Why I care about the Cheney hunting accident

[Predicto]

Here is the honest, sincere, single reason that I am still interested in this subject, especially on this message board. It reflects something scary that is going on in our country.

Follow along with me, please, and think about this.

1) The Vice President shot someone in the face while hunting over the weekend. I'm sorry, but this is undeniably News, with a capital N. I believe it was an accident, I do not suspect any excessive drinking or any illegal cover up or anything. Regardless, the incident is still News, and I do want to know exactly what happened. He is the Vice President - and he shot someone in the face.

2) Despite the fact that this clearly is News with a capital N, it is at first very hard for the press get much information out of the White House, which always wishes to "manage" the news as much as possible. We are still learning basic information about what happened, four days later. Fine, again, I'm not that surprised or outraged. This is the basic operating approach of this Administration - they are very calculated in how they allow information to be released. I'm not going to whine about it.

3) But this is the kicker for me - on Monday afternoon, the day after the incident was reported to us, guys like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and many others were spreading the message: "The Press is Out to Get Dick Cheney! Why are they hammering on this story?"

People right here on this board started popping up with posts on Tuesday morning repeating the message: "It was just an accident! Why can't the press let it go? Why are you obsessed with this?" The Conservative blogs and airwaves began filling up with this point of view.

Let me repeat: Within 24 hours of us learning that anything had happened at all, we were already being told that the obsessive liberal press, the "enemy within," was out to get conservatives once again, and the defensiveness and outrage began growing and growing.

On day was all it took to figure out the proper spin. Make this into a story about press excess and obsession and bias, not about the Vice President and guns. Put the liberals back on their heels - make the reporters justify WHY they are even interested in this, call them grandstanders. Question whether Clinton would get the same treatment, assert that he wouldn't. Attack people's motives, refocus attention on your percieved enemies, find a scapegoat - this is pure Karl Rove at his most effective.

And it began ONE day after this story broke.

Honestly, most people really just wanted to know what happened, how it happened. I know I did. (Maybe make a few jokes, because the potential for good jokes is certainly there, sure). But no one was calling for the impeachment of Dick Cheney over this. Unfortunately, the immediate (and very effective) response of the Right has become to characterize every question or comment as an attack on Cheney, as a demand that Cheney step down or go to jail - then go on to attack the motives of the press or the posters here for being so outrageous and so biased and for jumping to conclusions without evidence.

It aggravates me to see this level of manipulation of the public, and it makes me scared to see how successful it is. I suspect most posters here don't even realise they have been manipulated. You are probably pissed at me for even suggesting it.

There is no way to escape it - our political discourse is poisoned. And that makes me sad.

Ok - that's it. Please, if you respond to this, explain to me why I'm wrong. I want to be wrong.

[rincewind]

On day was all it took to figure out the proper spin. Make this into a story about press excess and obsession and bias, not about the Vice President and guns. Put the liberals back on their heels - make the reporters justify WHY they are even interested in this, call them grandstanders. Question whether Clinton would get the same treatment, assert that he wouldn't. Attack people's motives, refocus attention on your percieved enemies, find a scapegoat - this is pure Karl Rove at his most effective.

I agree. And what's funny is how long they hammered on about Clinton getting a BJ - hell the right still can't let that go. Before anybody brings up his lying - i'm talking about before he lied. All he did was get a BJ, he did shoot anybody and it was news for months.

[Kilmer17]

Of Course it's news. I cant see how anyone argues otherwise.

Now that doesnt mean it should be dominating the way it is, while other (and I would argue more important) stories are almost completely ignored.

[TimmySmith]

There is only one issue of any importance here. The safety, security and privacy of the gentleman who was shot. If it took 5 or 10 or 24 hours to guarantee this, then so be it. This is not an issue that affects my daily life, and don't give me some "principle of the thing crap". The press has evolved into some creature that has no respect for any human dignity, and their whining throughout this whole ordeal is sickening.

[iheartskins]

There is no way to escape it - our political discourse is poisoned. And that makes me sad.

