Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here)

Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Author
BT
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3589
  • Joined: 2004/07/03 13:19:00
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/14 22:01:28 (permalink)
I ran across the following. For the oblivious among us, it's fictitious, but funny in its way (well, OK, you may have to be a Democrat to see the sarcastic humor) and this started off as a thread inviting humor, so:
quote:
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
DOJ Memo Defends Cheney Shooting


JB

Frankly, I don't understand all the fuss about Vice President Cheney's shooting of Harry Whittington. This unsigned Department of Justice Memorandum, which was slipped under my door this morning, explains it all:

* * * * *

Under the unitary executive theory of Article II, the President of the United States, as Commander-in-Chief, has inherent authority to shoot anyone he likes, and he may surely delegate that authority to his second in command, the Vice President of the United States. Indeed, to the extent that federal law or state tort law is to the contrary, we must read all such laws in harmony with the inherent powers of the President as head of the unitary executive in order to avoid any potential constitutional conflict. As the President himself noted in his recent signing statement to the McCain Amendment, laws that purport to limit the President's authority to use force in time of war must be construed "in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the president to supervise the unitary executive branch and as commander in chief."

The Executive's ability to identify enemy combatants and apprehend or, if necessary, shoot them on the field of battle is fully recognized under the laws of war. There is no doubt that it is fully within the President's powers under the laws of war to identify enemy combatants and apprehend, or if necessary, shoot them in order to prevent them from returning to the battlefield where they may do harm to the interests of the United States. In this case, it is undisputed that Harry Whittington (if that is his *real* name) was carrying arms in close proximity to the Vice President of the United States, and, moreover, in the very same state as the President's Crawford, Texas, residence.

It was therefore completely within the Vice-President's discretion to determine that the said Whittington was an enemy combatant who posed a threat, whether real, potential, imagined or fictitious, to the national security of the United States. Media accounts do not reveal what Harry Whittington's name was before he changed it; it is entirely possible, however, that his real name is Ari Al-Whittington and that he is an Al Qaeda operative, or is associated with groups who are associated with Al Qaeda, or is associated with groups who are associated with groups who are associated with Al Qaeda. And so on.

The objection that Al-Whittington was found on American soil is completely without merit. We are dealing with questions of war, not the criminal or civil process. What so-called "civil libertarians" still don't understand is that 9-11 changed everything. Thousands of people died in the World Trade Center *on American soil.* Discovering Al Qaeda operatives on American soil, or those that executive suspects, whether reasonably or unreasonably, to be Al Qaeda operatives, does not bestow upon such "persons" the "right" to call upon the criminal justice system, much less the civil tort system. We note, moreover, that the President's constitutional obligation in Article II, section 3, to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed" fully supports these conclusions. If the President is constitutionally authorized to execute "laws," a fortiori he is clearly authorized to execute "persons" by shooting them at his discretion.

Nor is the fact that Al-Whittington is a 78 year old businessman who has made substantial contributions to the Republican Party a reason to doubt the Vice-President's plenary determination that Al-Whittington may have links to Al Qaeda, or links to links to links to Al Qaeda. After all, if Al Qaeda wished to infiltrate the Executive branch it would be entirely logical to plant operatives posing as Republican businessmen who gave money to Republican causes because everyone knows that in this Administration the best way to gain access to Administration officials is to buy your way in. Indeed, precisely because money buys access in this Administration, the more money a businessman gives, the more justified the suspicion that the businessman is in fact in league with Al Qaeda, groups associated with Al Qaeda, groups associated with groups associated with Al Qaeda, and so on. The Vice-President's determination, whether reasonable, unreasonable, or completely under the influence of drugs, is therefore plenary and unreviewable, as is made clear by the text of the Constitution, which fails to say anything to the contrary.

Finally, even if one doubts the inherent authority of the unitary executive to identify and shoot persons like Al-Whittington, the September 18th, 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (hereinafter "AUMF") clearly gives the President authority "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." This authorization clearly includes persons like Al-Whittington, since the letters in the authorization can be rearranged to spell "Al-Whittington," not to mention "Al-Gore." (But we digress). Such Congressional authorization clearly trumps any federal or state law to the contrary, and all state or federal laws which may be passed in the future. In particular, the AUMF clearly obviates the need for Vice President Cheney to have purchased a hunting license from the State of Texas.

In sum, because of the President's inherent authority to supervise and direct the Unitary Executive Branch as Commander-in-Chief under Article II of the Constitution, Vice President Cheney was clearly authorized to shoot Ari Al-Whittington, enemy of the people, under the laws of war. Any suggestions to the contrary show ignorance of the original understanding of the United States Constitution, serve to give our enemies in the Global War on Terror aid and comfort, and in and of themselves constitute grounds for detention as an enemy combatant. We're serious. Don't f*ck with us.

Department of Justice
John Yoo Building
Washington, D.C.
#31
sizz
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1688
  • Joined: 2004/02/12 00:12:00
  • Location: San Jose, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/14 22:12:49 (permalink)
quote:
BT Posted - 02/14/2006 : 13:15:29

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the face of it, it reeks of "special treatment". ..........................

................But it really doesn't matter--it appears to me that breaks were given in the Cheney situation that wouldn't have been had a "regular citizen" done the same thing and that bothers me because, more and more, the Bushies seem to consider themselves above the law.


