The Cheney interview

Okay, okay, so he took responsibility. More or less. A few days late. And only after much pressure was applied by pretty much everyone. Only after joke after joke on late-night TV (Jon Stewart's been absolutely hilarious this week). Only after not allowing himself to be questioned by local law enforcement. Only after rumours of alcohol imbibement. Only after trying to cover up or bury or otherwise manipulate the story. Only after that long delay in reporting it. Well, having someone report it to the local paper and keeping the White House, including his boss (loosely speaking), in the dark.

Only after the poor man's heart attack!

Only...

Ah, it goes on and on -- see here and here.

But could he have picked a softer interviewer and a safer forum? Brit Hume? Fox News? Lynne would have been tougher on him. Hell, Rush probably would have been tougher.

But -- so what? No, this isn't the biggest, most important story of the year. Yes, we should be focusing on more salient stories like Libby's claim that Cheney authorized the leaking of classified information (see here) and Pillar's claim that the White House "cherry-picked" evidence to back up its preconceived case for war in Iraq (see here).

But the truth remains: The Vice President of the United States shot a guy in the face and chest.

That's not just the characteristic truthiness of the Bush Administration. And there's no spin that can save him from the wicked jabs of Jon Stewart and the utter contempt of people like me, of bloggers big and small alike.