// you’re reading...

Austin

The Politicizing of an Accident

VP Cheney Shoots Fellow Hunter

Tragic story, but not that uncommon (except for the fact that it was the Vice President of the United States who was involved in shooting a fellow hunter…that probably hasn’t happened too many times before) in hunting.

Thankfully, Austin attorney Harry Whittington (78) is recovering from the shotgun blast.

I dont’ know why this is such a big story though. It’s an accident, not an incident. There are no political angles here. But that won’t stop both sides of the aisle from making it into one (mostly the Left side making fun of Cheney for it, and then the Right coming to Cheney’s defense and reacting to the idiocy from the Left).

For instance, the tinfoil hat brigade on the left is already charging that the shooting actually occurred at Lynn Cheney’s apartment, and the body of Whittington was then taken to the ranch as a “cover up”.

This nut claims that there were “an awful lot of black helicopters flying over southern Texas yesterday.”:

Mark my words, though: the Harry Whittington hunting accident was not a hunting accident. Sure, it will never be “proved”. What would you expect?

UPDATE: Ok — I’m wrong and owe someone (Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings) an apology. Her post (from whence the above comments came from) were intended as satire, rather than legitimate tinfoil hattery. Though I’ve been accussed of not clicking all the links in her post — I did. I just didn’t get it. My humor meter wasn’t (and — sadly still isn’t) working. At least not in satire mode. I retract and apologize for my “this nut” comment.

What would I expect? Oh, I don’t know…maybe at least having one foot standing in reality.

This useless idiot leads with the headline Cheney Shoots 78-Year-Old Man, Bin Laden Still at Large, as though this accidental shooting and the War on Terror are somehow associated. Of course this site is The Democratic Party web site, so logical ideas aren’t exactly their forte.

Bill Nienhuis at PunditGuy noticed the politicizing, too:

Those who hate Bush, Cheney, or anyone associated with their administration will take any opportunity they can to make political hay from bonafide accidents that occur. It was Bush falling from bikes before, and now it’s gonna be the gun-toting wild-eyed Veep who is so mean he’ll shoot his own friends.

I wish politics was just about politics.

But, as long as we’re all going to politicize this anyway…I have to admit to chuckling when I read this comment at Michelle Malkin’s site: “I’d rather hunt with Dick Cheney than ride with Ted Kennedy .”

Discussion

60 comments for “The Politicizing of an Accident”

  1. and the American public not be informed of it until today? That will likely be the main question asked of the White House about the apparent accidental shooting of a 78-year-old man during a Texas hunting trip by the vice president.” UrbanGroundblogs about the event being politicized: “I dont’ know why this is such a big story though. It’s an accident, not an incident. There are no political angles here. But that won’t stop both sides of the aisle from making it into one (mostly the Left side

    Posted by Bloggers Blog: Happy Blogiversary Announcements 1-29-06 | February 13, 2006, 8:35 am
  2. February 12, 2006» The Politicizing of an Accident–It’s an accident, not an incident. There are no political angles here. Or there shouldn’t be. via UrbanGrounds at 10:31 PM » Refresh Austin–“Refresh is a community of developers, designers, usability experts and other new media

    Posted by Austin Bloggers Metablog | February 14, 2006, 5:07 am
  3. Ranch’ mean anything to you?” And simple as that, their investigations will just disappear. That’s the way these guys operate, folks. Welcome to their world. Again, links are liberally sprayed about to explain the satire. Wasn’t enough forthis guy: I dont’ know why this is such a big story though. It’s an accident, not an incident. There are no political angles here. But that won’t stop both sides of the aisle from making it into one (mostly the Left side making fun of Cheney for it,

    Posted by D-Day | February 14, 2006, 1:49 am
  4. Then again, they aren’t really quick enough to know a joke when they see one. I wrote this yesterday and Hilzoy over at Obsidion Wings did a fine riff on it last night. Sadly, it was a little bit too subtlefor the folks apparently. I won’t say it… .

