Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daswig
That's already illegal in most of the country to appear in public with a see-through garment that exposes female nipples under the public decency laws. Would it have been fair for Bush to say "Kerry can't even keep his own daughter from breaking the public decency laws, so how can he prevent terrorists from killing people?"
Of course not. It'd be a very low blow. Kerry's even MENTIONING Cheney's daughter in ANY negative context was inappropriate.
|
Well, since there is absolutely zero fucking connection between controlling the behavior of one's adult aged children and fighting terrorism, it would seem to me that if bush made that comparison, it would just be par for the course in terms of the cognitive jumps he is capable of.
It would be a low blow to mention bush's daughter's indiscretions, because they are irrelevant. Mentioning the sexuality of one of your opponents family members(after is has already been mentioned without offense in an earlier debate) and thereby exposing his hypocrisy is only a low blow if you demand so much respect for your candidate that you consider any criticism of him to be a low blow. I don't know why you can't see that the homosexuality of cheney's daughter is relevant.