You have to laugh at this. I put up a post with links to several sites with information from professionals in or aligned with the firearms industry to prove one can't conclude Cheney was closer than thirty or so yards to Whittington when he fired ... but the left is having none of that. It isn't credible. LMAO
They prefer to put their faith in some moonbat with a video camera and shot gun, a message board, and emails from, for us, anonymous sources. Their use of the word substantial should have Daniel Webster rolling over in his grave. The evidence as well as the polls show the unhinged left is anything but substantial, especially when it comes to this issue about which Americans couldn't care less.
But as for the "rebuttals" of our assessment that Dick Cheney was indeed closer than 30 yards, nothing has been presented by anyone so far that shakes our assessment, interviews and personal field test and analysis of the situation. If information is presented that is credible and substantial, we'll be glad to review the matter, but that certainly hasn't happened so far.


"...nothing has been presented by anyone so far that shakes our assessment [that closer than 30 yards]"
and I would imagine that nothing will.
Actually, I think you still have not addressed the point, made rationally and civilly several times in the comments, that the birdshot appears to have penetrated Mr. Whittington's hunting vest, clothing, skin and chest wall, and it really strains credulity to believe that number 7 birdshot out of a 28 gauge gun has that kind of kinetic energy after 30 yards. The distance was almost certainly less. But really, who cares?
It was an accident, albeit one handled poorly from a public relations and personal viewpoint by Cheney. What I find ironic is the amount you seem to have invested in this point-pretty much everyone has moved on, except for folks like yourself, on the right as much as the left, who argue pointless minutae.
Posted by: pdq | Sunday, February 19, 2006 at 10:44 AM
pdq -
So the person responding to and refuting the irresponsible attacks is just as unhinged and complicit in not moving on as the Left Wing wacko making the attacks?
Another fine example of Leftist logic.
Posted by: Gahrie | Sunday, February 19, 2006 at 10:52 AM
You know-I think in a strange way this may be a winner for the administration....a watershed of sorts:
On CNN's RELIABLE SOURCES, WASHINGTON POST reporter Dana Milbank fretted that the White House is exploiting the public's growing disdain for the mainstream media. "Of course they succeed,” Milbank said of Bush aides. “The press always looks awful. They will once again make us look awful.”
CNN's Candy Crowley added: "The perception is that we're whining."
White House correspondent Bill Plante of CBS agreed.
"The vice president and the White House have both used the constant press coverage of this story as a wedge,” he told RELIABLE SOURCES host Howard Kurtz. “It plays to the prejudices of the people who are predisposed not to like us, and it's one way to distract attention from what happened.”
Posted by: COLUMBO | Sunday, February 19, 2006 at 02:18 PM
sorry-linking:
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2ch.htm
Posted by: COLUMBO | Sunday, February 19, 2006 at 02:19 PM
Where's the NYT????
Mayor Richard Daley (D) wants to require bars open until 4 a.m. to install security cameras that can identify people entering and leaving the building. Other businesses open longer than 12 hours a day, including convenience stores, eventually would have to do the same.
Daley's proposed city ordinance adds a dimension to security measures installed after the Sept. 11 attacks.
The proliferation of security cameras — especially if the government requires them in private businesses — troubles some civil liberties advocates.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-02-14-chicago-cameras_x.htm
Posted by: COLUMBO | Sunday, February 19, 2006 at 03:34 PM
Personally, I think he was closer than 30-yards (a was just a bitty 28-gauge) and I think he was drinking and maybe drunk. BUT SO WHAT? In my book, you accidentally shoot your buddy and he says, "No big deal, just an accident." the issue is over. The police shoudn't get involved and it's not anybody else's business. Even if you were drunk it's a dead issue if your buddy is OK with it.
Posted by: Sgt. York | Monday, February 20, 2006 at 06:24 PM