Everyone knows by now that Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot a fellow hunter during a quail hunt in Texas over the weekend. No big deal there, it's a risk you take and no one is going to suggest it was anything but an accident. But the fact this was not real hunting but a "canned hunt", where farm-raised game are released as little more than targets for lazy "sportsmen" to kill. These farm-raised animals aren't even afraid of humans, having been raised by them, so they just sit there while you kill them. According to this letter, 500 pheasants were released on this ranch in Texas for Cheney's 10-person hunting group to kill and they killed 417 of them. That alone tells you this isn't sound sport, it's just a slaughter, a place for rich faux-hunters to get off while killing things. That's just pathetic.
And as Ed Darrell notes in a comment at Pharyngula, it's not the first time this gang has had a staged hunting trip that ended badly: Back in in the early 90s, Bush was fined for killing a protected bird during a staged dove hunt/photo op:
The Bush/killdeer incident was when he was running against Ann Richards for governor of Texas. Richards is a lifetime hunter, and it was beginning to look in the papers as though she was more "macho" than George. So Rove set up a dove hunting trip for Bush. Bush promptly mistook a killdeer for a dove and killed it.
I guess we can put Bush the Hunter and Cheney the Hunter on the strike-a-pose wall next to Bush the Rancher (I love it when they show the President out "clearing brush" after his aides bring in some brush for him to clear). It's as funny as watching Al Gore, third or fourth generation scion from one of America's wealthiest and most powerful political families go toe to toe with Bush, who fits in the same category, in 2000 trying to out Bubba one another to prove they're just common folk like us.
- Log in to post comments
Ed writes:
While I think hunting is an actual sport that requires skill and at least some respect for nature and wildlife, this is just plain ridiculous. It's only one step away from blasting them while they are still in their cages. That may even be more humane, as I have to wonder what happens now to the "lucky" 83 that got away.
And what did they do to the ones they 'bagged'? Supper at the Observatory as Lynne Cheney fries up a batch?
I don't want to take away from your main point (about political theater), but I think you're a little mistaken about Gore's biography. As far as I can tell, he's a second generation "scion".
According to Wikipedia, his paternal grandparents were farmers and his maternal grandparents ran a general store. Is there some deeper politics/wealth/power history in his geneology?
Just being pedantic....
Ooh, one more pedant point: the letter you link is from 2003 and refers to a hunting trip in Pennsylvania.
Everyone loves a know-it-all :-)
Just a quick correction, the canned pheasant hunt was back in 2003 in Ligonier Township, Pennsylvania, not the Armstrong ranch in Texas where Cheney shot a member of his hunting party. Pheasants aren't in season right now in Kenedy County where the Armstrong ranch is located. I can't find any cites as to whether or not it was a canned hunt Cheney was on this time.
Hmmm. You're right, that was a previous "hunting" trip. I wonder, then, if this one was the same kind of trip? If not, it makes me look pretty foolish, doesn't it? The link I saw to that letter on another blog implied that it was about this trip and it never occured to me to question it.
As far as Gore is concerned, his family's political leaders go back much further than just his father. It also includes the legendary blind Oklahoma Senator T.P. Gore, grandfather of Gore Vidal. I believe Al is the great-grand-nephew of that senator, but that may not be the precise relationship.
T. Carter is right, this wasn't pheasants they were hunting, but quail. Whether they were actually farm-raised or not is still up in the air. If not, the overall point of my post may well be true since this is a common political pose, but obviously the specific allegations would be false and I regret making that mistake without bothering to read more carefully. Unlike the folks at Dembski's Home for Wayward Sycophants, however, I won't delete the post I'll just apologize for my sloppiness.
Looks like bobwhite quail hunting is a pretty normal thing to do down in those big ranches in Texas. It's plausible that this particular hunt was not a "canned" one at all like the one referenced in 2003. Although the wild populations are managed, you would still call them wild birds.
In that case, while my criticism of the earlier hunt is justified, and the overall point is still correct, those criticisms would not apply to this particular situation. I apologize to my readers for not taking the time to verify the accuracy of the accusations before passing them on. That was pretty sloppy on my part. I'll let the post stay here as a reminder to me not to be that sloppy the next time.
Department of Fish and Game here in California puts on several "put-and-take" pheasant hunt opportunities in Southern California each year. You sign up for a lottery to participate in these. For several years when we lived in SoCal, Diane volunteered as a pointing dog handler (and provided our dog, Farli) for those who did not have their own dog. In Northern California, F&G opens some land with wild pheasant for planned hunts.
Southern California is a bit different, because there are not a whole lot of upland bird game opportunities otherwise. So please don't get too worked up over the process itself. Other data about the SoCal setup: they only "put" male pheasants out, and the birds are raised in flight pens, so they are not complete "sitting ducks". Diane's guess is that between 10 and 20% are not taken during the hunt. She says that she has seen birds from previous years at these events.