    Posted by Hullabaloo | February 13, 2006, 6:15 pm
  5. And THAT is MY Opinion, RightWinged, Macmind, Small Town Veteran, Joni’s Universe, Oblogatory Anecdotes, Homemade Sin, The Big Picture, Martin’s Musings, Iowa Voice, Gribbit’s World, Jawa Report, Pardon My English,Urban Grounds » RightWinged.com links with: PHOTOS: Cheney Hunting Accident Photos Released. That’s Odd…

    Posted by Rhymes With Right | February 13, 2006, 4:04 am
  6. In my post, I advised people to click the links. You should have taken my advice. Either that, or clicked on Digby’s links. Just to make it easy for you, you could start here, and try matching quotes from my piece to what you find.

    Posted by hilzoy | February 13, 2006, 1:34 am
  7. Your target selection would do Cheney proud.

    Posted by dirk | February 13, 2006, 7:27 am
  8. I understand that W is still confused about why Cheney was trying to shoot his daddy’s VP.

    Yes, there are certainly some dingbats out there, and they are on both sides. I wrote a satirical post at my blog trying to predict the news cycle, and my satire was matched by reality within minutes – one of my fellow lefties truly did propose investigating whether he had a valid hunting license. As if Cheney is going to wind up in jail over a quail hunt, but has dodged it thus far in committing treason.

    Posted by Dan | February 13, 2006, 7:39 am
  9. “This nut claims that there were “an awful lot of black helicopters flying over southern Texas yesterday.”:”

    Two things are clear:

    1) You somehow don’t remember the incident they are lampooning, probably the most brazen instance of slander against the Clintons ever to be broadcast.

    2) You aren’t familiar with Hilzoy’s blogging career.

    Do yourself a favor, save yourself some embarrassment, and rectify both situations.

    Posted by Gromit | February 13, 2006, 9:22 am
  10. Was he lampooning that incidident? Because that wan’t clear.

    After reading all the links — was he making fun of Digby?

    And no, I’m not familiar with Hilzoy’s blogging style — is he a satirist like IowaHawk? A quick read of all the post on the main page didn’t seem to reflect that.

    When I read, “Mark my words, though: the Harry Whittington hunting accident was not a hunting accident. Sure, it will never be “proved”. What would you expect?” I took him at his word — if he was being sarcastic, satirical, or just being glib, I didn’t pick it up.

    Could I be wrong about Hilzoy? Perhaps. But his own words and my opinion of them stands. Nothing embarrassing about that at all. Even if I am wrong — there’s nothing embarrassing about that either.

    Posted by Robbie | February 13, 2006, 9:46 am
  11. If you still haven’t gotten the joke then irony is truly dead. Long live irony.

    Here’s an example of one of Hilzoy’s links. Denounce him for not being funny, but if you go after him for partisan sniping then you’re throwing a boomerang.

    Posted by Tim F | February 13, 2006, 10:07 am
  12. Looks like someone’s going to have to say the VF word for Robbie to get it.

    Oh, btw, hilzoy’s a she.

    Posted by Swoof | February 13, 2006, 10:10 am
  13. Kerry is complaining that Aaron Burr was a better shot. (And yes, before lgf picks it up, I made that up.)

    Posted by Ontario Emperor | February 13, 2006, 11:05 am
  14. To show you how much I didn’t get it (and — perhaps sadly — still don’t), Im not sure what “VF” word you’re referring to. Very Funny? Voter Fraud? Variable Frequency? Something in Latin, perhaps?

    Tim, I respect and enjoy your writing quite bit, and you and others are obviously more versed in Hilzoy’s writings and style than I am — so if you say that I’m misguided on calling her a partisan hack (your words, not mine, but I clearly alluded to such), there’s a good chance I am wrong.

    Yeah, I vaguely get the piece now. If it was intended as “funny”, my humor meter must be off. I’ll make an appointment and get it checked out shortly.

    My point that this entire accident is being overly played and dramatized still stands — perhaps that’s what Hilzoy was doing too?

    Posted by Robbie | February 13, 2006, 11:07 am
  15. Hilzoy is only an occasional satirist. The salient point is that “nut” is not a word which can reasonably be applied to her.

    But even for someone who doesn’t realize that the post is out of character for her, and someone who doesn’t get the historical reference, both forgivable lapses, the last line of the post should have been a dead giveaway.

    Posted by Gromit | February 13, 2006, 11:09 am
  16. You’ve inspired me; I’m going to make myself a bumpersticker with the “Hunt w/ Cheney–Ride w/ Kennedy” slogan.

