MY FINAL THOUGHTS ON WHITTINGTON SHOOTING
This is not a story that I had intended to address today but comments on my last two articles concerning the VP's wounding of his long time friend have prompted a written response. It has been mentioned that because I have been critical of the vulture response of the press and their very obvious agenda to , "cut the throat, " so to speak of the VP that I do not believe this story to be news worthy. Just the opposite is true. The story is very news worthy BECAUSE it involves the VP. My contention is in the way the liberalistic press handled it and their disrespect to the family of Whittington, the Vice President and White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, (calling him a jerk is absolutely uncalled for!). It has been suggested in one comment that a two hour time line from the shooting to a press release would have been appropriate. I counter with the thoughts of Whittington's family and ask this question. If you were in the same shoes and as a family member learned of the accidental shooting of your loved one from a press release would you not be upset ? Second, two hours is not enough time to determine the condition of the victim nor the details of the accident. I give you the hasty release of the , "survival, " of the mining victims and the devastation that it caused the family because it was released to quickly by a press that has become more tabloid oriented then journalistic. There have been comments concerning McClellans knowledge of the heart attack and his not briefing the press when he knew. It is not the medical responsibility of a press secretary to brief anyone on a clearly medical condition. The hospital in these type of cases deliberately holds information except to family and friends because of the sensitive nature and further clarification of a patients condition. Therefore it was the attending physician or the hospital spokes persons responsibility to reveal the heart attack NOT McClellan. Cheney has never been liked by the press and they usually make every attempt to discredit him and attack him when possible. This incident was no different. Could he have gone public earlier than the FOX interview yesterday ? Quite possibly, but that was his decision. The attempt to create the idea that there was contention within the White House is again agenda based media talk based on what they perceived when discussion about Cheney's response took place in white House circles. The opinions of even Republican writers such as Peggy Noonan who was mentioned in comments does not take precedence over the VP's decision nor that of the Whittington family. The President today backed Cheney's response and decisions and put the entire story into perspective when he stated that his and the VP's concern is for that of the recovery of their friend!
Ken Taylor
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 7:04 PM
17 Comments:
Here is my final thought - I am in agreement with the press, Democrats, Cheney critics, AND numerous Republicans who believe Cheney totally mishandled his responsibility to inform the public. I think more info will emerge in coming weeks. We now also know that the VP was so concerned for the friend he shot in the face that he did not go to the hospital. Could it be that he did not want to appear in public drunk? Who knows, but it certainly begs the question. That said, I'm ready to leave it alone in the absence of other, new info.
Sorry, I am just curious - who called McClellan a jerk? Les Kinsolving asked a question during the press briefing in which he referred to someone supposedly calling McClellan a jerk, but that is hearsay. Les is an ultra-right wing talk show host on Baltimore AM 680 - his questions are quite often laced with inaccuracies.
Given that you are including it in your post I would like to know who you are referring to. I would agree that is uncalled for - if it is true.
My satire I wrote the other day was more a satire of the news media than it was a satire of the Cheney story. The idea that the media deserves to be the first notified is just ludicrous.
Rob, David Gregory called McClellan a jerk.
Having to deal with HIPPA laws on a daily basis I know that it is against the law for the hospital to release information about a patient, without the patients consent, EVEN to immediate family. Why does the press think they should have full access to such information?
Could it be he didn't go for the reason he mentioned? Or how about the fact that it is a massive security issue for VPOTUS to go anywhere, it would actually slow down the treatment of others in the hospital due to Secret Service having to close off a section of the Hospital. Then people would be mad he went to the hospital because people in the ER would complain they waited too long thanks to the VP.
Also, it was Gregory as mentioned. The video of him, I mean it was classic. I want to order it from C-SPAN to go on my annoying liberal media shelf.
Well I agree, leave it alone. By the way, since the investigation is closed, and you seem so concerned over "hearsay" I would say you should retract your assumption that someone was drunk when there is no proof of it.
This has turned into the perfect example of how horrible the press can be, and how the same people that demand all are "innocent until proven guilty" can turn around and convict someone because they didn't do something according to the timeline they like.
So sad.
You all should write to the White House press office and tell them that they were wrong about wanting to let the American people know that the VP had accidentally shot a man in the face. While you are at it, get on all of the REPUBLICANS who share my view. Maybe you can change their minds.
When was the Gregory comment? Was it during a Press Briefing? I watch the briefing and/or read the transcript just about every day. Can you give me a day or let me know which transcript it is in?
MDCons - You want me to "retract an assumption?" What does that mean? I am not allowed to think differently from you? What, are the Bush thought police going to come after me?
If you actually take time to read my post, it said that we don't know if he was drunk but his actions beg the question.
In my position I am not allowed to comment in negative fashion on the Executive Branch.
As for the ex-press secs, and other Republicans I don't care. They are wrong.
I thinking you are accusing someone of something and the investigation is CLOSED. How about Kennedy, was he drunk when driving home? How about that.
Based on your comment, it would seem that you also think the position of the current Press Secretary was wrong I suppose. But, I cannot be sure.
"I thinking you are accusing someone of something . . ." Hilarious, but just read my words they are clear. I have not accused CHENEY of BEING DRUNK.
