[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Fury in Memphis after attempted murder suspect who ambushed FedEx employee walks free without bail

Tehran preparing for attack against Israel: Ayatollah Khamenei's aide

Huge shortage plagues Israeli army as losses mount in Lebanon, Gaza

Researchers Find Unknown Chemical In Drinking Water Posing "Potential Human Health Concern"

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

Putin visibly ‘shocked’ by US green-light for long-range missiles to strike inside Russia

The Problem of the Bitcoin Billionaires

Biden: “We’re leaving America in a better place today than when we came into office four years ago … "

Candace Owens: Gaetz out, Bondi in. There's more to this than you think.

OMG!!! Could Jill Biden Be Any MORE Embarrassing??? - Anyone NOTICE This???

Sudden death COVID vaccine paper published, then censored, by The Lancet now republished with peer review

Russian children returned from Syria

Donald Trump Indirectly Exposes the Jewish Neocons Behind Joe Biden's Nuclear War


Miscellaneous
See other Miscellaneous Articles

Title: CHENEY CLAIMS NOBODY WAS DRINKING -- BUT HE HAD A BEER
Source: nolu chan
URL Source: http://none
Published: Feb 16, 2006
Author: nolu chan
Post Date: 2006-02-16 18:29:39 by nolu_chan
Keywords: DRINKING, CHENEY, CLAIMS
Views: 2136
Comments: 172

CHENEY CLAIMS NOBODY WAS DRINKING -- BUT HE HAD A BEER

CHENEY INTERVIEW WITH BRIT HUME

Q Was anybody drinking in this party?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No. You don't hunt with people who drink. That's not a good idea. We had --

Q So he wasn't, and you weren't?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Correct. We'd taken a break at lunch -- go down under an old -- ancient oak tree there on the place, and have a barbecue. I had a beer at lunch. After lunch we take a break, go back to ranch headquarters. Then we took about an hour-long tour of ranch, with a ranch hand driving the vehicle, looking at game. We didn't go back into the field to hunt quail until about, oh, sometime after 3:00 p.m.

The five of us who were in that party were together all afternoon. Nobody was drinking, nobody was under the influence.

Nobody was drinking. You don't hunt with people who drink. That's not a good idea. We took a BBQ lunch break in the field under a tree and he had a beer. Then they went back to ranch headquarters. They went back out hunting quail at about 3:00 p.m.. Nobody was drinking, nobody was under the influence.

Uh huh.

Notice that they had lunch in the field and then went back to the ranch headquarters. The beer was in the field with them. Presumably that was just ONE (1) beer and Cheney drank it while everyone else drank their Dr. Pepper and watched him drink his ONE (1) beer.

Uh huh.

When did they eat lunch? When did they finish lunch? Had the beer passed through his system by 3:00 p.m.?

Wait a minute. What beer? Nobody was drinking. You don't hunt with people who drink. That's not a good idea. Nobody was drinking, nobody was under the influence.

Wait a minute. Maybe he was parsing. If it is not Wild Turkey or the equivalent, it is not considered drinking.

Whatever. Brit Hume let it slide.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 110.

#1. To: nolu_chan (#0)

You missed it completely!

I know people who consider two or three drinks of ANYTHING to be in the category of NOT DRINKING.

(I also don't let them drive me anywhere)

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   18:34:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Feynman Lives! (#1)

Stop being argumentative, Richard. You're becoming a PITA again.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   18:43:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Jethro Tull (#2)

Jethro Tull,

First off, the name is Monty, not Richard. I am a fan of the good Doctor Feynman, but we do not share the same name.

Second off, I was not being argumentative. If you want argumentative, perhaps you should go back to your own board where you seem to take no end of delight in calling people dumbfucks, assholes and peodphiles.

I was making fun of Dick Cheney, you nimwit.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   18:45:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Feynman Lives! (#3)

First off, the name is Monty

Monty my balls. You're Richard. It's as evident as the beating young Michelle took at the hands of your heroes. BTW, I just pm'd ruthie. If there is anything I can do for Michelle or her legal team, my services are theirs. I'll be happy to fly down to Dallas just to sink this rogue cop. If I do come down, I'll let you know. Lunch is on me. OK?

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   18:56:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Jethro Tull (#4)

Jethro,

I really don't know what you are talking about, but you sure do like to talk about it. I kinda do wish I fit neatly into your paranoid conspiracies, but it just ain't the case.

I don't know what you mean when you say that you pm'd ruthie, nor do I know who ruthie is, so... I guess.. good for you?