My God Man, he happens to be the Vice President of the United States Of America and I'd hope to hell he'd be given "special treatment"........... and why would you even think he was just a "regular citizen" ..............?
#32
Michael Hoffman
Double-chop Porterhouse
  • Total Posts : 18891
  • Joined: 2000/07/01 08:52:00
  • Location: Gahanna, OH
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/14 23:47:14 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by bill voss

quote:
Originally posted by V960

Mr. Voss,
You may spin your Democratic garbage if you wish and I shall ignore it. Looked at the Congress lately...the nation doesn't agree w/ you.

Always would have figured Cheney would have been a better shot...dead lawyers, even Republican lawyers, are always a good thing. Sorry Jack, personal thing.

I suppose this means our hunting trip for Snipe & Grouse is off.

You can come grouse hunting with me anytime, although you have better grouse hunting in Michigan than we have here in Ohio. As to snipe, it's usually too hot and buggy for me to enjoy snipe hunting these days.
#33
roossy90
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 6695
  • Joined: 2005/08/15 16:17:00
  • Location: columbus, oh
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 00:53:50 (permalink)
OK,
First of all, I applaude Mr. Voss's litenay in his post, but it was very long to read, and I got bored since it was so long, and personally I didnt finish it..
I like to read, but since being on the PC< I have a short attention span for things like this.
NOT to say, that they arent newsworthy, or readable, but it is just too long for a forum like this.
i would rather someone keep it short and sweet, instead of making it like something I have to read for a test later on.



Second of all:
Do any of you like satire out there?
(with a bit of political/comedic insinuations?)

If you do, I hope you caught both episodes of Jon Stewart's, "The Daily Show" regarding this whole "MISHAP" with VP Cheney?...
They have been very enjoyable, and you can catch PART 2 Wednesday night at 8 PM on Comedy central.
First part was great, but that was on repeat tuesday night at 8..


I love humor, and if any kind of celebrity/political satire is mixed with it, I love it even more.
"nuff said.
Tara
Zing
#34
roossy90
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 6695
  • Joined: 2005/08/15 16:17:00
  • Location: columbus, oh
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 01:10:24 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by fpczyz

quote:
BT Posted - 02/14/2006 : 13:15:29

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the face of it, it reeks of "special treatment". ..........................

................But it really doesn't matter--it appears to me that breaks were given in the Cheney situation that wouldn't have been had a "regular citizen" done the same thing and that bothers me because, more and more, the Bushies seem to consider themselves above the law.


My God Man, he happens to be the Vice President of the United States Of America and I'd hope to hell he'd be given "special treatment"........... and why would you even think he was just a "regular citizen" ..............?


OK..
Now you got me involved in this debate..

Is he different from any other citizen of the US when things go wrong?
What happens when this lawyer dies because of what Cheney did?..
The lawyer screwed up and it wasnt Cheney's fault, but we know that is probably a cover up, because we cant trust our own government to tell the truth.

Step 2
Case in point. Why did they wait so long to tell the public.
?
But nevermind that.
(I will just accept that as trying to get the man some first class help)

Someone got shot by accident, (doesnt matter who), someone shot him by accident, (doesnt matter who)--
Man dies!
If it was a "REGULAR CITIZEN" of this lovely run US of A, they would be charged with some type of reckless endangerment/assualt/manslaughter--ETC..

You get the gist of what I am saying.??
So----
If Whittington dies, SHOULD Cheney get special treatment because he shot a man, BY ACCIDENT, (as we have been told)--we dont know-
Well, yeah..Or just be excused?
They charge people with lesser crimes, and then drop them.

Hell, no..
The priviledges of the government do not extend to exempting "HUMAN BEINGS" from the law.
How would you feel if you were in Whittingtons shoe. I dont even know if I am spelling his name right..
Ok.. I got shot, because I screwed up.. but then I died. DAMN-I hate when that happens....

OK.. well , after all, he is the VP.. oh yeah......cant charge him with anything because he is the VP>>/above the law?
UGH......
Hello?
Who is playing GOD here?
That is what I want to know.
And, yeah, Mr Voss, it seems that I am going on too long myself..
But outraged at the people that think any lawmaker/government official is above the law!
Everyone knows..but we close our eyes everytime it seems.

Sheesh.. Only Steven Segall is "ABOVE THE LAW"
(LMAO)
#35
mr chips
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 4727
  • Joined: 2003/02/19 00:15:00
  • Location: portland, OR
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 01:11:10 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by fpczyz

quote:
BT Posted - 02/14/2006 : 13:15:29

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the face of it, it reeks of "special treatment". ..........................

................But it really doesn't matter--it appears to me that breaks were given in the Cheney situation that wouldn't have been had a "regular citizen" done the same thing and that bothers me because, more and more, the Bushies seem to consider themselves above the law.


My God Man, he happens to be the Vice President of the United States Of America and I'd hope to hell he'd be given "special treatment"........... and why would you even think he was just a "regular citizen" ..............?
He shot someone. Nobody deserves a special break on that issue..
#36
roossy90
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 6695
  • Joined: 2005/08/15 16:17:00
  • Location: columbus, oh
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 01:22:33 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by mr chips

quote:
Originally posted by fpczyz

quote:
BT Posted - 02/14/2006 : 13:15:29

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the face of it, it reeks of "special treatment". ..........................

................But it really doesn't matter--it appears to me that breaks were given in the Cheney situation that wouldn't have been had a "regular citizen" done the same thing and that bothers me because, more and more, the Bushies seem to consider themselves above the law.


