Replies

Amazingly there are articles on the net about the penetrating power of steel birdshot ~ although it doesn't have quite the range of the older lead birdshot, it's sharper, and goes further.

I presume Cheney and company were on the up and up and used steel, not lead, birdshot!

Time is so criminally irresponsible these days they obviously no longer employ fact checkers.

A much more honest statement is that the reporting on this has been a media crisis....there is no political crisis except in the minds of the old media loser leftists who write garbage like this.

It's just so funny, watching the parroting of the lies that Mary Matalin concocted for Cheney to spew about this incident.

First, it is time to cease spreading Cheney's fiction that Katharine Armstrong was an "eyewitness" to the shooting. By her own admission, her first reaction to the commotion was that Cheney had suffered a heart problem. She did not see the shooting. Her ever-changing account of events should not be relied on.

Second, it is highly likely that poor old Mr. Whittington was between 15 and 20 feet from Cheney when Cheney whirled 180 degrees (or more) and shot and nearly killed him. Tests conducted with the same gun and load Cheney used show the shot pattern is much more expanded at 90 feet (30 yards, as Cheney desperately wants us to believe the distance was) than the damage pattern on poor old Mr. Whittington's body.

Third, the morally bankrupt Cheney persists in sending out surrogates, including the victim himself, to place the blame on poor old Mr. Whittington. It is incumbent on anyone wielding a loaded weapon to ensure that he does not shoot another person. The quail-hunting community has weighed in with a resounding affirmation of that protocol. We don't know precisely why Cheney violated that protocol of the hunt. However, he certainly did.

Fourth, Cheney badly needs to offer a credible explanation for waiting overnight to tell the world that he had shot poor old Mr. Whittington. It wasn't to get all the facts together and release them. That did not happen, and it still has not. It was not to allow the "eyewitness" to tell the story. Katherine Armstrong was not an "eyewitness"; it is most likely that she simply relayed the story that Cheney, Rove, and Matalin cobbled together. It wasn't in deference to comforting poor old Mr. Whittington. He did not do that Saturday night. Rather, he went to the Armstrong ranch for roast beef and a cocktail.

Fifth, I would like to know precisely who, in the hunting party, drank what alcoholic beverages after noon on Saturday, February 11. We have heard at least three different accounts, two of them from Katharine Armstrong, the reliable "eyewitness," herself.

That's not all that does not add up with regard to the ever-shifting Cheney storyline of the past seven days. But, it's enough. When our vice president shoots poor old Mr. Whittington, we, as American citizens, our entitled to the plain unvarnished truth.

All we've been told so far is a bunch of hoo-ha with so many discrepancies and inconsistencies that it would be foolish to believe any part of the tall tale.

"I presume Cheney and company were on the up and up and used steel, not lead, birdshot!"

Just about nobody uses steel shot for anything but waterfowl!

They don't even make steel shot in 28 ga.

Less than 10% of all shot-shells sold are steel shot, lead is used for everything but waterfowl, and is only used for that because some eco-twits claimed ducks were dieing from eating lead shot and got some moonbats to pass a law banning it for duck hunting.

It was, and is a lie!