Bruce
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2001
- Messages
- 7,519
davefoc
Philosopher
Would anybody like to take a shot at ranking the possible reasons that the reporting of the accident was delayed by their likelyhood?
1. Cheney was emotionally distraught and wanted time to compose himself before appearing in public.
2. Cheney was drunk and wanted time to sober up.
2A. Cheney had been drinking a bit but wasn't drunk and wanted time to eliminate all signs of alcohol consumption.
3. Concern for the Whittington family. They wanted to give them a chance to deal with tragedy in private before event became public.
4. It was a strategy to reduce impact of story by preventing release before Whittington's condition was stable.
5. There was a thought for awhile that it might be possible to cover up accident completely so delay was just first part of that effort.
6. Cheney was having an affair with Swiss ambassador and delay reduced likelyhood that she would be interviewed by press.
7. Cheney doesn't like the press and he just thought he'd jerk them around on this.
That's all the possibilities I can think of. Does anybody have any I haven't thought of?
Besides the delay there were other strange aspects to the story:
Why was the president informed in such a strange way. (Call to Card telling of a shooting accident involving Cheney. Followup call by Rove to find out that Cheney was the shooter).
Why was the not-quite-an-eyewitness Armstrong selected as the person to notify the press?
Who were the actual eyewitnesses to the event and have they been interviewed at all?
Does anybody have any thoughts about these issues?
1. Cheney was emotionally distraught and wanted time to compose himself before appearing in public.
2. Cheney was drunk and wanted time to sober up.
2A. Cheney had been drinking a bit but wasn't drunk and wanted time to eliminate all signs of alcohol consumption.
3. Concern for the Whittington family. They wanted to give them a chance to deal with tragedy in private before event became public.
4. It was a strategy to reduce impact of story by preventing release before Whittington's condition was stable.
5. There was a thought for awhile that it might be possible to cover up accident completely so delay was just first part of that effort.
6. Cheney was having an affair with Swiss ambassador and delay reduced likelyhood that she would be interviewed by press.
7. Cheney doesn't like the press and he just thought he'd jerk them around on this.
That's all the possibilities I can think of. Does anybody have any I haven't thought of?
Besides the delay there were other strange aspects to the story:
Why was the president informed in such a strange way. (Call to Card telling of a shooting accident involving Cheney. Followup call by Rove to find out that Cheney was the shooter).
Why was the not-quite-an-eyewitness Armstrong selected as the person to notify the press?
Who were the actual eyewitnesses to the event and have they been interviewed at all?
Does anybody have any thoughts about these issues?
There was no delay in reporting the incident to the local authorities.
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2001
- Messages
- 60,135
I don't think I'll be around that long but we could work out a deal. BTW, I'll give a discount for anyone who is a free speech proponent.Hi RandFan,
I'm thinking about renting your sigline. Since we both believe in free speech, I was thinking about a 99 year lease. OK?
One reason which covers both: Cheney has never really got used to the fact that the Vice President of the United States is an elected job and he's an elected guy. He still thinks of himself as the behind-the-scenes insider that he's always been in government. He just doesn't "get" that stuff you could keep private when you're a CEO or chief of staff or even a Congressman or Defense Secretary you can't keep private when you're Vice President.
Further, and somewhat related, he hasn't gotten that information, true false and otherwise, now gets disseminated at the speed of light without filtration through big media outlets once it's released anywhere. To everyone. This is an administration-wide fault and it has cost them over and over again. This was a phonomenon which really happened for the first time during the Clinton adminstration, but Clinton and Gore "got" it as it was happening. The Bush administration, and Cheney in particular, still has a view of the news cycle that hasn't been relevant since the early '80s. TV they get. Google news and blogs, not so much.
Bjorn
Off Topic
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2002
- Messages
- 2,968
Makes sense, give or take a beer or two.
See Manny's post above. It is an unavoidable "public spectacle", the question is how to handle it from 'the big bang' and onwards.Errr, maybe he didn't want to make it a public spectacle?
How would you handle it? Would you toss your gun on the ground and go running to the press shouting, "Hey, everybody! I just shot my best friend! What do you think of that?!"
Sheesh.
Bjorn
Off Topic
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2002
- Messages
- 2,968
I am one. Even more so when it's my FREE speech we are talking about, in your sigline to be specific. (How can you, by the way, give a discount on "free"? Maybe you'll pay me?)I don't think I'll be around that long but we could work out a deal. BTW, I'll give a discount for anyone who is a free speech proponent.
I wonder what I shall put there - "Don't listen to me, listen to bjorn" is not really what I want ... (well it is, but it's too obvious). The one I want is this one: "Don't mess with bjorn. I'm RandFan. I approved this message."
Deal, or no deal?
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2001
- Messages
- 60,135
I'm a capatalist supporter of free speech. You can have all the free speech you want but if you want exposure, well, that's gonna cost ya.I am one. Even more so when it's my FREE speech we are talking about, in your sigline to be specific. (How can you, by the way, give a discount on "free"? Maybe you'll pay me?)
*You pony up the dough and you can put what ever you want there. Remember AJ Liebling's refrain, Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one. Also, location, location, location.I wonder what I shall put there - "Don't listen to me, listen to bjorn" is not really what I want ... (well it is, but it's too obvious). The one I want is this one: "Don't mess with bjorn. I'm RandFan. I approved this message."
Deal, or no deal?
*The space doesn't really belong to me so don't send me any letters.
Bjorn
Off Topic
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2002
- Messages
- 2,968
Hm. Maybe you should try "Speech might be free, but my sigline isn't. Get your own".Remember AJ Liebling's refrain, Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one. Also, location, location, location.