Irrelevant Kennedy reference. What does Kennedy in 1969 have to do with Cheney shooting a man in the face in 2006? It is just obfuscating the issue. But, if you want me to say that Kennedy was wrong in the way he handled Chappaquiddick, fine. At least I am consistent in my position. How about you? Somehow I think you have different rules for Republicans.
How about the full Gregory "jerk" reference - do you have one - so I can see the context make a determination for myself? I am not saying you are lying, I really want to be able to actually think for myself after reading a transcript or full description of the incident.
Rob,
Thanks for that answer. I assume you will now join me in a demand of more investigations into Senator Kennedy?
Charge him with murder and try him. Shooting is one thing, but as most know there is NO statute of limitations on murder. So you are with me in bringing in the good Senator to justice?
Me reading your words? I said "As for the ex-press secs, and other Republicans I don't care. They are wrong." and you wonder my position? Yes I THINK THEY ARE WRONG.
Well if the sheriff has said there is no case, then you can stop your worries about the VP being drunk. He has determined there is no reason to believe so.
If there is any evidence of murder try him. That was 1969 and I have no idea where you expect evidence will come from. Knock yourself out, I won't complain. But your last paragraph would seem to apply to Kennedy.
I am still waiting for you or Mark to provide me with a link to the Gregory "jerk" comment.
By the way, I would love to hear your thoughts about the efficacy of a military strike on Iran. You never responded to my thoughts.
Rob, here is a link to the Gregory , "jerk, "quote, (http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/02/no_lights_no_ca.html), and here is the quote itself, "Don’t be a jerk to me personally when I’m asking you a serious question." As far as the efficiancy of a military strike against Iran. Whether it is a surgical strike to specifically take out the nuclear capability such as was preformed by Isreal against Iraq in the late 80's or a full military confrontation, I believe that if either of these possibilities were to actually become reality the Iranian government would fall. It has long been known that a movement within Iran to break away from the theocracy that has been oppressing Iran since the fall of the Shah has been gaining strength and momentum. A strike could be the catylist to start to revolution that ends this thocracy. Even if this were not to happen Iran does not have the military strength to withstand a conflict with the U.S.nor the ability to rebuild the nuclear capability if it were to be completely destroyed. With the worldwide attention that the current confrontation has caused the ability to get materials to start over would be extremely hard because of the spotlight on Iran.
Ken
Rob, here is a link to the Gregory , "jerk, "quote, (http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/02/no_lights_no_ca.html), and here is the quote itself, "Don’t be a jerk to me personally when I’m asking you a serious question." As far as the efficiancy of a military strike against Iran. Whether it is a surgical strike to specifically take out the nuclear capability such as was preformed by Isreal against Iraq in the late 80's or a full military confrontation, I believe that if either of these possibilities were to actually become reality the Iranian government would fall. It has long been known that a movement within Iran to break away from the theocracy that has been oppressing Iran since the fall of the Shah has been gaining strength and momentum. A strike could be the catylist to start to revolution that ends this thocracy. Even if this were not to happen Iran does not have the military strength to withstand a conflict with the U.S.nor the ability to rebuild the nuclear capability if it were to be completely destroyed. With the worldwide attention that the current confrontation has caused the ability to get materials to start over would be extremely hard because of the spotlight on Iran.
Ken
The link did not get to the quote. Perhaps I missed it on the page you referenced, where is it? I still don't know what the context of the quote is. But if that was the quote (the way you wrote it), it seems like Gregory is responding to something McClellan said. I'll still reserve judgement until I see a transcript of the quote and the full context.
I don't think you read my earlier post about Iran. Of course we could bomb Iran, but I pointed out two reasons that won't happen: 1. Iran is the #2 oil producer in OPEC and an attack would send oil prices over $100/barrel. I don't think our economy or American consumers would stand for $5/gallon gas. 2. Iraqi Shiites would likely rise up which would worsen the situation in Iraq. Right now we are battling a raging Sunni insurgency - adding the majority Shiites would be suicide.
I am still laughing at your idea that if we attack the leadership in Iran would fold and democracy would spring up. Do you mean like it did in Iraq?
Oh, I am fairly certain we will not be launching a strike against Iran any time soon. Bush's incoherent Mid-East policy has left no real options. With the deal that China is signing with Iran for $100 billion in oil and natural gas the U.S. geo-political position is even further diminished.
Hi:)
You cannot compare your blog with mine... They are completely different. I not even have one comment :)
Regards,
make money at home online
[url=http://tonoviergates.net/][img]http://tonoviergates.net/img-add/euro2.jpg[/img][/url]
[b]adobe acrobat 9 for free, [url=http://tonoviergates.net/]software retail price[/url]
[url=http://tonoviergates.net/]discounts on adobe software[/url] academic software for students buy software online
educational softwares [url=http://tonoviergates.net/]filemaker pro apple version 9 downloads[/url] discount business software
[url=http://tonoviergates.net/]software reseller australia[/url] windows xp wallpaper
[url=http://sopriventontes.net/]download kaspersky internet security 2009 genuine keyfinder[/url] buy windows mobile software
largest selling software [url=http://tonoviergates.net/]of software stores[/url][/b]
golden goose slide
nike air max 270
nike air vapormax
coach outlet stores
yeezy shoes
yeezy
hermes birkin
louboutins
off white shoes
nike air max 270
Post a Comment
<< Home