My God Man, he happens to be the Vice President of the United States Of America and I'd hope to hell he'd be given "special treatment"........... and why would you even think he was just a "regular citizen" ..............?
He shot someone. Nobody deserves a special break on that issue..

AMEN!
#37
BT
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3589
  • Joined: 2004/07/03 13:19:00
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 01:22:33 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by fpczyz

quote:
BT Posted - 02/14/2006 : 13:15:29

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the face of it, it reeks of "special treatment". ..........................

................But it really doesn't matter--it appears to me that breaks were given in the Cheney situation that wouldn't have been had a "regular citizen" done the same thing and that bothers me because, more and more, the Bushies seem to consider themselves above the law.


My God Man, he happens to be the Vice President of the United States Of America and I'd hope to hell he'd be given "special treatment"........... and why would you even think he was just a "regular citizen" ..............?


Because under the law--remember the LAW--he IS, Frank. He's apparently being cited for breaking one law in this episode--not having the required upland bird stamp. Ask Aaron Burr, the last Vice President to shoot someone. Sorry, but your Navy time may have convinced you those in power are different from the rest of us, but my experience then and with politicians before and since convinced me they are absolutely no different than the rest--some are downright incompetent and venal. And certainly the law does not give them a pass if they commit a crime. Only Congress can remove the VP from office, but any local DA can charge him with a crime if they have sufficient evidence he has committed one (and OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, as a recent President learned) is a crime as is NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE. I'm not saying he committed either of those, but the local authorities have a right and duty to investigate that possibility no matter who he is.

Truth is, this is looking worse and worse for Dick because it's looking more and more like he or his "people" may have been hiding something (aside from the lack of an upland bird stamp which they've now admitted) and intentionally cut a deal with local law enforcement to put off his being interviewed. The most obvious thing they may have been hiding, like I said before, is he had been DRINKING. We've recently discussed that in another context.
#38
roossy90
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 6695
  • Joined: 2005/08/15 16:17:00
  • Location: columbus, oh
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 01:25:38 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by BT

quote:
Originally posted by fpczyz

quote:
BT Posted - 02/14/2006 : 13:15:29

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the face of it, it reeks of "special treatment". ..........................

................But it really doesn't matter--it appears to me that breaks were given in the Cheney situation that wouldn't have been had a "regular citizen" done the same thing and that bothers me because, more and more, the Bushies seem to consider themselves above the law.


My God Man, he happens to be the Vice President of the United States Of America and I'd hope to hell he'd be given "special treatment"........... and why would you even think he was just a "regular citizen" ..............?


Because under the law--remember the LAW--he IS, Frank. He's apparently being cited for breaking one law in this episode--not having the required upland bird stamp. Ask Aaron Burr, the last Vice President to shoot someone. Sorry, but your Navy time may have convinced you those in power are different from the rest of us, but my experience then and with politicians before and since convinced me they are absolutely no different than the rest--some are downright incompetent and venal. And certainly the law does not give them a pass if they commit a crime. Only Congress can remove the VP from office, but any local DA can charge him with a crime if they have sufficient evidence he has committed one (and OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, as a recent President learned) is a crime as is NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE. I'm not saying he committed either of those, but the local authorities have a right and duty to investigate that possibility no matter who he is.

Truth is, this is looking worse and worse for Dick because it's looking more and more like he or his "people" may have been hiding something (aside from the lack of an upland bird stamp which they've now admitted) and intentionally cut a deal with local law enforcement to put off his being interviewed. The most obvious thing they may have been hiding, like I said before, is he had been DRINKING. We've recently discussed that in another context.

Oh, but his office sent the $7.00 check to cover that bird stamp.. whoopie....
after the fact..
LOL
#39
UncleVic
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 6025
  • Joined: 2003/10/14 14:56:00
  • Location: West Palm Beach, FL
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 01:32:01 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Hoffman

quote:
Originally posted by UncleVic

Seeing the news today, seems the hunting accident became a little more serious. The lawyer had some birdshot either hit his heart, or flow to his heart casuing a heart attack. I dont know how Texans deal with the law out there, but in Michigan, this would definatly get one locked up.


No it wouldn't. It would be handled as a hunting accident, and that's it. Unless a Michigan game protector determined that the shooting was the result of some unlawful action -- and negligence could be construed as unlawful -- there would be no arrest.


Well, if the police (or Foresty service) where able to investigate the situation without being turned away, I'd agree with ya... But the 24 hour delay, and lack of due process being deliverd in that time frame makes a tax payer wonder... In my neck of the woods, it's considered negligence until proven innocent.. 99% of the time, anyone involved in something similar whould be hauled in, maybe not handcuffed, but not by their choice either hauled into the pen...

I was involved in an accidental shooting back when I was 17.. Nobody injured, involved a hole in a pickup in the field, and I got stuck doing time.. And if you seen how minor it was, and being in my shoes, after the fines, It would make you wonder why someone famous is able to walk.... Laws are laws.. I respect them, follow them, and feel others should do the same...
#40
roossy90
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 6695
  • Joined: 2005/08/15 16:17:00
  • Location: columbus, oh
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 01:51:12 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by UncleVic

quote:
Originally posted by Michael Hoffman

quote:
Originally posted by UncleVic

Seeing the news today, seems the hunting accident became a little more serious. The lawyer had some birdshot either hit his heart, or flow to his heart casuing a heart attack. I dont know how Texans deal with the law out there, but in Michigan, this would definatly get one locked up.