Wes-
I'm not an animal rights activist by any means. I'm a full fledged carnivore. And I'm not opposed to hunting at all, though I don't do it myself. But I just don't get the point of such a hunt. It's not real hunting, it's like the proverbial shooting fish in a barrell. It just seems like pointless killing to me, brought down to a level so easy that Stevie Wonder could do it.
Ohhh.... Gotta remember that one. Perfect.
Interesting. Beyond the "type of hunt" issue already discussed, the "Bush shoots killdeer" incident also may not be quite as advertised.
From http://www.savethedoves.org/gwbush.html ...
"Many avian species (including protected, threatened, and endangered) are often mistakenly shot by mourning dove hunters who target birds on the wing...and the misidentification of fast erratic flyers is an unfortunate fact that has happened to both experienced and inexperienced hunters alike...it can even happen when hunters bring with them an entourage of professional people and a game warden hunting guide."
I find it intriguing that visceral dislike of Bush apparently runs so deep that a minute or two of fact-checking can't be allowed to get in the way of another, "Look at that idiot!" post.
Don't get me wrong ... I'm no Bush fan. But a bit more attention to fact-checking at scienceblogs.com would seem to be in order.
(Yes, he is a dangerous clown, in my opinion ... but there are more than enough "true facts" to demonstrate that without just leaping at everything that comes along.)
For me the issue is not whether Bush shot a nongame bird, but the fact that Cheney shot a fellow hunter. That in itself does not necessarily disqualify a person from holding office, but I think it does open him to legitimate criticism. The fact that Cheney didn't mean to do it does not change the fact that any time a person pulls a trigger while aiming a gun and hits a person it is fully the fault of the shooter. Lucky they weren't hutting deer.
This is a huge victory for the gun control lobby though.
Scott-
The point of my criticism of the Bush hunt was not that he shot a killdeer. I myself couldn't tell the difference between a killdeer and a dove, or likely pick either one out of a police lineup. It's that the whole thing was setup as a photo opportunity to make him seem more manly. That's the kind of political stupidity I loathe, and given that I also brought up similar posing by Gore (and could easily have also mentioned the same kind of posing by Kerry - remember the fake Wendy's meal during the campaign?), it has nothing to do with hatred of Bush.
Ed said:"I'm not an animal rights activist by any means. I'm a full fledged carnivore. And I'm not opposed to hunting at all, though I don't do it myself. But I just don't get the point of such a hunt. It's not real hunting, it's like the proverbial shooting fish in a barrell. It just seems like pointless killing to me, brought down to a level so easy that Stevie Wonder could do it."
Chuck Norris fact:"Chuck Norris does not hunt because the word hunting infers the probability of failure. Chuck Norris goes killing."
Mark: if they were hunting deer, perhaps the guy wouldn't be hit at all (unless Cheney was stupid enough to shoot straight at his companion). That's because the bullets were spread out in air.
This kind of hunting reminds me of how Party bonzos did hunt in the USSR, shooting at a bear tied to a tree.
Last: call me a tree-hugger, but I don't like hunting at all. It's enough we kill animals for food, we don't have to kill them for pleasure.
Ed ...
"The point of my criticism of the Bush hunt was not that he shot a killdeer. I myself couldn't tell the difference between a killdeer and a dove, or likely pick either one out of a police lineup. It's that the whole thing was setup as a photo opportunity to make him seem more manly. That's the kind of political stupidity I loathe..."
Fair enough, Ed, and I agree strongly with your comment above.
However, I would suggest (gently) that the item didn't seem to focus on that point, and going back, it still seems to me to have the knee-jerk "look at the idiot" flavour that I commented on. (I mean, the quote you picked started, "The Bush/killdeer incident...".) But if that was not what was in your mind, then we're in complete agreement.
And as I said, there are more than enough unarguable criticisms ... :-)
Sort of off in "germane" land here, but some of the issues regarding this "incident" stem from: the failure to report it out to law enforcement with due diligence, failure to allow local enforcement to investigate any of the particulars whatsoever, and the numerous and glaring holes in the "official" story put forth by Ms. Armstrong. Hunting accidents happen, and happen especially when some other factors are involved: alcohol, lack of light, inappropriate separation of party, disregard for others, etc. I can't say if any of these factors were involved, and i am sure that the Secret Service will swear not one of them were, since these factors could contribute to criminal charges. But for an interesting hunting perspective, see:
http://direland.typepad.com/direland/2006/02/questions_about.html
New here, so you may have answered this before, but I'm suprised that you put Gore and Bush on a par in terms of family wealth. Or maybe the operative concept is "wealthiest political family"?
And since all politicians try to look like just one of the guys, I wonder what Gore did in particular to arouse your disdain. Maybe you felt he was just too Bubba-ish when he said his favorite book was that all-time popular favorite in middle America The Red and the Black?
Roman--
I understand, but a lot of people do hunt for food...especially, as I understand it, in the northern states. Freezers stocked with venison, and all that. And I think that's great-- actually arguably much more justifiable morally than eating meat from the store if we're getting down to it, considering how both how the animals and the people who slaughter them are treated.