    Posted by Jeff H | February 13, 2006, 12:03 pm
  17. The ‘VF’ word? Vampire freaks?
    http://p197.ezboard.com/bvampirefreaksandgoth

    Robbie, clearly you have a pretty low opinion of liberals if you think this was serious.

    The only real issue here is the the delay in reporting a serious accident and the speed at which the administration is willing to make sure the blame is far away from the Vice-President. Actually, it seems like your Chappaquiddick analogy is apt.

    Posted by Preston | February 13, 2006, 12:43 pm
  18. PHOTOS: Cheney Hunting Accident Photos Released. That’s Odd…

    RightWinged.com’s investigative reporter in the field has uncovered these secret photos of the Vice President Cheney hunting accident, in which he mistakenly shot his partner Harry Whittington. He just emailed them to me for a rush to the web and…

    Posted by RightWinged.com | February 13, 2006, 1:06 pm
  19. I guess the word “oops” isn’t in your vocabulary? And perhaps I’m just not reading the liberals who are dramatizing this, as I keep seeing jokes. I mean, from the moment that Digby wrote “Ok, folks” I knew he was copying Limbaugh’s old line. And just to spoil the joke even more, VF is Vince Foster; as in the guy that many rightwingers insisted had been murdered by the Clintons. Even Josh Marshall’s research into this is in the vein of what a goof Cheney made, especially in his people trying to blame the guy who got shot; rather than putting the blame on the careless hunter.

    I suppose when someone wants to see the other side being ridiculous, nothing will appear to be humor.

    Posted by Doctor Biobrain | February 13, 2006, 1:40 pm
  20. VF=Vince Foster

    While we on the left don’t think there’s anything to this story other than a stupid old man having a senior moment, you should remember that we also didn’t think too much of the Vince Foster thing.

    But the whackjobs on the right spent seven years concocting various theories about how the Clintons were involved.

    Posted by Duane | February 13, 2006, 1:45 pm
  21. Hahaha! Someone’s “humor meter” is indeed off: Digby’s post is also obviously satire.

    I don’t know what’s funnier, the posts themselves, or that people actually thought they were real!

    Posted by touchstone | February 13, 2006, 2:14 pm
  22. Seriously, digby’s post was pretty obviously satire. The “it will be published” line is dripping with Limbaugh.

    Posted by Vladi G | February 13, 2006, 2:20 pm
  23. I don’t read, watch, or listen to Limbaugh. I’m as unfamiliar with his style as I am Hilzoy’s.

    Posted by Robbie | February 13, 2006, 2:27 pm
  24. Not too swift at guessing when your leg’s being pulled, huh, hoss?

    P.S.: It’s spelled “queue” not “que”. That’s Spanish for “what”?

    Posted by Frank Sinatra | February 13, 2006, 2:28 pm
  25. Robbie,

    We all make mistakes. Wouldn’t it be appropriate to update your post to let your readers know that you mistook a satirical post for a serious point? Otherwise, it’s pretty misleading.

    Posted by Ted Barlow | February 13, 2006, 2:31 pm
  26. Ah- there it is. Ignore the previous comment, and thanks for that.

    Posted by Ted Barlow | February 13, 2006, 2:32 pm
  27. You also might want to take off the obvious lie that you read ‘all the links’ in the post.

    Posted by neil | February 13, 2006, 2:37 pm
  28. It’s pretty funny that 1) you made a big deal that democrats were “politicizing” this accident when 2) it was sarcasm in the style of 3) all of the endless “politicizing” of EVERYTHING done by the Clintons. Someone got fired from the white house travel office and then it was “travelgate”. Fifteen year old business deals suddenly had $50 million special prosecutors on witch hunts. Impeachment over a consensual sexual act. All of that was OK?? But “politicizing” the vice -president actually shooting someone with a gun is somehow beyond the pale?

    Do you Bush-Supporters even realize what cartoons you have become?

    Posted by fasteddie | February 13, 2006, 2:39 pm
  29. Neil — sorry. It wasn’t a lie. I did read all the links in her post. I admitted I just didn’t get it even after reading them.