Is it poisoned or is it controlled? Maybe that's the same thing, at least in its more recent incarnation...but if its just controlled, then there's nothing new (and I guess, in turn, it seems a lot less ominous) about controlled political news. The personal lives of high politicians has always been controlled to a varying degree--certianly Rove and his cronies are particular adept at their way of spinning news and situations, but their craft is far from new.

If the News is, as you say, poisoned, what do we do? What's next? What's the conclusion and/or remedial step?

[rincewind]

If the News is, as you say, poisoned, what do we do? What's next? What's the conclusion and/or remedial step?

Hey, he's a liberal. Remember - we point out problems, we don't fix them.

[camyj15]

I agree with the essence of your post. It seems most politics get summed up with catch phrases - pro-life, pro-choice, red, blue, conservative, liberal, affirmative action. Say any one and you're liable to set somebody off.

Speak out against President Bush or his administration and you're a tree-hugging liberal. Stand up for President Bush and you're a card-carrying NRA lunatic that might accidently shoot someone in the face :laugh: (sorry had to do it). It's a shame that things have detoriorated to the point where issues cannot be discussed on merit but come from dumbed-down catch phrases.

[Predicto]

Of Course it's news. I cant see how anyone argues otherwise.

Now that doesnt mean it should be dominating the way it is, while other (and I would argue more important) stories are almost completely ignored.

Plenty of people right here on this board are arguing that it is not news, and the big story is how the press is out of control.

I would suggest that it is dominating the news because it is just so bizarre and unlikely. The Vice President shot a guy. In the face. Just to watch him die. (well, I added the last part). If the press isn't going to obsess over that for a few days, then they aren't human - it's a great story.

[Johnny Punani2]

Shouldn't the story have died down now? I mean Christ when is enough enough? Hunting accidents happen all the time. Esp with the type of hunting they were doing.

Don't sit there and act like libs are just really trying to find out what really happened. Because if you were this story would have ended the day it came out. Manipulation of the public? Give me an effing break....

[hokie4redskins]

Yes, we conservatives certainly would like to sweep this under the rug. I'm not even about to deny that. But, given the way the liberal media (sans Fox) exploited and beat the **** out of the dead horse that was Abu Ghraib, I think it would be nice if our own media didn't do everything possible to put their own country in the WORST possible light and fueling even more hatred for us. Realistically speaking, however, the media are a bunch of sharks, and Cheney's story a feeding frenzy. That's the nature of the beast, but we reserve the right to be sickened by it. Am I saying the Bush administration should've covered this up? No. But, we need to consider how this makes us look in the world. Regardless of partisan ideology and liberals salivating over this, you're still apart of this country, and believe it or not, this makes all of us look bad. Does that slow down the frenzy? Nope.

And yes, I believe Clinton's Lewinsky mess was out of control too. Also, I don't think this warranted a separate thread on the issue considering there are 150 others in the Tailgate. But I suppose that just proves my point. People are going to push this to the top of the message board for as long as possible, whether writing new articles or new threads.

[The Evil Genius]

Predicto,

You forgot, "in Reno".

Seriously, why wouldn't this be a major issue? How many VP's have shot someone (not during warfare)? Then, of those who did, how many fleed from the shooting?

[The Evil Genius]

And I said it yesterday - why are people getting mad at the media being capitalistic? They see a story that titallates the american public and, more importantly, sells newspapers (they are praivate companies you know, so earning a buck is the mission) and they run with it.

What, should we have State sponsored media only?

[Predicto]

There is only one issue of any importance here. The safety, security and privacy of the gentleman who was shot. If it took 5 or 10 or 24 hours to guarantee this, then so be it. This is not an issue that affects my daily life, and don't give me some "principle of the thing crap". The press has evolved into some creature that has no respect for any human dignity, and their whining throughout this whole ordeal is sickening.

I'm sorry. Unless I am reading this wrong, this post is sort of exactly what I meant.

