Name:
Location: Cheshire, Connecticut, United States

devilishly handsome, screamingly funny, overly modest

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

My Man Cheney, or It's Hard To Imagine a Bigger Dick

I've just finished reading the Huffington Post article revealing the apparently scandalous assignation between Dick Cheney and our Ambassador to Switzerland, Pamela Willeford. It seems that part of the motivation for the cover-up of the Whittington shooting may have been the fact that the hunting party consisted only of Cheney, Whittington, and two women not their wifes, Willeford and Katherine Armstrong. Prior to being whisked away by the Secret Service, Pamela told police that she was standing next to our noble VP when he let loose his misdirected salvo, and is therefore the only actual eye-witness except the victim and Cheney. Armstrong was in the car (not "hunting", if that's what shooting people is called vice-presidentially). Aside from some attempts to obfuscate the fact that there had been some alcohol consumed by the shooters, she was an innocent (maybe) bystander.

What I can't figure out is, where is the official inquest? A man was shot. He has already suffered a heart attack as a result of the shooting, and could conceivably die. At the very least there was negligence, possibly criminal, involved. If there was alcohol imbibed, and it contributed to the "accident", there are possible grounds for a felony indictment. The doctor minimized the seriousness of the injuries until the heart attack forced it into the open. The whole thing stinks like hell, even and especially born-again hell. I hate the arrogance as much as the unstated lies.

I couldn't care less whom Dick Cheney screws, as long as it isn't me or the Nation. I leave the sub-rosa relationship with the Ambassador to Dick, his wife, and maybe the Almighty which this administration keeps mixing in with their politics ( although I don't think the Big Guy gives a rat's ass about any of it). My problem is , why does our VP get to be above the law? If you or I went off, chugged down a few, and then shot somebody, you damn better believe we'd be spending some of our leisure time in the pokey until somebody figured out what actually happened. Big Dick, on the other hand, has stated that his position in life exempts him from even responding to questions about his behavior, criminal or not. Is that a born-again thing or a vice-presidential thing? Then again, does it matter? He's a Big Dick either way. How the hell do we elect these guys?

Later.

6 Comments:

Anonymous colleen said...

I had not heard this latest. It did seem fishy though...and maybe metaphor or a divine intervention to bring things to light. Aren't the odds in our favor that he can't get away with JUST EVERYTHING?

8:49 PM  
Anonymous blue girl said...

Boy, Colleen -- I'm with you -- the odds have to be in our favor sooner or later. I prefer sooner.

These goofballs (Bush and Cheney)are elected officials, not Co-Kings of the US.

8:58 PM  
Blogger Holly said...

I once read Dick Cheney and his clonies referred to, in an editorial some years ago (just after 9/11, in fact) as Dick "Rambo" Cheney & Co.
Funny how things come full circle, isn't it? And as I commented to Colin: If the shoe fits...

Must be nice to be "above the law" - I have an ex-husband who places himself in the same category - but at least he's being charged with International and Federal kidnapping... let's hope they nab him!

P.S. Bill... I LOVE the title to your post!!

4:33 AM  
Anonymous Hugh said...

Oh, dear. I fear our good friend Bill has been loitering too long in the fever swamps of the American Left. If you, Bill, and I were hunting on the private property of a friend -- unlikely, since neither of us hunts, but humor me -- and one of us shot the other accidentally, I don't see why the shooter would spend time in jail. If the victim or a witness made an accusation of a crime to the police, certainly the authorities would investigate. But, in the absence of an indication of a crime, why would anyone be carted off to the slammer? Surely not because of the lurid fantasies of a loony blogger. You're not mistaking Arianna for a rational grown-up, are you? Anything is possible, I suppose, and let's not test my theory. Let's just keep it hypothetical.

3:14 PM  
Blogger Papa Bill said...

A crime is a crime and should be investigated whether or not it occurs on private property. IF there was drinking involved (and certainly you can't believe Cheney's "one beer" story over the evidence of 2 empty 6-packs in the back seat) and IF the VP was somewhat impaired when the gun went off, THAT can certainly be construed as criminal negligence (a crime) and should at least be thoroughly checked out,whether or not a complaint was filed.(Very few complaints were filed against Gotti, for instance). Blind right wing allegience to this arrogantly supercillious administration and it's antics is not typical of my friend Hugh. Is there need for more perspective? (I'm no fan of Arianna's hyperbole, but she didn't write or edit the post to which I referred).

2:26 PM  
Anonymous Hugh said...

Hmmmm. Papa Bill does not show much tolerance for a different (from his) view of things, does he. (Rhetorical question – hence no question mark.) "Blind right wing allegiance"? Good grief. I voted for Bush-Cheney twice because I considered them a better choice than the Democrat alternatives – a rather low standard. Given the choice, I would have voted for Colin Powell, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and probably a few others, maybe Joe Biden, over Bush-Cheney – but I was not given that choice. I feel no personal or emotional loyalty or disloyalty to either of them. I am loyal to our Constitution, which you and I once took a sacred, public oath to defend, and to the (unpleasant to some) fact that they are the elected Administration. Nothing beyond that. If the authorities convict the Vice President of a crime, they should throw him in jail. (Arianna Huffington is not, however, a legally constituted authority, her own delusions or others’ notwithstanding.) If Cheney had an accident, we should leave him and the victim alone to work it out between them. But "If this" and "if that" statements and unsubstantiated assumptions in the blogosphere (hope I'm spelling that neologism correctly) do not constitute evidence. “There were empty beer cans in the area, so Cheney must have drunk them, and he must have been drunk, and so he’s criminally negligent, and so he should go to prison, and anyone who disagrees is a right-wing kook, aaaahhhhh!” Whew! Maybe that passes for evidence on the Harvard campus, but not with me.

1:17 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home