    Posted by Robbie | February 13, 2006, 2:39 pm
  30. From the home office, Dick Cheney’s Top 10 Excuses for Shooting That Guy:

    10. Sure, like you’ve never seen seen giant game birds wearing day glo orange vests

    9. Warrantless domestic spying revealed he was getting phone calls from al Queda

    8. If the Vice President does it, its not against the law

    7. Hoping to put him in a persistent vegetative state so the GOP could pass a law to keep him alive

    6. Thought he was hunting Dan Quayle

    5. The love between them could not survive back in Washington

    4. Birds, Cows, People– with my eyesight I’m lucky I hit anything

    3. Positive the guy’s family will welcome him as a liberator

    2. Pheasants? I thought we were hunting peasants

    and the number one Cheney excuse for shooting that guy:
    1. Open season on liberals started early this year

    Posted by Ed | February 13, 2006, 3:44 pm
  31. Hahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahha.

    Man, talk about not getting the joke.

    Heh. Indeed.

    Posted by Califlander | February 13, 2006, 4:13 pm
  32. I imagine a similar story from Robbie years earlier..

    Tragic story, but not that uncommon (except for the fact that it was an attorney connected to the White House that committed suicide.…that probably hasn’t happened too many times before) in depression.

    Thankfully, no one else was threatened or injured in the suicide of Vince Foster.

    I dont’ know why this is such a big story though. It’s a suicide, not a murder. There are no political angles here. But that won’t stop both sides of the aisle from making it into one (mostly the Right side trying to implicate the Clintons, and then the Left asking why we have to turn everything into a scandal).

    For instance, the tinfoil hat brigade on the right is already charging that the shooting actually occurred in the White House, and the body of Foster was then taken to a park as a “cover up”.

    A nut with a radio show (G. Gordon Liddy) claims that there were “an awful lot of black helicopters flying over Washington yesterday.”

    Posted by Duane | February 13, 2006, 4:27 pm
  33. Hmm, would you please write to Ann Althouse, she seems to think that all conservatives are smart and all libruls dum.

    Posted by quxxo | February 13, 2006, 4:38 pm
  34. So, snide comments from Michelle Malkin provoke a chuckle while snide comments from lefties are seen as the mark of a “useless idiot”. Do you read what you write? Are you really that into yourself? My god. The links you didn’t click on made reference to the fact that Limbaugh was a douchebag a number of years ago. (Note: that statement in no way infers that he still isn’t a douchebag, but he was one, and continues to be one, too. That reminds me of Mitch Hedberg’s one-liner [redundant?]: “I used to take drugs. I still do, but I used to, too”. See if that tickles your comedy meter. Perhaps it needs to have a racist undertone though, as Michelle is full of those.)

    Posted by mikebdot | February 13, 2006, 5:01 pm
  35. [Comment deleted by Robbie --- Guess what Nick, you don't get to attack my military service on my Web site. I don't care or mind people that disagree with me, think I'm an idiot, or what not. That's why I have comments enabled. But thanks for stopping by just the same. Maybe on your way out next time you could click the Advertisement in the side column for the Intrepid Fallen Heros Fund.]

    Posted by Nick | February 13, 2006, 5:06 pm
  36. Pssst. This is probably a good time to clue you in that Day by Day is also an elaborate librul hoax, produced by a lesbian kolkhoz in Vermont.

    Posted by Sven | February 13, 2006, 5:21 pm
  37. The joke is that these full of themselves lefties believe we should know or even care who they are. Sorry, haven’t seen you on Chris Matthews’ show yet. Oh wait, they already booked Ron Reagan..the ultimate know it all expert.

    Posted by dianne | February 13, 2006, 5:45 pm
  38. Actually, Dianne, what was funny to me is the reason why I missed Hilzoy’s attempt at satire in the first place: that being her references to Rush Limbaugh and Vince Foster from 10 years back.

    I don’t care about either of them, and therefore didn’t understand the references to them as they apply to Vice President Cheney’s hunting accident.

    When Vince Foster was killed, I was in Iraq trying not to get shot by the local “freedom fighters”, so I wasn’t paying much attention to some guy’s suicide back here at home.

