0
   

Uh oh: Cheney Drunk as Skunk?

 
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 09:04 am
dlowan wrote:
So.....if he was drunk, is there anything criminal in the US (it's obviously grossly irresponsible) about shooting while drunk?


My understanding of Texas law is that it would be a felony. It is state and not Federal law that comes into play in this situation.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 09:06 am
Doug Thompson stands by this story BTW. Cheney was drunk the only question is how drunk.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 10:46 am
Quote:
based on a probably false report


Hahah, what leads you to believe this is true?

Any objective evidence at all? Or just a deep-down belief that BusHaters will make up any story they can to discredit the admin?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 11:20 am
I find it funny you would ask me for objective evidence based on a story that presents none of its own.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 11:22 am
http://www.vicalecorporation.com/images/Dick%20Sm.jpg AN ARMED VP FOR EVERY HOME
JUST when Dick Cheney thought it was safe to rear his "aimless" head, someone goes and immortalizes the veep's quail-hunting mishap in an action figure. HeroBuilders.com yesterday launched a "You Don't Know Dick" doll, complete with shotgun, scowl and "retractable-spike kick shoes" - just like the pair 007 villain Rosa Klebb sported in "From Russia with Love." The tiny Oxford, Conn., company, which specializes in action figures based on real newsmakers, usually responds to headlines by putting dolls in production within 24 hours. "But in this case, we held off until Harry Whittington" - the 78-year-old lawyer pal Cheney shot in the face - "was out of the woods, so to speak," CEO Emil Vicale told The Post's Philip Recchia. Within hours of launching the $29.95 toy, Vicale had orders from as far away as England. Though he wouldn't reveal the British buyer's identity, he did confirm, "It's not Tony Blair."
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 11:26 am
As I said from the beginning, we don't know if the story is true or false.

We do know that Cheney admitted to drinking that day; so the postulate that he was drunk is not a crazy or wild one. It makes sense in a lot of different ways, and corresponds to the way events played out as well.

Therefore, there is more evidence that the story is true, than that it is false; your 'probably false' comment is, in fact, untrue; unless of course, you would like to tell me why you believe the story is probably untrue.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 11:40 am
Doug Thompson has more credibilty than anyone in the Bush administration.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 12:19 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
As I said from the beginning, we don't know if the story is true or false.

We do know that Cheney admitted to drinking that day; so the postulate that he was drunk is not a crazy or wild one. It makes sense in a lot of different ways, and corresponds to the way events played out as well.

Therefore, there is more evidence that the story is true, than that it is false; your 'probably false' comment is, in fact, untrue; unless of course, you would like to tell me why you believe the story is probably untrue.

Cycloptichorn


No, there is zero evidence that the story is true. None, nada, zilch. It's the ramblings of a journalist based on un-named sources bad mouthing the VP. It's all conjecture and ill will.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 12:55 pm
God is there anything bush or Cheney could do that you wouldn't take their side?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 12:55 pm
and I'm not referring to you as God, McG, believe that....
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 01:10 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
God is there anything bush or Cheney could do that you wouldn't take their side?


Sure there is son, but the question you should ask yourself is, is there is anything [/i]you[/i] WOULD take their side on.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 01:16 pm
I agree with them that Saddam Hussein is a bad man.... your turn.....
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 01:19 pm
hmmmm... I am already involved in one contest, but ok...

I disagree with Bush regarding abortion.
0 Replies
 
Lord Ellpus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 02:47 pm
Re. the whole Cheney shooting his mate fiasco.

From the Washington Post......

"....the whole incident sums up the attitude of the trigger happy Bush administration. Whether the issue is Iraq, or greenhouse gas emissions, their philosophy is the same: "Just lock and load. The rest of you, don't forget to duck".
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Feb, 2006 03:04 pm
Roxxxanne wrote:
dlowan wrote:
So.....if he was drunk, is there anything criminal in the US (it's obviously grossly irresponsible) about shooting while drunk?


My understanding of Texas law is that it would be a felony. It is state and not Federal law that comes into play in this situation.


So the delay in reporting it is quite relevant to the possibility of any charges being laid then? Since it became impossible to check him for alcohol?


It was silly to delay, then, if he was sober.

Interestingly, my state has had a recent commission of inquiry into a case where a prominent lawyer hit and killed a cyclist with his car, and fled from the scene, only emerging to give himself up to the police after enough time had elapsed to make an alcohol test impossible.


There was a general impression that the system had treated him very lightly and that he was not prosecuted with reasonable vigour because of his position within the legal community.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Mar, 2006 06:30 am
Re: Uh oh: Cheney Drunk as Skunk?
McGentrix wrote:


I find it intreresting [sic] that in the midst of a thread accusing the vice president of immoral behavior based on a probably false report that you would pick my post as a morality guage.

I guess that presents a a clear picture of just how deep your level of blind hatred goes.


It isn't about the VP, McG. It's about you. You've no moral compass, lad. Whatever it is, you trying to think of ways to absolve, play down, mislead, [you name it].

Let me pull out a few quotes from the article for you.



Quote:

Secret Service agents guarding Vice President Dick Cheney when he shot Texas lawyer Harry Whittington on a hunting outing two weeks ago say Cheney was "clearly inebriated" at the time of the shooting.



Quote:
Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions.


Quote:
According to those who have talked with the agents and others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk when he gunned down his friend and the day-and-a-half delay in allowing Texas law enforcement officials on the ranch where the shooting occurred gave all members of the hunting party time to sober up.


Quote:
We talked with a number of administration officials who are privy to inside information on the Vice President's shooting "accident" and all admit Secret Service agents and others say they saw Cheney consume far more than the "one beer' he claimed he drank at lunch earlier that day.


Quote:
"This was a South Texas hunt," says one White House aide. "Of course there was drinking. There's always drinking. Lots of it."


I don't think I had to snip anything from the first few paragraphs. It was all PERTINENT.

But there's ole McG, the guy who used to feed a line of BS a mile long that you were a middle of the roader, a fair and even-handed fella; you've now obviously given up all pretenses of fairness and toe the party line, no matter how vigorously you have to shovel, no matter how high you have to pile it.

Is it the absolute truth, nobody knows for sure yet? But it boggles the mind that you can't, sorry won't allow for even a second, that there could be something to these comments.

This calculated apologist routine is just so bloody transparent. You really ought to try developing a new shtick.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Mar, 2006 07:17 am
Hey, it's not my problem if you can't tell the difference between a National Enquirer article like this one or and actual news article. I have absolutely no problem at all identifying that difference, but you do.

Quote:
Is it the absolute truth, nobody knows for sure yet? But it boggles the mind that you can't, sorry won't allow for even a second, that there could be something to these comments.


That is a difference between us. You believe the hate and propaganda thrown at the administration because there might be a hint of truth to it. I, on the other hand, prefer to not believe it because I need more than a hint of truth before believeing something.

If you wish to believe National Enquirer style articles, feel free, but it only dumbs you down.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Mar, 2006 07:24 am
Amigo wrote:
We're in the middle of a war and this piece of sh!t hasn't held a press conferance since 2002 and then we find him hunting drunk on heart meds after he shoots a guy in the face.

We are more pathetic then he is. We let them get away with it.


AMEN!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Mar, 2006 07:28 am
Ahhh...

the Bear, the Bunny...

...and McG.

Some things never change.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Mar, 2006 07:30 am
And Frank.


NO GODDAMN GROUP HUGS< RIGHT???!!!!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 06/07/2025 at 02:29:57