And...... question #34 is the first one to address the pointless, dunderheaded delay in alerting the press. (AKA, the reason Cheney's on TV.) Following seven questions of the "do you feel bad?" variety. Suuuccccck, succcck, suuuuucccckkk!!! We fellate, you decide.
Then Hume asks Cheney if he "couldn't have headed off this beltway firestorm," as if the reaction is a minor inside-baseball detail. Or as if this wasn't directly caused by Cheney.
Really big of the Dickster to speak out in a provocative environment like the Fox news studio. A prompt 4 days after he shot a guy.
Cheney: "One of the problems we have as a government is our inability to keep secrets."
and of course all the other networks are so objective when they lob softballs at John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, forgetting to ask about those niggling little details like "When exactly are you going to release all of your medical records as you promised?" and "why did it take you TWO YEARS to find those Rose Law Firm billing records, even tho you were under a federal subpeona to produce them immediately, Mrs. Senator?"
but I suppose anonymous comments and logic just don't mix
One of the most mind-numbing parts of our national discourse is the "why criticize the Democrat/Republican who did THIS, when here is an example of a Republican/Democrat who did THAT" whining.
I thought the buzzword was "values"?
Try defending someone on the merits of their case once in a while. Even if it's more difficult, it's better for the spirit.
As for Cheney, he continues to hurt himself unnecessarily with his stonewall response. There's a rumor going around that Cheney's mistress was on the trip, which led to the stupid impulse to secrecy. I have no idea if that's true (heart attacks and adultery aren't the best combination). But if these stories take root, it's Cheney's own fault for trying to deflect onto supposed sore losers in the media:
CHENEY: I had a bit of the feeling that the press corps was upset because, to some extent, it was about them — they didn't like the idea that we called the Corpus Christi Caller-Times instead of The New York Times.
To some extent, it's about the press. But to the other 99.8% of the extent, it's about a Vice President who SHOT A MAN. If Cheney really believes he can get traction from the public by trying to make this about Brian Williams' ego instead of his, you know, SHOOTING A MAN, that thunderous noise you're hearing is impromptu tap-dancing at the D.N.C.
And a Barbara Walters sitdown ain't gonna cut the mustard:
HUME: Mr. Vice President, how is Mr. Whittington?
HUME: How did you feel when you heard about that?
HUME: How long have you known him?
HUME: Would you describe him as a close friend, friendly acquaintance, what —
HUME: Right, what about his children?
HUME: Describe if you can your conversations with him, what you've said to him and the attitude he's shown toward you in the aftermath of this.
HUME: For you, personally, how would you — you said this was one of the worst days of your life. How so?
HUME: Will it affect your attitude toward this pastime you so love in the future?
HUME: If you could be any kind of tree, what kind would you be?
actually, my comment, if you'd care to read it for it's value, rather than rely on your preconceptions, was addressing your comment, "provocative environment like the Fox news studio"
I said absolutely nothing about the politicians involved.. I referred to other newscasters who refuse to this day to address major scandals by other elected officials.. and yet those news channels aren't called "provocative" by you or any other anonymous troll
and just for the record, lying in defense to a congressional subpeona is a felon, and potentially treason.. accidentally shooting someone during a hunting excursion, while very regretable and irresponsible, is the equivalent of a fender bender.. it happens.. people go to the hospital, and hopefully get back to doing work
Cheney's "stonewalling" is what other people would call "moving on".. there is absolutely nothing new to gain from going over this topic, but the tinfoil brigade need to keep discussing it in order to feel relevant.. another example of "stonewalling" might be Bill Clinton's refusal to deny that he raped Juanita Broadrick.. yet the media spent a whole 2 minutes on that topic.. personally, I'd consider rape a more serious topic than a minor hunting accident.. call me silly.. but you don't hear me spewing garbage about that incessantly
and just for the record, it's pretty slimy to insinuate that "Cheney's mistress" was on the trip.. since A) you have no evidence that Cheney has a mistress B) you have no evidence that if said mistress existed, which you don't know, that she was on the trip, and C) it has absolutely nothing to do with a damn thing
so.. tell us all about Republicans and Nazis now.. cuz that's obviously where you, and all trolls inevitably go.. so, what were you saying about values?