No it wouldn't. It would be handled as a hunting accident, and that's it. Unless a Michigan game protector determined that the shooting was the result of some unlawful action -- and negligence could be construed as unlawful -- there would be no arrest.


Well, if the police (or Foresty service) where able to investigate the situation without being turned away, I'd agree with ya... But the 24 hour delay, and lack of due process being deliverd in that time frame makes a tax payer wonder... In my neck of the woods, it's considered negligence until proven innocent.. 99% of the time, anyone involved in something similar whould be hauled in, maybe not handcuffed, but not by their choice either hauled into the pen...

I was involved in an accidental shooting back when I was 17.. Nobody injured, involved a hole in a pickup in the field, and I got stuck doing time.. And if you seen how minor it was, and being in my shoes, after the fines, It would make you wonder why someone famous is able to walk.... Laws are laws.. I respect them, follow them, and feel others should do the same...


Amen......... Makes me GAG thinking about what the outcome of this will be.
I swear, I will eat my words.
I will print this out and eat it for breakfast, if he is charged with any type of "crime"..

(ever seen me so steamed about anything?)
#41
Jimeats
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3175
  • Joined: 2005/08/15 20:02:00
  • Location: Ipswich Ma
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 07:08:18 (permalink)
Who hijacked this thread? I think it said insert joke here. And here I was sitting here wating for all the good punch lines. Come on there must be more out there. Vivere,mangarie,bibita e essera allegro. Ciao Jim
#42
Tedbear
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1832
  • Joined: 2004/01/26 12:31:00
  • Location: Somerset, NJ
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 07:49:36 (permalink)
Originally posted by Sundancer7

Personally I regard Cheney as a patriot. I know that many of you do not and that is your opinion. I think the guy gave up a great job just to assist at far less money. I realize that he was extremely wealthy but I sincerely believe the best interst in the USA is in his heart.

/quote]

Paul--I'm just curious about something here. Does your view of him as "a patriot" include the fact that he received an unusually large number of draft deferments back during the Vietnam Era? (While I hesitate to come up with a specific number, if my memory serves me correctly, I believe that he received draft deferments seven times.)

When questioned years later about his lack of service in the military, his response was, "I had other priorities". I am quite sure that the thousands of guys who perished in the Vietnam War had other priorities too, but they didn't have the connections to be deferred, as he was. Or, perhaps, they were patriots in the true sense.

Speaking from my own experience, as a teacher, I received two deferrments. Then, the deferrments were no longer available, and I was called for my physical exam. If not for high blood pressure, I would have been required to serve, as did my brother and ten of thousands of others. Somehow, this "patriot" managed to finesse the system so that he was never even called for a physical exam. And, years later, he became one of the chief architects (along with Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld who also failed to serve) of our present war.

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion in our society, so I respect your opinion. However, I strongly disagree with your characterization of this man as a patriot. Based on his record with the Draft Board, with Halliburton, and now as the V.P., perhaps opportunist might be a better characterization of Mr. Cheney.
#43
Sundancer7
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 13549
  • Joined: 2001/07/18 14:10:00
  • Location: Knoxville, TN,
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 08:02:10 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Tedbear

Originally posted by Sundancer7

Personally I regard Cheney as a patriot. I know that many of you do not and that is your opinion. I think the guy gave up a great job just to assist at far less money. I realize that he was extremely wealthy but I sincerely believe the best interst in the USA is in his heart.

/quote]

You opinion is your opinion and I respect that. Mr. Cheney was making mega bucks with Halliburton. He certainly took a cut in pay when he agreed to take the current job. I sincerely believe he is a patriot not because of his military service but because he was willing to serve in a position of minimum pay, receive constant criticism and still work behind the scenes in what he believe is in the best interest of the USA.

I do understand that many do not have the same feelings. I respect those views. I just merely expressed what I thought.

If I had been him, I would have never taken the job that he currently has. The constant criticism is not worth it. As a matter of fact from my point of view is if I had been George W, I would not have wanted that job either. Neither of them pay enough.

I believe that the current President and his vice has endured more during their tenure than any other leader we have had.

I am glad that I am semi retired.

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN


Paul--I'm just curious about something here. Does your view of him as "a patriot" include the fact that he received an unusually large number of draft deferments back during the Vietnam Era? (While I hesitate to come up with a specific number, if my memory serves me correctly, I believe that he received draft deferments seven times.)

When questioned years later about his lack of service in the military, his response was, "I had other priorities". I am quite sure that the thousands of guys who perished in the Vietnam War had other priorities too, but they didn't have the connections to be deferred, as he was. Or, perhaps, they were patriots in the true sense.

Speaking from my own experience, as a teacher, I received two deferrments. Then, the deferrments were no longer available, and I was called for my physical exam. If not for high blood pressure, I would have been required to serve, as did my brother and ten of thousands of others. Somehow, this "patriot" managed to finesse the system so that he was never even called for a physical exam. And, years later, he became one of the chief architects (along with Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld who also failed to serve) of our present war.