    Posted by Robbie | February 13, 2006, 6:26 pm
  39. >>Tragic story, but not that uncommon

    Posted by Basharov | February 13, 2006, 7:07 pm
  40. “Tragic story, but not that uncommon”

    Wrong, O Irony-Impaired One. In 2004, there were over one million licensed hunters in Texas. Of that group, 19 were the victims of accidental gunshots, of which 4 died.

    Tragic story, and very uncommon.

    Posted by Basharov | February 13, 2006, 7:09 pm
  41. “…the reason why I missed Hilzoy’s attempt at satire in the first place: that being her references to Rush Limbaugh and Vince Foster from 10 years back.”

    Uhhhh… actually, Rush was pushing the “Hillary murdered VF” theory 5 months ago. As one of Hilzoy’s links that you clicked on showed.

    Posted by Svejk | February 13, 2006, 7:19 pm
  42. Even more uncommon is a hunting accident involving a drunken sitting vice-president.

    Posted by Duane | February 13, 2006, 7:49 pm
  43. Not drunk according to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Hunting Accident and Incident Report Form which for both Cheney and Whittington is filled in as follows:

    Under the apparent influence of intoxicants or drugs?
    [ ]Yes [x]No [ ]Unknown

    I wonder what evidence allowed them to say [x]No instead of [x]Unknown. Maybe they got a blood alcohol content from a Whittington hospital sample and extrapolated that Cheney was therefore also dry. Or maybe they saw no reason not to believe some heavy GOP operatives/donors and secret service agents.

    Posted by AlanDownunder | February 13, 2006, 11:25 pm
  44. Of course, if it had been John Kerry who accidentally shot someone in his hunting group in the face and chest, I’m sure all you right-wingers would have been oh-so-adult and understanding, and would have recognized it as the unfortunate accident that it was.

    Uh-huh…

    Posted by Sticker | February 14, 2006, 12:54 am
  45. Your target selection would do Cheney proud.

    Hahaha. That’s a keeper.

    Isn’t it kind of odd, though, how wingers don’t recognize their own rhetoric? I mean, I got the Vince Foster joke immediately. I can understand why, I guess; you don’t hear much about the excesses of the Clinton-era Limbaugh lunatics these days, and for people whose idea of reasoning is Hoovering up and regurgitating that particular day’s talking points, that’s just like tossing it down the Memory Hole.

    Posted by scarshapedstar | February 14, 2006, 2:25 am
  46. When Vince Foster was killed….

    Freeperian slip there, hoss?

    Posted by Sven | February 14, 2006, 9:16 am
  47. No slip. As I’ve mentioned before, I hardly even remember who he was, or anything about the entire story.

    But he was killed. It just so happens that he killed himself.

    Posted by Robbie | February 14, 2006, 12:57 pm
  48. Politicizing accidents?

    There is not enough hours in the day to catalogue Dick Cheney’s false hoods. If the vice president of anything shoots someone it is a public event, not just a personal tragedy. And the politics is relevant due to the delay in announcing the story and the conflicting stories coming from different government sources. To any reasonable person it looks like they waited to get their story straight, and then couldn’t even do that.

    It is appropriately political, as this administration has stone walled and blatantly lied (last throes anyone?) at every turn. Its takes a near farcical event like this to wake people up to the idea that arrogant silence and lies are not evidence of strength, they are the tell tale signs of corruption and incompetence.

    But I’m sure you have lots of posts condemning the photos of John Kerry windsurfing, because you are all about politics being about politics.
    right.

    Posted by feckless | February 14, 2006, 5:28 pm
  49. Perhaps the reason this story has taken the foothold that it has is it (as Karl Rove would say) encapsulates the story. The administration tends to be very stingy with the facts, and this leads a lot of people to wonder if they’re keeping something bad from us. Then the VP shoots a guy and hides it for 18 hours. Would have been longer had the owner of the ranch not stepped in.

    VP commits hideous crime, fails to own up to it. Moonbats have been saying this about the guys energy policy and Haliburton links for years, so this incident is like a handy shorthand version.

    It was unwise for them to not put this story out themselves; it’s the worst kind of damage control.

    Posted by Daniel | February 14, 2006, 7:58 pm
  50. Heheh. My comment was deleted. Why do right-wingers hate free speech and America?