5 comments:
And...... question #34 is the first one to address the pointless, dunderheaded delay in alerting the press. (AKA, the reason Cheney's on TV.) Following seven questions of the "do you feel bad?" variety. Suuuccccck, succcck, suuuuucccckkk!!! We fellate, you decide.
Then Hume asks Cheney if he "couldn't have headed off this beltway firestorm," as if the reaction is a minor inside-baseball detail. Or as if this wasn't directly caused by Cheney.
Really big of the Dickster to speak out in a provocative environment like the Fox news studio. A prompt 4 days after he shot a guy.
Cheney: "One of the problems we have as a government is our inability to keep secrets."
It's good to see the man gets it.
and of course all the other networks are so objective when they lob softballs at John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, forgetting to ask about those niggling little details like "When exactly are you going to release all of your medical records as you promised?" and "why did it take you TWO YEARS to find those Rose Law Firm billing records, even tho you were under a federal subpeona to produce them immediately, Mrs. Senator?"
but I suppose anonymous comments and logic just don't mix
One of the most mind-numbing parts of our national discourse is the "why criticize the Democrat/Republican who did THIS, when here is an example of a Republican/Democrat who did THAT" whining.
I thought the buzzword was "values"?
Try defending someone on the merits of their case once in a while. Even if it's more difficult, it's better for the spirit.
As for Cheney, he continues to hurt himself unnecessarily with his stonewall response. There's a rumor going around that Cheney's mistress was on the trip, which led to the stupid impulse to secrecy. I have no idea if that's true (heart attacks and adultery aren't the best combination). But if these stories take root, it's Cheney's own fault for trying to deflect onto supposed sore losers in the media:
CHENEY: I had a bit of the feeling that the press corps was upset because, to some extent, it was about them — they didn't like the idea that we called the Corpus Christi Caller-Times instead of The New York Times.
To some extent, it's about the press. But to the other 99.8% of the extent, it's about a Vice President who SHOT A MAN. If Cheney really believes he can get traction from the public by trying to make this about Brian Williams' ego instead of his, you know, SHOOTING A MAN, that thunderous noise you're hearing is impromptu tap-dancing at the D.N.C.
And a Barbara Walters sitdown ain't gonna cut the mustard:
HUME: Mr. Vice President, how is Mr. Whittington?
HUME: How did you feel when you heard about that?
HUME: How long have you known him?
HUME: Would you describe him as a close friend, friendly acquaintance, what —
HUME: Right, what about his children?
HUME: Describe if you can your conversations with him, what you've said to him and the attitude he's shown toward you in the aftermath of this.
HUME: For you, personally, how would you — you said this was one of the worst days of your life. How so?
HUME: Will it affect your attitude toward this pastime you so love in the future?
HUME: If you could be any kind of tree, what kind would you be?
actually, my comment, if you'd care to read it for it's value, rather than rely on your preconceptions, was addressing your comment, "provocative environment like the Fox news studio"
I said absolutely nothing about the politicians involved.. I referred to other newscasters who refuse to this day to address major scandals by other elected officials.. and yet those news channels aren't called "provocative" by you or any other anonymous troll
and just for the record, lying in defense to a congressional subpeona is a felon, and potentially treason.. accidentally shooting someone during a hunting excursion, while very regretable and irresponsible, is the equivalent of a fender bender.. it happens.. people go to the hospital, and hopefully get back to doing work
Cheney's "stonewalling" is what other people would call "moving on".. there is absolutely nothing new to gain from going over this topic, but the tinfoil brigade need to keep discussing it in order to feel relevant.. another example of "stonewalling" might be Bill Clinton's refusal to deny that he raped Juanita Broadrick.. yet the media spent a whole 2 minutes on that topic.. personally, I'd consider rape a more serious topic than a minor hunting accident.. call me silly.. but you don't hear me spewing garbage about that incessantly
and just for the record, it's pretty slimy to insinuate that "Cheney's mistress" was on the trip.. since A) you have no evidence that Cheney has a mistress B) you have no evidence that if said mistress existed, which you don't know, that she was on the trip, and C) it has absolutely nothing to do with a damn thing
so.. tell us all about Republicans and Nazis now.. cuz that's obviously where you, and all trolls inevitably go.. so, what were you saying about values?
http://www.nawcc.org/school/images/cuckoo3.jpg
Post a Comment