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion in our society, so I respect your opinion. However, I strongly disagree with your characterization of this man as a patriot. Based on his record with the Draft Board, with Halliburton, and now as the V.P., perhaps opportunist might be a better characterization of Mr. Cheney.
#44
Scorereader
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 5566
  • Joined: 2005/08/04 13:09:00
  • Location: Crofton, MD
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 10:03:18 (permalink)
for those that read my response to all this political crap. Just ignore my response, I don't want to egg anyone on. Especially now that I deleted it and replaced it with this joke ripped from the headlines...or rather ripped off from Leno:

That’s the big story over the weekend. On a quail hunting trip in Texas, Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney accidentally shot a fellow hunter, a 78 year old lawyer. In fact when people found out he shot a lawyer his popularity is now at 92%!
#45
tmiles
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 2033
  • Joined: 2004/10/01 15:59:00
  • Location: Millbury, MA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 12:35:16 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Jimeats

Who hijacked this thread? I think it said insert joke here. And here I was sitting here wating for all the good punch lines. Come on there must be more out there. Vivere,mangarie,bibita e essera allegro. Ciao Jim


I was wondering the same thing. This will be standup fodder for years, so where are the jokes?
#46
1bbqboy
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 4644
  • Joined: 2000/11/20 16:52:00
  • Location: Rogue Valley
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 12:48:41 (permalink)
...Now THIS is funny.
*
Ballot botch: Coulter votes in wrong precinct

By Jose Lambiet

Palm Beach Post Columnist

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

She may be smart enough to earn millions from her acidic political barbs, but when it comes to something as simple as voting in her tiny hometown, hard-core conservative pundit Ann Coulter is a tad confused.

Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections records show Coulter voted last week in Palm Beach's council election. Problem is: She cast her ballot in a precinct 4 miles north of the precinct where she owns a home — and that could be a big no-no.
Coulter, who owns a $1.8 million crib on Seabreeze Avenue, should have voted in Precinct 1198. It covers most homes on her street. Instead, records show, she voted in Precinct 1196, at the northern tip of the island.

A fave on the college speaking circuit and the occasional target of cream-pies-to-the-face, Coulter registered as a Republican (no kidding!) with the supervisor's office June 24. That's three months after she bought the home and moved to Palm Beach from Manhattan.

Here's the sticky part for The Right's Lady Macbeth: She wrote down an Indian Road address instead of Seabreeze on her voter's registration application. And she signed to certify the information as true.

"She never lived here," said Suzanne Frisbie, owner of the Indian Road home. "I'm Ann's Realtor, and she used this address to forward mail when she moved from New York."

Coulter didn't respond to requests for comment. But the blond GOP pit bull's former agent, Joani Evans, last year told Page Two Coulter left NYC to escape stalkers.

Is a desire to hold on to privacy the reason she gave the wrong address?

"I know but I'm not going to say," Frisbie replied.

No matter, Florida statutes make it a third-degree felony to vote knowingly in the wrong precinct. Lying on a voter's registration can cost up to $5,000 and five years behind bars.

"We're not a policing agency," says Elections Chief Deputy Charmaine Kelly. "You do not have to show proof that you live at your address. But when you sign the registration application, you also take an oath that everything you wrote is the truth.

"If someone brings us proof that a person falsified a registration, we'll check into it, then refer the matter to the state attorney's office if necessary."
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/celebrities/content/local_news/epaper/2006/02/15/a2a_josecol_0215.html

#47
Bushie
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 2902
  • Joined: 2001/04/21 19:15:00
  • Location: Round Rock, TX
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 12:48:48 (permalink)
http://jewishworldreview.com/0206/blankley021506.php3
#48
BT
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3589
  • Joined: 2004/07/03 13:19:00
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 12:49:49 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by tmiles

quote:
Originally posted by Jimeats

Who hijacked this thread? I think it said insert joke here. And here I was sitting here wating for all the good punch lines. Come on there must be more out there. Vivere,mangarie,bibita e essera allegro. Ciao Jim


I was wondering the same thing. This will be standup fodder for years, so where are the jokes?


The only real cause for laughter in this is schadenfreude (forgive my German spelling). If you're of the R persuasion, a fellow party stalwart and major contributor has been seriously hurt and a bigtime elected official is in some hot water over it. If you are a D, you are disturbed by the way local officials and the White House Press office are operating. I think what laughter there is has a very nervous edge. Personally I laughed hard at Jon Stewart's show Monday night, but when I stopped laughing I felt a bit guilty--at least until Mr. Whittington gets out of the hospital. I suspect he isn't laughing (depending on what drugs they're giving him).
#49
sizz
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1688
  • Joined: 2004/02/12 00:12:00
  • Location: San Jose, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 14:02:54 (permalink)
quote:
Jimeats Posted - 02/15/2006 : 07:08:18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who hijacked this thread? I think it said insert joke here. And here I was sitting here wating for all the good punch lines. Come on there must be more out there. Vivere,mangarie,bibita e essera allegro. Ciao Jim

.Jimeats............ there isn't anything funny about our Vice President accidentally shooting a hunting companion and good friend in the face with buck shot.
You anti Bush liberals are only paying us back for the time we all had a good laught at your President Clinton when we he also shot some one in the face, and in the Presidential Oval Office to boot, and then lied about it. .............. "oooooooh the humanity"
Find any humor in that Jimmy?
#50
BT
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3589
  • Joined: 2004/07/03 13:19:00
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 17:44:53 (permalink)
Perhaps this is all just a re-enactment of a good movie:
quote:
Plot Summary for
The Shooting Party (1985)

Autumn, 1913: on the eve of the Great War, a small party of lords and ladies gather at the Hertfordshire estate of Sir Randolph Nettleby. A code of propriety governs all: dress, breakfast, relations with the estate's peasants, courtship, shooting, adultery. Lionel Stephens, who is courting Sir Randolph's daughter, gets into a shooting competition with Lord Gilbert Hartlip; Lord Gilbert's wife carries on discreet affairs; a pamphleteer circles the estate calling for no more killing, and Sir Robert's grandson hopes to protect a wild duck he's befriended. A way of life is ending: Lord Gilbert's violation of the gentlemen's code suggests internal rot as the real world presses in.