But I just don't get the point of such a hunt. It's not real hunting, it's like the proverbial shooting fish in a barrell.
Well, I'm not trying to say that all gun hunting is just peachy, either. But there are different set-up hunts, not all of them available only to the idle rich.
That said, we're pretty picky about letting Rusty or other hawks loose if there are *any* gun hunters about. There is an unfortunate laxness in many hunter's species identification process. Oh, and Rusty quite often does not connect even on those captive-raised pheasant.
In my experience a killdeer and dove look nothing alike. They even fly differently. You would have to be a pretty bad hunter to mistake the two.
jumped-up monkey wrote:
No, I can't think of anything specific that Gore did because, as you say, all politicians try to look like the "common man". It just seems more ridiculous to me when it's done by people like Gore and Bush who are scions from powerful families. Clinton could pull it off to some degree, as he really did come from relatively humble beginnings, but Bush and Gore were both born with a silver spoon in their mouths, as was Kerry for that matter.
Wesley wrote:
Wow, even I could tell the difference between Rusty and a dove or a killdeer. Rusty, for those who don't know, is a Harris Hawk raised by Wesley and Diane. Amazing animal.
Apparently Cheney does not watch 'King Of The Hill', especially the episode "Good Hill Hunting" where Hank takes Bobby to a prearranged captive-release deer kill. Bobby says; "This is wrong, isn't it?" and Hank (relieved) says "Yes it is, son. Yes it is."
Eh, Cheney thought the guy was a killdeer.
Oh, and NPR today played a tape of Cheney making fun of Kerry having to borrow or buy a jacket to go hunting in Ohio (Kerry's hunting togs being back farther east somewhere), as if hunting in a new jacket was some sort of sin.
Which one would you rather hunt with?
Just a minor quibble, Ed - you always seems to feel the need to qualify any criticisms of the GOP with 'equal time' for the Dems. We know you're no fan of the Dems either, so you really don't have to go out of your way to be fair and balanced, you know! You can just go after one or the other and we won't say you're part of an evil left-wing/right-wing conspiracy. Most of your readers are actually sophisticated enough thinkers to avoid the trap of binary thinking.
Ed's comparision of Bush and Gore is typical of the way all politicians are starting to look identical these days, and it's getting to be real problem. Last time I was out hunting for Republicans, trying to put some extra food on the table, I accidentally picked off a Democrat by mistake. It coulda happened to anyone, I swear!
Dammit, now I've got that Aerosmith song running through my head..."Cheney's got a gun.."
Wesley said:
That makes me feel a bit better, although I find it personally difficult to believe that 417 killed out of 500 released can be ascribed mainly to hunting skill.
I wonder what the statistics are on the survivability of such birds as opposed to their purely wild kin? Obviously as you mention, at least some do make it.
From what I've been reading - Bush stopped hunting after the killdeer incident. It's clear that someone needs to give Uncle Dick "the talk" so he gives up the hobby as well...thekeez
>I'll let the post stay here as a reminder to me not to be that sloppy the next time.
Much better than editing history. However, I'm sure there are readers who don't always go to the comments sections. Should there not be some update appended to the original post, for those browsing your "front page"?
Looks like some of the birdshot has migrated to his heart. This is somewhat more serious situation.
Like Chappaquiddick, this started with a clearly-unintended injury. But like Chappaquiddick, this is a character issue, and how Cheney responds to this will speak volumes about his character, and that of his administration.
Raging Bee wrote:
Well, I don't think this analogy really holds up. Yes, in a broad sense it may tell us something about Cheney's character (at least how he's handled the aftermath), but in order to be like Chappaquiddick, he would have had to leave the guy laying in the field and bolted the scene.
Cheney may have been drunk at the hunt (http://blogs.philly.com/blinq/2006/02/was_there_beer_.html).
That would explain his silence after the incidence.
Would that be enough to derail his career (hint: Ted Kennedy)?
Hunting accidents happen; the shooting itself isn't the issue for me, it's the aftermath.
Ms. Armstrong, the ranch owner, has been labeled an "eyewitness," although initial writeups quoted her as saying that the first she knew that something was wrong was when she saw the security detail running toward Cheney -- which means she did not see the actual shooting.
Next, Whittington was taken to a small hospital in Kingsville; it was determined that he needed better medical care than was available there and he was helicoptered to a major medical center in Corpus Christi. I wonder if "low profile" entered into the initial choice of hospital?
Again according to most writeups, right next to Cheney at the time of the shooting was Pamela Willeford, ambassador to Switzerland. It appears that she has spoken neither to the press or to law enforcement. Hmmm.
From an AP writeup.
From the Washington Post writeup of Whittington's bout of atrial fib:
Two things here: Armstrong described Whittington as standing in tall grass, but the sheriffs say he was standing in a dry lake bed. Cheney was shooting downward; were the quail he was shooting at actually on the wing?
There are several more inconsistencies, but Lt. Columbo has retired.