By now, you’ve heard that Vice-President Dick Chaney shot his buddy in a hunting accident. Thank God they were hunting quail instead of big game as the birdshot used was not fatal. I figured there would be some funny poking at the vice-president by the late night talk show hosts—that’s just expected. Despite my thoughts concerning the biased, anti-Bush, liberal press, I was taken off-guard by the Washington press corps who reacted like a pack of wild dogs being tossed a bloody bone. You would have thought they had uncovered Watergate all over again, that visions of Pulitzer prices were dancing in their heads, that Chaney had been caught molesting an intern. (Remember, he’s a republican, not a democrat; so the press would not have been as apologetic for him.)
The vitriol was outrageous. The lambasting of the White House continued despite the fact that everyone involved and every official involved declared the incident to be what it was: a simple accident, which probably scared the wits out of both Chaney and his buddy. Yet the press corps was there, doing their job: “Just what did the president know and when did he know it!”
During the Sunday news shows, the liberal apologists couldn’t come up with a single solid reason for the actions of the Washington Press Corps. The standard answer became, “It was a metaphor for the way the White House hides the facts from the American people.” A metaphor! Funny thing about finding metaphors: When you go looking for them in nature or in circumstances, they tell much more about the observer than the object itself. I certainly do agree with one thing: This event was certainly a metaphor, but less one describing the White House so much as one illustrating the hatred--the blind blood-thirst—that the liberal press has for the current administration. There was no clamor from the American people to get to the bottom of it: Was Chaney wearing camouflage or orange? BBs or pellets? Boots or tennis shoes? The shameless media just took an opportunity to attack a man they hate, regardless of how down Chaney must have felt already for accidentally shooting his friend.
Thomas Sowell, a lonely voice of reason in the media wilderness, explains the nature of these Bush-whackers in his editorial Spoiled Brat Media: “The New York Times informs us solemnly that, if Mr. Whittington dies, there will be a grand jury investigation. If Mr. Whittington is so uncooperative as not to die, there will be much disappointment and frustration in Beltway media circles.” (To read Sowell’s full article, go to:
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/thomassowell/2006/02/16/186735.html )
UPDATE: First, I love that I can agree with Jerry for a change! Doesn't happen ofen so I get excited when it does.
In response to your questions, Eddie, the laws he broke were having an appropriate hunting license and reporting a shooting to the police. The shooting wasn't the issue here, Cheney's character and the duplicity of the right were. Weeks ago, we got to hear much about NO ONE being above the law during the Alito hearings. Years ago, we got to hear how it was the right of 'we the people' to know who Clinton had under his desk, and what he did on 'our time' - as though every second of the man's life belonged to the public. Now, you come here with a negative tone toward liberals for wanting to know why someone on the other side shot a man, failed to report it to the police when he should have, refused to allow the police on the property when they found out, and didn't announce it to the public in a timely manner. Considering Cheney's lies about Halliburton, WMD, (they're all documented if you care to look for them), wire-tapping, etc.. it is reasonable and expected that 'we the people' now wonder why he didn't follow the rules. Was he waiting to get sober (one beer can affect someone who's on enough drugs to require him to haul around a mini-hospital on the tax-payer's bill), trying to get the story straight with those other mysterious eight hunters (who are they and why aren't we concerned they're as big a threat to national security as Monica), or just feeling especially 'above the law'? The in-your-face duplicity of this administration is disgusting.