Lord Gilbert's sin, reportedly, is being too competitive and taking a shot he should not have, causing Sir Randolph to tell him, "You were not shooting like a gentleman, Gilbert." That may turn out to be the biggest sin here. Stumbling out of a motorcade full of retainers in order to kill pen-raised half-tame quail?? Tsk, tsk. You were not shooting like a gentleman, Dick!
#51
BT
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3589
  • Joined: 2004/07/03 13:19:00
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 17:52:25 (permalink)
Just for fpczyz and the others who things the VP has some sort of legal immunity:
quote:
Cheney Could Face Charges in Shooting
- By MATT CURRY, Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, February 15, 2006


(02-15) 13:34 PST DALLAS (AP) --

If the man wounded by Dick Cheney dies, the vice president could — in theory at least — face criminal charges, even though the shooting was an accident.

Dallas defense attorney David Finn, who has been a state and a federal prosecutor, said Wednesday that a Texas grand jury could bring a charge of criminally negligent homicide if there is evidence the vice president knew or should have known "there was a substantial or unjustifiable risk that his actions would result in him shooting a fellow hunter."

"The risk must be of such a nature and degree that it got to be pretty outrageous — that a reasonable person would have to say, `I am not pulling the trigger because this other guy might be in front of me,'" Finn said.

The charge carries up to two years behind bars, but with no previous felonies Cheney would be eligible for probation, the former prosecutor said.

Manslaughter, a more serious charge, would require a prosecutor to prove Cheney was reckless, which would be "virtually impossible under the facts we know today," said Michael Sharlot, professor of criminal law at the University of Texas at Austin.

"With recklessness, the defendant has to be aware of the risk, but choose to ignore it. With negligence, he doesn't have to be conscious of the risk, but a reasonable person would have been," Sharlot said.

As vice president, Cheney has no immunity from prosecution.

Mark Skurka, first assistant district attorney of the three-county area where the shooting took place, said prosecutors did not have an investigation under way.

"If something unfortunate happens, then we'll decide what to do, then we'll decide whether we're going to have an investigation or not," Skurka said.

If District Attorney Carlos Valdez decided to pursue charges, he would forward the matter to a grand jury, which would determine whether to indict Cheney. Valdez, a Democrat, is best known for his prosecution of Yolanda Saldivar, who was sentenced to life in prison for the 1995 slaying of Tejano singer Selena.

Harry Whittington, a 78-year-old lawyer, was struck in the face, neck and chest with shotgun pellets over the weekend while Cheney was shooting at quail. Whittington suffered a mild heart attack Tuesday after a pellet traveled to his heart.

On Wednesday, hospital officials said he had a normal heart rhythm again and was sitting up in a chair, eating regular food and planned to do some legal work in his hospital room. Doctors said they are highly optimistic he will recover.

In a TV interview Wednesday, the vice president accepted full blame for the shooting and defended his decision not to publicly disclose the accident until the following day. He called it "one of the worst days of my life."

If Whittington recovers, Cheney could still face a felony charge of negligently causing injury to an aged person, Sharlot said. But he said such a charge would be "quite unusual" in the case of a hunting accident.

In the only other case of someone being shot by a vice president, Aaron Burr was indicted on murder charges in New York and New Jersey for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel in 1804, but he was never tried and finished out his term in office.


URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/02/15/national/w114746S90.DTL

#52
tamandmik
Double Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 949
  • Joined: 2003/06/25 10:11:00
  • Location: Las Cruces, NM
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 18:04:36 (permalink)
#53
Tedbear
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1832
  • Joined: 2004/01/26 12:31:00
  • Location: Somerset, NJ
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 18:08:02 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Sundancer7

quote:
Originally posted by Tedbear

Originally posted by Sundancer7

Personally I regard Cheney as a patriot. I know that many of you do not and that is your opinion. I think the guy gave up a great job just to assist at far less money. I realize that he was extremely wealthy but I sincerely believe the best interst in the USA is in his heart.

/quote]

You opinion is your opinion and I respect that. Mr. Cheney was making mega bucks with Halliburton. He certainly took a cut in pay when he agreed to take the current job. I sincerely believe he is a patriot not because of his military service but because he was willing to serve in a position of minimum pay, receive constant criticism and still work behind the scenes in what he believe is in the best interest of the USA.

I do understand that many do not have the same feelings. I respect those views. I just merely expressed what I thought.

If I had been him, I would have never taken the job that he currently has. The constant criticism is not worth it. As a matter of fact from my point of view is if I had been George W, I would not have wanted that job either. Neither of them pay enough.

I believe that the current President and his vice has endured more during their tenure than any other leader we have had.

I am glad that I am semi retired.