As for that chick in Deep Ellum, all I know about her is what I read in the papers, and so far as I know, nothing has been decided yet. He was not discplined and she hasn't filed a complaint as far as I know. I don't have a feeling on it one way or the other, she might be guilty, he might be wrong. I honestly don't care.

I don't know why you are so bent on this story, do you live in Dallas? Were you beaten by the cops? What is your deal?

So, while you are pm'ing ruthie, why not PITA Michelle and eat my BM, and then call yourself a cop and have us all arrested. You are making NO sense to me at all. To me, you are just an ass.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   19:04:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Feynman Lives! (#5)

Richard's posts on 4um

How about that! Your posting style and syntax is identical to Richard's. Maybe you're his twin separated at birth?

christine  posted on  2006-02-16   19:17:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: christine (#11)

Christine,

I can show you 200 people who use the same argumentative style as I do. They would all also be lawyers, 9 times out of 10. So, what?

Think about it, Richard was OBSESSED with that incident in Deep Ellum, he swears up and down the yard that he was there and he posted a couple hundred times on that one thread. (problematically so, in my opinion) I, on the other hand, wasn't even IN Dallas that weekend, and more importantly, I really don't give a tinker's toot about what happened down there and will wait to see what shakes out before passing my judgement on the event.

It seems HIGHLY unlikely that Richard could "sneak" back into this group and NOT post ad nauseum to that thread.

You are an intelligent creature, Christine, think it thru.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   19:29:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Feynman Lives! (#14)

I can show you 200 people who use the same argumentative style as I do.

Yep, contrarians blow.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   19:32:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Jethro Tull (#18)

To: Feynman Lives!

I can show you 200 people who use the same argumentative style as I do. Yep, contrarians blow.

DAMMIT JETHRO, you LIED to me!

You said you were done.

You PROMISED!!!

Now, go away, little one.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   19:34:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Feynman Lives! (#21)

Sorry Dick. You pissed me off. I'm in for the long haul :)

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   19:36:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Jethro Tull (#22)

You pissed me off. I'm in for the long haul

What did I do that pissed you off?

You thought I was someone else and now you are venting your uncontrolled rage on me.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   19:40:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Feynman Lives! (#24)

What did I do that pissed you off?

You're a liar.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   19:44:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Jethro Tull (#26)

You're a liar.

I am a liar? Well, I guess on some level, we have all lied at one point or another in our lives.

YOU call me a liar, yet you do not know me, so what is your factual proof of this allegation?

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   19:47:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: Feynman Lives!, Jethro Tull, christine, Zipporah, Dakmar, duckhunter, All (#32)

YOU call me a liar, yet you do not know me, so what is your factual proof of this allegation?

Dakmar's post #6 at 19:09:55

You seem capable of understanding internet links, yet you have ostensibly failed to do any research on a former poster named Richard, although you have been accused of being that person many times by many posters. Do you just have damaged areas in your brain or something, some sort of mental blind spot?

Your response post #12 at 19:24:01

... well, my original thought was that he was naturally calling me Richard because of my screen name FEYNMAN LIVES! which is an homage to the good Dr Richard Feynman. Why would I naturally presume he was talking about an old poster if the name he is using has significance to MY screen name?

After reading your post I have gone back and read some of the stuff from the guy he was talking about. He seemed bent on that incident in Deep Ellum last month. So what? He says he was there, maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. I am far too busy not giving a damn to care either way. It looks like he was fixated on that one thing.

And in between those two posts:

#9. To: Dakmar at 19:13:50

#10. To: Jethro Tull at 19:14:56

So between Dakmar's post #6 and your #12, exactly 14 mins and 6 seconds elapsed (24:01 - 09:55) during which time you also read three posts to you and made three reponses for which I estimate 1 min each to refresh and read the post and 1 minute to compose and write the repsonses or at least 6 minutes minimum for responses #9, #10 & #12, leaving about 8 mins to find Richard's posts and read enough of them to be knowledgable enough of Richard's posting history at that point to claim in your post #12:

After reading your post I have gone back and read some of the stuff from the guy he was talking about. He seemed bent on that incident in Deep Ellum last month. So what? He says he was there, maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. I am far too busy not giving a damn to care either way. It looks like he was fixated on that one thing.

Further, here in your post #14. To: christine at 19:29:01

Think about it, Richard was OBSESSED with that incident in Deep Ellum, he swears up and down the yard that he was there and he posted a couple hundred times on that one thread.

And here in your post #20. To: Dakmar at 19:33:25

From reading his posts he does sound like a lawyer, and he certainly does seem know the Deep Ellum area. However, I don't know enough about the incident to comment one way or the other as to whether or not he was there. As for the conflicting reports...

