the Bush campaign they lost all three debates and Kerry has surged into the lead.
yeah, i'd be pissed over things like this if I were them too, they're in desperation mode now.

When you get your ass kicked over and over on the issues, personal attacks will ensue. Ms. Cheny opened fire.

Seems to me, almost as if this was the only thing they had to pick on in the entire debate. Whereas CNN had the "I'm not worried about Osama" quote on the air before the damn thing was even over. Maybe the GOP is running out of Ammo, and starting to reach a bit further into that little world of make believe they refer to as "reality". Or maybe I am just so freakin' sick of the endless parade of non-issues that I refuse to listen to these pointless soundbites anymore.

Balanced against all of the under-handed shit the bush-cheney campaign has pulled, I don't think mentioning relevant facts about a canidates family is that big of a deal.

Let's see, Mary Cheney has worked in gay outreach for Coors and for Republican politicians. So why is mentioning her sexuality a taboo?

100% totally hit the nail on the head with that statement.

That's exactly what I was gonna post when I got back home, but you beat me to it ;)

IMO, it was a clever move on Kerry's part, not a "low blow" like others are saying.

For those who still think it's a low blow, let's use use this comparison (and I feel this is a perfectly acceptable analogy of sorts):

It's the 1800's and an election is going on. One of the candidates has a vice president with a black (mixed) child and this was made known to the public. That candidate is against the abolishment of slavery. His opponent is FOR abolishment of slavery and mentions, "My opponent, whose daughter is black, should be treated equally and without contempt."

The other side retorts back saying it was a low blow, when in fact the candidate FOR the abolishment of slavery was pretty much dead on in his statements and ideas while not ONCE crossing any line. Was he speaking badly? No. Not even ONCE. He made a good point in saying anyone who lives in this country deserves equal rights and benefits regardless of race.

Flat out, it was a well made point on the part of Kerry. Whether you're FOR gay marriage or not, it goes without saying that they must also be treated equally just like anyone else. That's all he was saying.

I find it amusing that Lynne Cheney would attack John Kerry over his comments rather than showing the American public how they love and support their daughter unconditionally. But then again,... One of the GOP'S talking heads really got that one wrong.

Or did they?,..maybe they were trying to deflect from Bush's abortion statements that everyone has the right to life. That's his opinion of course in that context but I really don't think Bush should be talking about anyones right to life especially after 10,000 Iraqi's end up dead because of ,..what was it,..WMD?.

I agree sounds to me like she is ashamed of her daughter and feels personally embarassed that her daughter should have a different lifestyle than she approves of.

As stated before, MR. Cheney showed massive class with this subject at the VP debate. I think (regardless of what I think of him politically) that he is probably a very loving, caring and compassionate father to his daughter. For that belief (and it is just what I have seen) I respect immensely that about him.

I have nothing to add, but I'll say it anyway.

It was fair game. The Veep introduced her to the millions of folks watching to score political points (just like every other politician) and placed his daughter's sexuality in the public domain.

Sen. Kerry was asked a question to which Cheney's daughter's sexuality was relevant. He used it to score political points with the television audience (again, just like very other politician.) Also, I might add, had Sen. Kerry tried to anecdotalize his response and speak of some illusionary "parents" with a gay child, he would have been lambasted by these same people. "We know who he's "really" talking about, right" would flood the airwaves along with talk of how disrespectful the candidate had been. It was a lose/lose situation for Kerry, but I think he did the right thing. There was no denigration. I think he tried to handle as best he could considering the options.

This indignatious outrage from Lynne Cheney is far from genuine and is only an attempt to score, you guessed it, more political points with the American people.

The only opinion I would truly care to hear regarding Mary Cheney's sexuality and this election is Mary Cheney's. Anyone elses opinion, as Averett so eloquently put it, is sound and fury, folks.

All ifs ands or buts aside, comparing a see through dress to preventing terrorism is like comparing apples to NUCLEAR WARHEADS. It makes about as much sense as the "World of Nations".

I think the outrage from Mrs. Cheney is actually probably genuine, but not in a way that reflects positively upon her.

I see it as one thing to mention your own family situation in order to provide an understanding of your perspective on the issue, and an entirely different thing to drag your opponent's family situation into a point you wish to make. There was no explicit denigration, but the less-than-compassionate motive could be seen by reading between the lines.

Why use her as an example? Why not somone Kerry actually knows, like Chris Dodd?

Why shouldn't he use her as an example?

Lynn and Dick's feigned "outrage"= desperate spin from the crew of a sinking ship!

it was a subtly backhanded compliment. of course, it was framed innocently, but kerry just wants to remind bush's right wing base about the issue. didn't think it was such a big deal until today though. now the statement has much more attention.

they made fun of it on the daily show after the VP debate. Stewart kept emphasizing the phrase GAY DAUGHTER, getting louder and louder. something to the effect that Edwards kindly spoke of Cheney's GAY DAUGHTER, how much respect he had for his GAY DAUGHTER, that Cheney's GAY DAUGHTER should be treated equally under the law. the last time Stewart yelled GAY DAUGHTER, they made his voice echo. good stuff.

I saw that Daily Show bit. It was great stuff.

by the way, you guys should check on that book lynne wrong a long time ago.
guess what it's about? hot girl-on-girl action! proof that it's enjoyed by republicans too, i guess.

here is a sample...

http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art19337.asp

would have been funny if kerry somehow weaved the name of the book into a compliment during the debate, acting like he was serious. "i am deeply inspired by the book sisters by lynne cheney."