    Posted by Duane | February 14, 2006, 10:56 pm
  51. Dear Duane: You have about as little understanding as to what “free speech” means as you do how to pick a winning political ideology.

    “We” right wingers only love America enough to fight (literally, not in some holding-a-sign and chanting-at-the-Governor’s-mansion liberal idea of “fighting” way) and die for her freedom. You, on the other hand, love socialism and the thought of “one-world” enough to allow Islamofascists an unfettered ability to attack us — just so we make sure not to offend them.

    Posted by Robbie | February 15, 2006, 9:10 am
  52. Oh yeah? Oh yeah? Well you support freemasonry, high interest rates and crypo-fascist baby wiping rituals.

    Nyah.

    Posted by Sven | February 15, 2006, 9:16 am
  53. This post has been a very good reality check for me. I’ve been pissed off at the Republican party lately, but thanks to some of the geniuses from the left on this post, I’ve had an attitude adjustment. I don’t care who the Republican party puts up in ‘08. He/she will get my vote.

    Posted by dianne | February 15, 2006, 10:15 am
  54. I tried so hard my dear to show that you’re my every dream.
    Yet you’re afraid each thing I do is just some evil scheme
    A memory from your lonesome past keeps us so far apart
    Why can’t I free your doubtful mind
    And melt your cold, cold heart

    Posted by Sven | February 15, 2006, 11:20 am
  55. Yeah, I like Norah Jones, too.

    Posted by Robbie | February 15, 2006, 11:37 am
  56. I don’t care who the Republican party puts up in ‘08. He/she will get my vote.

    I doubt you were seriously considering voting for a Democrat but this seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    If you want to see some truly vile comments look up the reactions to my comments on Polipundit. (Don’t feel too bad for Robbie- he linked to a liberal site and misinterpreted the post- that will attract a bit of attention. It’s rough out there on the blogosphere…)

    Posted by Preston | February 15, 2006, 11:54 am
  57. yeah, Preston, but after reading the comments section at one of the blogs that I didn’t catch the satire on, I realize that it was tounge-in-cheek satire at best. It wasn’t satire intended to be humours (it wasn’t); it was satire delivered with a mean-spirited and mocking intent.

    If you doubt it, read the comments, which include gems such as, “Cheney is worse than Bin Laden”.

    Really? Worse than Bin Laden? Cheney accidently shot a friend while on a hunting trip. Bin Laden planned the intentional death of over 3000 American citizens by flying airplanes into our buildings.

    My satire meter might have been off that morning — but the guys and gals over there ought to have their moral equivalncy meters checked out.

    Posted by Robbie | February 15, 2006, 12:09 pm
  58. Preston..you might be surprised to learn I voted for D-Ks Dennis Moore – he was a great DA in our county before running for the House- but also made a big mistake by voting for our Democrat Governor Sebelius – won’t make that one again.

    I don’t care what side of the aisle vile comments come from. I apologize for my conservative “brethren’s” behavior toward you. I may check out that blog some day, a day when I can stand a raise in my blood pressure…lol

    Posted by dianne | February 15, 2006, 12:20 pm
  59. If you doubt it, read the comments, which include gems such as, “Cheney is worse than Bin Laden”.
    That’s the problem with non-moderated comments. A similar comment popped up on Daily Kos this morning and to the site’s credit the post received enough ‘zero ratings’ to disappear the comment into oblivion. Of course a system such as that has it’s own problems but it puts the jackasses on notice.

    Posted by Preston | February 15, 2006, 4:42 pm
  60. Other day, Digby posted that the right uses eliminationist rhetoric to portray liberals as enemies of the planet.. well, let’s go to the tape:

    ..and all the rest of these people you know that there is no greater enemy on the planet than the American liberal. That’s what Ann Coulter and her ilk are selling

    And I commented:

    Minor quibble: not enemy of the planet but enemy of real murikans. Liberals are actually considered to be allies of the planet vs. real amurika.

    And then Robbie comes along with..

    You, on the other hand, love socialism and the thought of “one-world” enough to allow Islamofascists an unfettered ability to attack us — just so we make sure not to offend them.

    Now, I ask you: was I dead-on or what?

    Posted by Duane | February 15, 2006, 10:42 pm

Post a comment

Quicktags:

Recent Comments