So between your post #12 and your post #20 is another 9 mins and 26 secs (33: 25 - 24:01) elapsed but assuming again 4 minutes to read and respond in posts #14 and #20 yields another 5 mins and 26 secs for additional 'research' of Richard's posting history, for a total of 13 minutes and 26 seconds for you to read a 784 post thread, find Richard's posts, read them and assess Richard's posting history.

So in the first 8 minutes of 'research' of an 784 post thread you determined that Richard:

and in the next 5 minutes and 26 secs of 'research' you determined that Richard:

You want us to believe that you just this evening between 19:09:55 and 19:33: 25 (an interval of 23 and a half minutes total) you researched Richard's posts from a 784 post thread and also read and responded to 5 posts on this very thread.

No one believes that, Richard. You know Richard's posting history not because you figured it out in 13 minutes, but because you are the poster previously known as "Richard". You've fooled no one. Your M.O. was pegged within a day of you're being here but many people were patient and tolerant, which you returned with derision and lies.

You might have had a little credibility but when you post blatant falsehoods like:

http://www.freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=19442&Disp=14#C14

I can show you 200 people who use the same argumentative style as I do. They would all also be lawyers, 9 times out of 10.

You don't know 200 laywers, and the few you might know wouldn't argue like you do (not in court, well, not twice anyway) and "all" does not equate to "9 times out of 10". But you didn't even think about the facts when you posted, no, your keyboard just runs mindlessly out of control.

http://www.freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=19372&Disp=14#C14

A shotgun is commonly also referred to as a rifle in modern parlance, Duck, but thanks.

Ignoring the fact you're posting to a "duck hunter" (duh!) who would know, a "rifle" is a firearm with a rifled bore, and "rifling" means to cut spiral grooves within a gun barrel, the purpose of which is to spin the bullet upon exit at the muzzle for better ballistics, whereas "shot" guns expel shot pellets (encased in a shot cup) through a smooth bore barrel with no rifling because the shot cup is not supposed to rotate or spin down the barrel.

You pretend to know what you're talking about when it is blatantly obvious to all of us you're lying.

You not only demonstrate a total disregard for truth but also a childlike naivete in what you think you can get away with.

Starwind  posted on  2006-02-16   21:53:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: Starwind (#59)

So in the first 8 minutes of 'research' of an 784 post thread you determined that Richard:

"says he was there" "bent" and "fixated" and in the next 5 minutes and 26 secs of 'research' you determined that Richard:

"posted a couple hundred times", "swears up and down the yeard that he was there" "certainly does seem to know the Deep Ellum area" "conflicting reports"

Starwind,

Wow, not sure who you are, but you are sure jumping on Jethro's bandwagon pretty hard. ROFL

Yes, this was my initial assessment after a cursory view of the thread. I have to read and digest enormous volumes of written material every day for a living. I know how to read for comprehension, not content, so I read much faster than you do. It does not take much reading to learn the things that you said there. Any psychologist or psychiatrist could give you the same base level assessment in the same time. Had I taken another 10 minutes I could have told you much more about the situation, but, as I said earlier, I just don't care that much about the case.

The rest of it just appears to be you going WELL out of your way to try to pick a fight with me over small matters that really don't concern you, so I will just ignore them.

Oh, and I am not gonna bother bickering with you about what name you wanna give me. I will tell you one time, and quite politely, that my name is not Richard, but in fact, Monty. I don't know who you are or why you have reacted in such an odd fashion, but once again, I will add this to the list of things about which I just do not care.

From there, you are free to go off on whatever rant you see fit.

You are too filled with hate to do anyone any good.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   22:09:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: Feynman Lives! (#62)

Who said your name was Richard? You simply chose that screen name in your previous 4um life. WhoTF do you think we are? Many of us have been posting on forums long before your parents let you near the family Tandy. Now scat.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   22:21:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: Jethro Tull (#69)

Who said your name was Richard? You simply chose that screen name in your previous 4um life. WhoTF do you think we are? Many of us have been posting on forums long before you parents let you near the family Tandy. Now scat.

Wow, Jethro,

Who said my name was Richard? YOU did, my dulcet darling. So did Starwind.

I don't know who you two are, but you two are really quite deeply steeped in your delusion. It is sad, but hey, it is also funny to watch, like a drunk who dropped his car keys in a puddle. I would really like to be able to say "aw, ya got me" so you can have a good feeling in your tummy, but it just ain't so. I have never used this site before, and I don't go around using the name Richard. However, I know that this will bring you little solace and your fury will go unabated... so... hey, if you are gonna nut out on me, why not have fun with it. You have yet to call me a dumbfuck or an asshole, as it is clear from your other thread that you LOVE to call people names.(a board that I read for an even SHORTER amount of time than I read the one on that Starwind mentioned.)

