Two Vice Presidents, Two Different Stories

This is a post about the news. It is not a post praising the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney; nor shall he be damned here. Yes, of course, I know that the VP shot a man over the weekend while hunting quail at a private ranch in Texas. Yes, of course, I realize that the VP is now fodder for media griping and Comedy Channel mockery. But I am not interested in any of that. I am interested in what's been reported about the incident.

Let me set it up: At around 5:30 pm (the sun sets around 6:10 in Texas on this date) Saturday afternoon, VP Cheney shot a man who was in the brush 90 feet away. Cheney was using a 28-gauge shotgun (the second smallest, after the .410) with bird shot shells (the least potent). Pellets hit the man, Harry Whittington, a 78-year-old lawyer, who, according to eyewitness statements, had failed to inform the hunting party that he was approaching through the brush in a manner or direction that was out of protocol. The victim was taken to a local hospital; he is out of intensive care and is in a private room, with wounds to head, face, neck and chest. One relative described the victim's injuries as looking like "chicken pox."

OK. That's about it. But a scandal is brewing. You see, the speed with which the Washington press corps learned of the event was too slow, coming in dribs and drabs, full of adumbrations. The press corps is steaming that a Corpus Christi, TX paper (small time, to the press corps) was the first to report the incident. And now, vengeance, which will manifest itself in reminders of White House arrogance; and that there is a conspiracy afoot, namely that Cheney was drunk and the delay was about concealment.

But perhaps the New York Times offers us the most important line in all of this "controversy," found in paragraph 17 of its page 1 story: "There is no requirement to report nonfatal hunting accidents in Texas, said Lydia Saldana, the communications director for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department." It seems, then, that if we are talking about strict legalities here, the VP's story is even more transparent than one might believe, dependent as we are on news media to inform us on such matters.

Here's another interesting report, from the New York Daily News. That paper reports that Cheney was hunting illegally:

Vice President Cheney had no license to kill - quail, that is.

After the White House reluctantly conceded yesterday that it sat on the blockbuster news that Cheney shot a hunting buddy Saturday, the veep's office revealed he didn't even have the proper $7 stamp on his hunting license to shoot quail in Texas.

"The staff asked for all permits needed, but was not informed of the $7 upland game-bird stamp requirement," Cheney's office said in a statement last night.

Although he was hunting illegally when he blasted Austin millionaire Harry Whittington, Cheney will get off with a warning from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department ...

Compare this with the New York Times (¶18, 19):

...Mr. Cheney's office said that a member of his staff had asked the Parks and Wildlife Department for all the necessary permits for the vice president to go hunting in Texas and had paid $140. But [Cheney's office] said, the staff member was not informed of the need for an additional stamp, costing $7, to allow hunting of upland game birds. ... Mr. Cheney has now sent a $7 check to the department.

Please take note of the difference between the two New York papers' reportage. The Daily News suggests that Cheney was hunting completely illegally (he was not, unless he shot at quail); the Times points out that he was indeed properly licensed to hunt, though without the proper stamp for a specific bird. That the State of Texas is fine with Cheney paying $7 after the fact is telling. But readers should be deeply saddened by the shoddy, manipulative and provocative journalism of the Daily News (and the rest of the media joining that sort of agitation).

***

Only days ago another Vice President shot something: he shot the rest of us in the head. Vice President Al Gore said at an economic forum in Saudi Arabia that after 9/11, the Saudis living in the United States were "indiscriminately rounded up, often on minor charges of overstaying a visa or not having a green card in proper order, and held in conditions that were just unforgivable. ...Unfortunately there have been terrible abuses and it's wrong. I do want you to know that it does not represent the desires or wishes or feelings of the majority of the citizens of my country."

I am glad that Gore wanted the Saudis to know that such actions don't represent the desires of most Americans. But I'd be even happier if Mr. Gore had told his Arab audience that he was lying. Moreover, as others have pointed out, it must be recalled that Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9-11 posited for leftists' lust for such things that President Bush after 9/11 was overly kind and generous to Saudis in America. Facts be damned: it's the target that matters, and that target is President Bush.

If there is anything that upsets me in the Dick Cheney shooting incident, it is this: that the White House has now done something that removes media attention away from the real news, which is that former presidents and one notable vice president are undermining a sitting president.

Shame on Al Gore. He is a threat to our security, our freedom, our peace. His words are a "terrible abuse." And yet he gets away with this, carrying with him a very dated license from a vice presidency that was as insipid as, well, Quayle.

©Bill Gnade 2006/Contratimes - All Rights Reserved.

(For a great, terse essay on Gore, read John Gibson's My Word posted yesterday.)