[Johnny Punani2]

Predicto,

You forgot, "in Reno".

Seriously, why wouldn't this be a major issue? How many VP's have shot someone (not during warfare)? Then, of those who did, how many fleed from the shooting?

Why aren't you still talking about the Hamilton vs Burr Duel? I mean come on how often do two founding fathers square off in a duel and one shoot and kills the other? You're lazy and slipping....

[DjTj]

Of Course it's news. I cant see how anyone argues otherwise.

Now that doesnt mean it should be dominating the way it is, while other (and I would argue more important) stories are almost completely ignored.

That happens with every big story ... people in general, and reporters in particular, like to deal with things one at a time.

Is it poisoned or is it controlled? Maybe that's the same thing, at least in its more recent incarnation...but if its just controlled, then there's nothing new (and I guess, in turn, it seems a lot less ominous) about controlled political news. The personal lives of high politicians has always been controlled to a varying degree--certianly Rove and his cronies are particular adept at their way of spinning news and situations, but their craft is far from new.

If the News is, as you say, poisoned, what do we do? What's next? What's the conclusion and/or remedial step?

I personally don't think this is a huge problem. Every politican has a press secretary, a communications director, a speechwriter, and other people that are paid simply to control the information and image of that person. On the other side, reporters are increasingly aggressive and have few qualms about reporting news that may be unfavorable to their subjects. This is simply a result of the professionalization of every job, and although it makes things a lot less friendly, I think the competition on both sides tends to even out, and our information isn't "poisoned" in any way.

Even in this case, despite the spin, the story is still the biggest story in the news, and we have all enjoyed the hilarity. I don't think we can blame the White House for trying to kill this story - if you had accidentally shot someone, would you like to talk about it? The good news is that they didn't actually kill it - if our information is poisoned, at least our immune system seems to be wroking.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Look, if Brad Pitt shot someone in the face on a hunting trip it would be huge news.

I think the VP doing it makes it that much more important.

The real issue for me in all this is not that Cheney shot someone. That story is what it is.

The real issue is that the VP is this reactive to the dissemination of ANY information that is not completely controlled by his office. Cheney undoubtedly has more power and influence than any VP in history. And he is more secretive than any VP in history. This story shows that his natural response to any news is to go into "bunker mode."

Why is that? Should the second highest elected official in the country not be more open?

[iheartskins]

Shouldn't the story have died down now? I mean Christ when is enough enough? Hunting accidents happen all the time. Esp with the type of hunting they were doing.

Don't sit there and act like libs are just really trying to find out what really happened. Because if you were this story would have ended the day it came out. Manipulation of the public? Give me an effing break....

I don't think that's true though JP. How often does a Vice President [or other senior American political official] (almost) kill someone with his own gun? That's a big story, in terms of criminal appeal and potential political implication. Has it been overblown by the press? Perhaps. But to the extent that some conservative media outlets would have one believe? I just don't think so. The VP is a celebrity--though maybe not on the order of an OJ--and with that celebrity comes a level of public interest unlike other topics. People are interested in public figures and in homicide and when the two intersect, it makes for big news--and to be honest, I think that's on the level of irrefutable fact.

[PleaseBlitz]

This is definitely news. But it is news like Brad got Angelina pregnant, not news like Oh ****, a plane just crashed into the Pentagon.

Its joke news. Its going to be the focus of Jay Leno and Conan and Jon Stewart to take pot shots at for the next few weeks until somebody else famous does something equally stupid. Which wont take long. This IS NOT news that is going to affect the lives OF ANYONE not directly involved. Joke news.

[The 12th Commandment]

Yes, we conservatives certainly would like to sweep this under the rug. I'm not even about to deny that. But, given the way the liberal media (sans Fox) exploited and beat the **** out of the dead horse that was Abu Ghraib, I think it would be nice if our own media didn't do everything possible to put their own country in the WORST possible light and fueling even more hatred for us. Realistically speaking, however, the media are a bunch of sharks, and Cheney's story a feeding frenzy. That's the nature of the beast, but we reserve the right to be sickened by it. Am I saying the Bush administration should've covered this up? No. But, we need to consider how this makes us look in the world. Regardless of partisan ideology and liberals salivating over this, you're still apart of this country, and believe it or not, this makes all of us look bad. Does that slow down the frenzy? Nope.