You really need to take whatever medication that the state psychiatrist gave to you, Jethro, and make sure to share some with Starwind.

Enjoy your paranoia. Remember, just because you are paranoid, it doesn't mean that people AREN'T out to get you. ROFL

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   22:31:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#76. To: Feynman Lives! (#73)

Who said my name was Richard? YOU did, my dulcet darling. So did Starwind.

I suggested that Richard was your previous 4um persona, not your Christian name. SO sorry if that offends. Now, I’m coming to Dallas. 4 mail me your contact. Lunch is on me.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   22:38:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#78. To: Jethro Tull (#76)

I suggested that Richard was your previous 4um persona, not your Christian name. SO sorry if that offends. Now, I’m coming to Dallas. 4 mail me your contact. Lunch is on me.

Jethro,

I have been on this site less than a week.

In that time you have been the most abusive, ignorant, irrational asshole I have seen in quite some time.

Why on earth would I want to share the same ZIP CODE with you, much less a table for lunch?

You are the embodiment of all things ignorant and offensive.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   22:41:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#79. To: Feynman Lives! (#78)

Jethro is not willing to give me a FIRST CHANCE.

Lunch? My treat?

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   22:44:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#83. To: Jethro Tull (#79)

Lunch? My treat?

Uh... in your own words...

"Shut up, dumbfuck"

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   22:52:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#85. To: JETHRO (#83)

Do you realize that you have RAILROADED this thread away from the original topic due to your delusion?

You basically took it over with your ass-like behavior.

I saw you doing the same thing on your own board.

Do you ever do ANYTHING productive?

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   22:55:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#88. To: Feynman Lives! (#85)

Do you ever do ANYTHING productive?

Yes, my mission is to expose BS artists. You've been busted. Sorry.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   22:59:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#97. To: Jethro Tull (#88)

Yes, my mission is to expose BS artists. You've been busted. Sorry.

Jethro,

You have done nothing other than show me how truly paranoid and rage-filled you are.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   23:22:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#99. To: Feynman Lives! (#97)

You have done nothing other than show me how truly paranoid and rage-filled you are.

Gotcha Dick. You've begun to name call :)

Jethro Tull  posted on  2006-02-16   23:26:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#100. To: Jethro Tull (#99)

You have done nothing other than show me how truly paranoid and rage-filled you are. Gotcha Dick. You've begun to name call :)

Jethro,

That was not name-calling, that was an acurate assessment of your state of mind.

I did not, like you have done, called you a fuckwad or a pedophile, for that matter, even though both of those things may be said to be true about you.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   23:28:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#101. To: Feynman Lives! (#100)

So, who are ya dickwad? JT and many of us may not see eye to eye, but we have a little respect. Unlike you.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-02-16   23:33:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#102. To: buckeroo (#101)

So, who are ya dickwad?

I have respect, and my name is Monty.

I did not say that JT WAS a pedophile or a fuckwad. What I said was that those were things that HE has called other people on his own forum, and that those terms may apply to him as well. Now, that said, they very well may not apply, I don't know the man, nor do I care to.

I have far more respect for Jethro than he has shown to most people.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   23:35:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#103. To: Feynman Lives! (#102)

What I said was that those were things that HE has called other people on his own forum

Get a life, this is his forum. As for PostLiberty, it is a fluke ... a method of letting off steam or hot hot air. It is a place for Tubby, the fatass.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-02-16   23:41:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#104. To: buckeroo (#103)

Get a life, this is his forum. As for PostLiberty, it is a fluke ... a method of letting off steam or hot hot air. It is a place for Tubby, the fatass.

So you are saying he is justified in calling people pedophiles?

Wow.

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   23:42:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#107. To: Feynman Lives! (#104)

So you are saying he is justified in calling people pedophiles?

Sure. Why not? Can you argue otherwise?

buckeroo  posted on  2006-02-16   23:45:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#109. To: buckeroo (#107)

So you are saying he is justified in calling people pedophiles? Sure. Why not? Can you argue otherwise

Well,

You have an interesting point there... I don't know the man he called a pedophile... :)

Feynman Lives!  posted on  2006-02-16   23:49:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#110. To: Feynman Lives! (#109)

So why do YOU exhort the way you do? It is clumsy from my perspective; in fact, everything about you is clumsy. I don't learn anything.

buckeroo  posted on  2006-02-17   0:10:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 110.

        There are no replies to Comment # 110.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 110.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]