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN


Paul--I'm just curious about something here. Does your view of him as "a patriot" include the fact that he received an unusually large number of draft deferments back during the Vietnam Era? (While I hesitate to come up with a specific number, if my memory serves me correctly, I believe that he received draft deferments seven times.)

When questioned years later about his lack of service in the military, his response was, "I had other priorities". I am quite sure that the thousands of guys who perished in the Vietnam War had other priorities too, but they didn't have the connections to be deferred, as he was. Or, perhaps, they were patriots in the true sense.

Speaking from my own experience, as a teacher, I received two deferrments. Then, the deferrments were no longer available, and I was called for my physical exam. If not for high blood pressure, I would have been required to serve, as did my brother and ten of thousands of others. Somehow, this "patriot" managed to finesse the system so that he was never even called for a physical exam. And, years later, he became one of the chief architects (along with Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld who also failed to serve) of our present war.

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion in our society, so I respect your opinion. However, I strongly disagree with your characterization of this man as a patriot. Based on his record with the Draft Board, with Halliburton, and now as the V.P., perhaps opportunist might be a better characterization of Mr. Cheney.




Paul--I really don't want to drag this out ad infinitum (or ad nauseum!), but I want to correct something else that you stated about Mr. Cheney. He is still drawing a VERY large chunk of money each year (deferred compensation, or something of that order) from Halliburton. That is just one of the many reasons why Halliburton's favored position for securing government contracts has come under some criticism. Naturally, that criticism has been squelched.

However, the fact remains that he derives considerable income to this day from the company that is the biggest recipient of government contracts in Iraq. (You know--the company that does not allow our troops to eat second helpings in the Mess Halls that they run. How's that for relevance to this site!)
#54
Sundancer7
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 13549
  • Joined: 2001/07/18 14:10:00
  • Location: Knoxville, TN,
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 18:20:04 (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Tedbear

quote:
Originally posted by Sundancer7

quote:
Originally posted by Tedbear

Originally posted by Sundancer7

Personally I regard Cheney as a patriot. I know that many of you do not and that is your opinion. I think the guy gave up a great job just to assist at far less money. I realize that he was extremely wealthy but I sincerely believe the best interst in the USA is in his heart.

/quote]

You opinion is your opinion and I respect that. Mr. Cheney was making mega bucks with Halliburton. He certainly took a cut in pay when he agreed to take the current job. I sincerely believe he is a patriot not because of his military service but because he was willing to serve in a position of minimum pay, receive constant criticism and still work behind the scenes in what he believe is in the best interest of the USA.

I do understand that many do not have the same feelings. I respect those views. I just merely expressed what I thought.

If I had been him, I would have never taken the job that he currently has. The constant criticism is not worth it. As a matter of fact from my point of view is if I had been George W, I would not have wanted that job either. Neither of them pay enough.

I believe that the current President and his vice has endured more during their tenure than any other leader we have had.

I am glad that I am semi retired.

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN


Paul--I'm just curious about something here. Does your view of him as "a patriot" include the fact that he received an unusually large number of draft deferments back during the Vietnam Era? (While I hesitate to come up with a specific number, if my memory serves me correctly, I believe that he received draft deferments seven times.)

When questioned years later about his lack of service in the military, his response was, "I had other priorities". I am quite sure that the thousands of guys who perished in the Vietnam War had other priorities too, but they didn't have the connections to be deferred, as he was. Or, perhaps, they were patriots in the true sense.

Speaking from my own experience, as a teacher, I received two deferrments. Then, the deferrments were no longer available, and I was called for my physical exam. If not for high blood pressure, I would have been required to serve, as did my brother and ten of thousands of others. Somehow, this "patriot" managed to finesse the system so that he was never even called for a physical exam. And, years later, he became one of the chief architects (along with Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld who also failed to serve) of our present war.

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion in our society, so I respect your opinion. However, I strongly disagree with your characterization of this man as a patriot. Based on his record with the Draft Board, with Halliburton, and now as the V.P., perhaps opportunist might be a better characterization of Mr. Cheney.




Paul--I really don't want to drag this out ad infinitum (or ad nauseum!), but I want to correct something else that you stated about Mr. Cheney. He is still drawing a VERY large chunk of money each year (deferred compensation, or something of that order) from Halliburton. That is just one of the many reasons why Halliburton's favored position for securing government contracts has come under some criticism. Naturally, that criticism has been squelched.

However, the fact remains that he derives considerable income to this day from the company that is the biggest recipient of government contracts in Iraq. (You know--the company that does not allow our troops to eat second helpings in the Mess Halls that they run. How's that for relevance to this site!)


Your thoughts are your thoughts and mine are mine. You may not admire him but I do. Lets let it go at that.

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN
#55
cornfed
Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 344
  • Joined: 2005/05/14 17:39:00
  • Location: atlanta, GA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 18:47:14 (permalink)
So Quayle is alive?
#56
CCJPO
Double Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 543
  • Joined: 2003/04/20 01:09:00
  • Location: Fallon, NV
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 19:11:59 (permalink)
To those of you who remember these sage words.

