So, the VP shot his friend in the face, neck & torso. An accident, to be sure. No one is contending malice (would the same be said of someone different?). I’m not suggesting that there was intent here, but why would this not be “involuntary manslaughter” or something like that (I guess manslaughter might mean the guy died, which isn’t out of the question, now that he’s had a heart attack caused by a pellet in his heart and has been in intensive care and won’t leave the hospital for a week or so)?
I don’t have more to add to the story than everyone else has, except that as a vegetarian and Reasonable Person, I need to mention that killing birds for fun or practice (let’s face it, these guys weren’t going to eat their pen-raised prey) is sad and heartless and provides a microcosmic metaphor for the entire administration’s disdain for life. “Pro-Life” is right up there with the other moronisms of W like “compassionate conservative” and his dad’s “education” and “environmental” president. Saying it don’t make it so.
Even though I’d never enjoy killing something, I’ve never been anti-hunter. I believe that hunters and fishers (fisherpeople?) do more to protect the environment than lots of folks, and they have more appreciation for their kill than people who buy their stuff from the grocery store under celophane. So I don’t have a problem with them. I do, however, have a problem with people who think it’s macho to do it, or fun to kill things. Yes, I realize that may be the motivation of many hunters, but the means sometimes justify the ends.
So I hope Wittingham doesn’t die. But I hope Cheney pays a price (he won’t).
Genius Bob Harris points us to some lessons from the recent events.
Update: What’s up with Bush’s analysis? He calls Cheney’s explanation “powerful.” That’s absurd. He basically said, “My bad.” That’s powerful??? Get me outa here.