It is a peculiar coincidence that sensational murderers seem to use all three of their names more often than the average American does. Think John Wayne Gacy, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Wilkes Booth. It's as if their mothers are perpetually castigating them for some transgression. It is then, only a matter of time before the Vice President will be publicly known as Richard Bruce Cheney. He has been roundly berated by the major media outlets for "nearly murdering" someone, when the truth is more benign. The Vice President erred, and had his error compounded by another's carelessness, which resulted in a friend of his being wounded by bird shot. Any injury by firearm is, by definition, serious, and the Vice President made the wrong choice when he neglected to inform the national press immediately. As Henry Kissinger once said, "What will come out eventually, must come out immediately," but that does not change the fact that nothing the Vice President could have done would have changed the mishap, nor the inevitable media excoriation.
In a New York Times article titled, "No End to Questions in Cheney Hunting Accident" it was reported that "The incident provided a wealth of material for Democrats, gun control activists and critics of the Bush administration, not to mention late night comedians." Apparently it escaped the attention of the self-proclaimed Newspaper of Record that those groups are all one in the same. John Dickerson, writing for the online magazine Slate reported, after poking fun at Texas, "Vice President Cheney shot a man in the head on Saturday, and 21 hours later you had to be looking at the web page of the Corpus Christi Caller Times to find out about it." Later in the article Dickerson ruminates, "When you nearly commit homicide as a public official shouldn't the honor of your office compel you to stand up and explain yourself in some fashion, at least say something in a press release and not just whisper it to a Texas rancher?" Evidently, monsieur Dickerson believes that offenses by public officials are to be judged by what the "honor of the office" demands. Lucky thing for President Clinton that Dickerson was not available to comment on his honor in office. There's also no escaping the fact that he is beside himself with glee that this occurred in the far away land of Texas. In neither of these things is he alone. No major outlet has missed the opportunity to zing the Vice President when reporting what happened.
In the county where the incident took place the Sheriff's Office released a statement that said, in part, "Sheriff Salinas was informed shortly after the incident by Secret Service Agents by phone due to incompatibility of radio equipment." So there was no attempt at a cover up, but rather a disregard for the always antagonistic press. The Kenedy County Sheriff's Office knew of the incident minutes after it happened, as did any number of staff at the hospital where Harry Whittington was flown for treatment. It seems then that the problem, as the press sees it, is not one of a cover up, but rather, as the venerable Washington Post put it, "Cheney waited 14 hours after the shooting to disclose it publicly." Therein lies the Vice President's true contravention: he neglected to inform the honorable members of the press in a fashion they deem timely.
Well, why should he? The major press sources have done nothing but ridicule the Vice President at every turn. Nothing has been off limits. Not even a major surgery escaped their scorn. More than one news source opined at the irony of a "heartless man" receiving cardiac care. His daughter's sexual orientation received scrutiny reserved only for those on the right. Can anyone imagine former President Clinton or Chelsea receiving this kind of attention? No, and that's why this story will not die. The story is not about the Vice President's mistake, nor his failure to issue a press release. The story is about the press feeling slighted. They hate the man, and the administration, and will not stop until their term has expired in 2008. All this from a supposedly impartial media.
In the opening paragraph of this article I stated that the Vice President erred by not disclosing the incident quicker, and I mean that. Not because I believe that wider, faster dissemination would have resulted in any sequence of events other than what happened. The press would have simply found something else about which to carp. The failure of the Vice President to purchase a $7.00 supplement to his hunting license has already been cited numerous times, in numerous places. No, it was a done deal the second the shotgun pellets hit Mr. Whittington. The reason Cheney should have had his office release a statement earlier is simply because that's what anyone of us should do when we screw up: own up to it. I am certain the Vice President is hurt more by the knowledge that he injured a friend, than by the jibes and barbs of a partisan press. He is many things, but thin-skinned is not one of them. He still should have owned up to it, and moved on to suffer his private penance. When this will all end I am uncertain, but one thing I do know: it is still much safer to hunt with Vice President Cheney, than it is to ride over bridges with Senator Kennedy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Does the press really claim to be impartial anymore? I agree, that is ridiculous.
I have to wonder though instead of comparing this scenario to that of a democratic high ranking offical, what about that of a lower on the scale(socio-economically) minority? Or if this was John Street? Or if this was a white suburban kid?
The press scrutinizes theses type cases all the time. I really don't think they are being more unfair and biased then usual. If I were to feel bad for Cheney on this I would have to feel bad for people like Paris Hilton, whose "mistakes" are published, quoted on and devoured every ten mintues. And I refuse to feel bad for her..
hehehe..anyway, I am blogging again.
Post a Comment