And yes, I believe Clinton's Lewinsky mess was out of control too. Also, I don't think this warranted a separate thread on the issue considering there are 150 others in the Tailgate. But I suppose that just proves my point. People are going to push this to the top of the message board for as long as possible, whether writing new articles or new threads.

Ironically, because Fox got the interview, they have had significantly more coverage of the issue last night and today than CNN.

How do you fit that into your rationalization?

[Johnny Punani2]

I don't think that's true though JP. How often does a Vice President [or other senior American political official] (almost) kill someone with his own gun? That's a big story, in terms of criminal appeal and potential political implication. Has it been overblown by the press? Perhaps. But to the extent that some conservative media outlets would have one believe? I just don't think so. The VP is a celebrity--though maybe not on the order of an OJ--and with that celebrity comes a level of interest unlike other topics. People are interested in public figures and in homicide and when the two intersect, it makes for big news--and to be honest, I think that's on the level of irrefutable fact.

The last time I check the Vice President of the United States was human and prone to make errors. Sure it's news worthy at first because no one knew what happend. Now, we find out it was just a horrible accident and the story should start to go away. However, I'm sure just as another poster mentioned about Abu Gharib every lib rag will carry this story as front page news for the next 6 months to a year.

[nelms]

I admire Dick Cheney more than I ever have. Not for the fact that he accidently shot a friend, but how he handled it afterwards. He basically said EFF YOU to the national press. Why not? They've been unfairly hammering him since day one. The Secret Service properly reported the incident to the sheriff's office immediately after it happened, what else was necessary? To personally call that idiot David Gregory? Eff him and all the other liberal windbag media types that try to find anything to bash this president and vice president.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Considering I don't watch the news, only hear headlines...I don't feel like I was manipulated into my thoughts on this issue.

I just think the media has too much power, too much influence in this country at this day and age. They should just stick to who, what, where, when and why. Thats all the news should ever be. No pundits, no people who have agendas, just nothing but the facts.

[PleaseBlitz]

Considering I don't watch the news, only hear headlines...I don't feel like I was manipulated into my thoughts on this issue.

I just think the media has too much power, too much influence in this country at this day and age. They should just stick to who, what, where, when and why. Thats all the news should ever be. No pundits, no people who have agendas, just nothing but the facts.

A world without Sean Hannity or Al Franken?????

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

[zoony]

Predicto,

That is a good post man... the only thing that I would ask you to consider is the intellectual honesty of your argument.

Honestly... if it was Al Gore and not Dick Cheney... would you still feel manipulated? This is a partisan issue dude... no spinning that, sorry.

If it were Gore, this would be Nelms' thread, not yours.

....

[Predicto]

Is it poisoned or is it controlled? Maybe that's the same thing, at least in its more recent incarnation...but if its just controlled, then there's nothing new (and I guess, in turn, it seems a lot less ominous) about controlled political news. The personal lives of high politicians has always been controlled to a varying degree--certianly Rove and his cronies are particular adept at their way of spinning news and situations, but their craft is far from new.

If the News is, as you say, poisoned, what do we do? What's next? What's the conclusion and/or remedial step?

I wish I knew what the next step is.

Of course, the lives of high politicians have been controlled - the public didn't even know FDR was crippled.

The scary thing is now it is becoming very clear that the "constantly and preemptively attack and demonize your opponent" approach to political discourse is really very, very effective. It changes the focus of the debate in your favor, keeps your base energized, defuses potential liabilities. I have no doubt that the Democrats are going to rely on the same approach to try to get back into power, because it is easier and safer than debating anything on the merits. And things will just get worse and worse for the US if we can't debate anything civilly or ever stay on topic.