"This is my rifle(shotgun), this is my gun, this one is for shooting, this one is for fun"

I find it really hard to equate what may have been a accidental "discharge" of a gun, with an apparently willing participant, to the willful act of discharging a rifle (shotgun) at an unwilling
participant. Even in an accidental shooting.
#57
roossy90
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 6695
  • Joined: 2005/08/15 16:17:00
  • Location: columbus, oh
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/15 21:00:57 (permalink)
SATIRE--
Someone sent this to me:
-----------------
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
DOJ Memo Defends Cheney Shooting


JB

Frankly, I don't understand all the fuss about Vice President Cheney's shooting of Harry Whittington. This unsigned Department of Justice Memorandum, which was slipped under my door this morning, explains it all:

* * * * *

Under the unitary executive theory of Article II, the President of the United States, as Commander-in-Chief, has inherent authority to shoot anyone he likes, and he may surely delegate that authority to his second in command, the Vice President of the United States. Indeed, to the extent that federal law or state tort law is to the contrary, we must read all such laws in harmony with the inherent powers of the President as head of the unitary executive in order to avoid any potential constitutional conflict. As the President himself noted in his recent signing statement to the McCain Amendment, laws that purport to limit the President's authority to use force in time of war must be construed "in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the president to supervise the unitary executive branch and as commander in chief."

The Executive's ability to identify enemy combatants and apprehend or, if necessary, shoot them on the field of battle is fully recognized under the laws of war. There is no doubt that it is fully within the President's powers under the laws of war to identify enemy combatants and apprehend, or if necessary, shoot them in order to prevent them from returning to the battlefield where they may do harm to the interests of the United States. In this case, it is undisputed that Harry Whittington (if that is his *real* name) was carrying arms in close proximity to the Vice President of the United States, and, moreover, in the very same state as the President's Crawford, Texas, residence.

It was therefore completely within the Vice-President's discretion to determine that the said Whittington was an enemy combatant who posed a threat, whether real, potential, imagined or fictitious, to the national security of the United States. Media accounts do not reveal what Harry Whittington's name was before he changed it; it is entirely possible, however, that his real name is Ari Al-Whittington and that he is an Al Qaeda operative, or is associated with groups who are associated with Al Qaeda, or is associated with groups who are associated with groups who are associated with Al Qaeda. And so on.

The objection that Al-Whittington was found on American soil is completely without merit. We are dealing with questions of war, not the criminal or civil process. What so-called "civil libertarians" still don't understand is that 9-11 changed everything. Thousands of people died in the World Trade Center *on American soil.* Discovering Al Qaeda operatives on American soil, or those that executive suspects, whether reasonably or unreasonably, to be Al Qaeda operatives, does not bestow upon such "persons" the "right" to call upon the criminal justice system, much less the civil tort system. We note, moreover, that the President's constitutional obligation in Article II, section 3, to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed" fully supports these conclusions. If the President is constitutionally authorized to execute "laws," a fortiori he is clearly authorized to execute "persons" by shooting them at his discretion.

Nor is the fact that Al-Whittington is a 78 year old businessman who has made substantial contributions to the Republican Party a reason to doubt the Vice-President's plenary determination that Al-Whittington may have links to Al Qaeda, or links to links to links to Al Qaeda. After all, if Al Qaeda wished to infiltrate the Executive branch it would be entirely logical to plant operatives posing as Republican businessmen who gave money to Republican causes because everyone knows that in this Administration the best way to gain access to Administration officials is to buy your way in. Indeed, precisely because money buys access in this Administration, the more money a businessman gives, the more justified the suspicion that the businessman is in fact in league with Al Qaeda, groups associated with Al Qaeda, groups associated with groups associated with Al Qaeda, and so on. The Vice-President's determination, whether reasonable, unreasonable, or completely under the influence of drugs, is therefore plenary and unreviewable, as is made clear by the text of the Constitution, which fails to say anything to the contrary.

Finally, even if one doubts the inherent authority of the unitary executive to identify and shoot persons like Al-Whittington, the September 18th, 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (hereinafter "AUMF") clearly gives the President authority "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." This authorization clearly includes persons like Al-Whittington, since the letters in the authorization can be rearranged to spell "Al-Whittington," not to mention "Al-Gore." (But we digress). Such Congressional authorization clearly trumps any federal or state law to the contrary, and all state or federal laws which may be passed in the future. In particular, the AUMF clearly obviates the need for Vice President Cheney to have purchased a hunting license from the State of Texas.

In sum, because of the President's inherent authority to supervise and direct the Unitary Executive Branch as Commander-in-Chief under Article II of the Constitution, Vice President Cheney was clearly authorized to shoot Ari Al-Whittington, enemy of the people, under the laws of war. Any suggestions to the contrary show ignorance of the original understanding of the United States Constitution, serve to give our enemies in the Global War on Terror aid and comfort, and in and of themselves constitute grounds for detention as an enemy combatant. We're serious. Don't f*** with us.

Department of Justice
John Yoo Building
Washington, D.C.

#58
EliseT
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 2888
  • Joined: 2001/07/11 13:25:00
  • Location: L.A, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/16 03:29:19 (permalink)
OK, if no one is going to go for the obvious, I will:

Teddy Kennedy was ribbing VP Cheney, "Hey, Dick! You want to go hunting this weekend?"

To which Cheney ripostes, "Sure, but I'M driving!"

#59
mr chips
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 4727
  • Joined: 2003/02/19 00:15:00
  • Location: portland, OR
  • Status: offline
RE: Cheney shoots lawyer(insert joke here) 2006/02/16 03:43:49 (permalink)
From Leno
When the ambulance crew got to shooting victim, they started to put Cheney on the stretcher from force of habit.
#60
Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Jump to:
© 2014 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1