Gay Daughter? Probably the only way to make it normal is to point it out. For many years it has been the conservatives "private pain" Too delicate a subject to broach. Fuck them, they want to have it both ways. A friend was told by his father "I'd rather see you dead than gay" The only way to stop it is to point out the Cheney's astounding hypocrisy.

Hot girl on girl action. Did the politics board and the TB just merge?

John Kerry's tears were that of a crocodile.

That is why they don't play well.

there seems to be many misconceptions concerning the conservative stance on homosexuality.

i'm a total liberal...and identify as queer.... Despite my support for Kerry in most matters, i'm very disaapointed in him. It's a cheap stunt to use someone's family like that. I disagree with Mary, and i think she's participating in the oppression of the queer community. But it seems apparent to me that to many listeners, hearing that she is gay would be percieved as a negative. Kerry appears to have intended this...it was an attack on Bush's credibility with his base supporters.

Outing is a way of using your queer idenity as an insult. It is a last ditch manouver, to be reserved for the most extreme circumstance. Kerry dissapointed me...but i will forgive it. He has been supportive of the community in other ways...and of the canidates, provides the best outcome for the queer community, IMO.

Thanks for that post.

I agree with you that Kerry has a much more palatable stance if you, like I, support gay rights.

I just can't get past some other issues with him.

No one has really explained how it was a jab, but oh well, that's expected, hehe :lol:

[edit]

I think what we have here is a classic case of "Hey, I'm a republican.. Cheney is a republican.. therefore, what Kerry said was bad!! BOOO!!" instead of a "Well, to be honest, what he said wasn't really that big of a deal".

So Kerry says that he supports Mary Cheney's way of life and wants to make sure that she can live as freely as possible without fear of retribution or discrimination, and Lynne Cheney's upset about this??? But she has no problem with trying to amend the Constitution to allow for legalised discrimination???

Mary Cheney must be welling up with pride as we speak.

Dick and Lynne Cheney were Outed, not their daughter
 

You weren't following the thread. Cheney's daughter wasn't outed!!!!!!!!!!! She's been out for a long time. It was VP Cheney and his wife who were outed to their conservative base, they don't want the fact of a gay child to disturb their conservative hate-mongering. It raises to many questions. And you know how Bush and Cheney feel about questions....

i'm using outing in the broader sense. many of bush's supporters didn't know anything about mary. to spread the information that she is gay, with the intent of separating conservative voters from bush....that's not cool in my book.

now...the Cheney's crocodile tears for this all, when they've played both sides of the issue, and align themselves with a party who spreads fear of teh queer community...well, i'm sorry, but i really don't feel much for them. Is mary a hypocrite to work for coors like she did? Yeah. Work for the campaign like she did? Yeah.

Is kerry a hypocrite to say he supports the queer community, and then to use Mary's queerness against Bush? Yeah.

How did Bush's own supporters not know that Mary Cheney was a lesbian? I knew it and I don't even live in the US. And I don't see how the above is hypocritical at all.

a lot of bush supporters on the religious right wouldn't exactly go looking for that news. i find slight mentions of dick's earlier remarks "freedom is freedom" at family.org...and no mentions i can find from pat robertson.

now...its a fallacy to say that's all the media of the religious right, but it's not been a banner and headline issue for them. the leadership of those circles tends to put top priority on the 2004 election, and will try to sort out the small stuff afterwards. thus...for the rank and file, kerry or edward's mention of mary may have been the first time that was brought up for them.

it's unseemly to be queer and participate in the repression of other queers. Thanks, mary, for nothing. it's unseemly to have a queer daughter and to use her as political tool. Thanks Dick, for nothing. but it's also unseemly to overly emphasize that someone else has a queer daughter... Thanks John, for nothing on that one.

If it is low or not isn't the issue. The most lacking part of the entire episode was that Edwards brought it up and no one cared. Kerry did the same and everyone go crazy. Doesn't make much logical since to me.

It's not "outing" when the individual mentioned is already out of the closet. The practice of "outing" gays always leaves me uneasy.....doesn't every individual have a right to privacy? However, this doesn't apply in this case as Ms cheney has been openly gay for years.

I think Kerry's underlying point in mentioning Mary Cheney is that if you are going to go on record as wishing to deny rights to homosexuals, then you should be aware of the fact that homosexuality is not some stange foreign perversion: Even Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian, and the Cheney's support her and her rights. What I found to be the most disgusting part of the whole episode was Lynne Cheney's selling out of her daughter by calling Kerry's remarks tawdry. This gives the impression that she finds her daughter's avowed lesbianism to be a perversion and Kerry's mention of it to be a dirty slam.

acknowledged...if you're sympathetic to the larger message, then it doesn't seem like an outing. but knowing the fundy types...it's largely going to be news to them. dick didn't exactly trumpet this to the world. and even if they did know...kerry is bringing it up as a wedge between them and bush. it strikes me that that's a negative use of mary's queer idenity, something closely akin to outing, IMO.

there's only one revision i would make to his comments. don't mention mary by name. other than that, he was spot on.

Context was everything in why the remark was inappropriate.

The question was about nature vs. nurture--what causes homosexuality. Bush said he didn't know.

Kerry's answer made me think that he had planned to mention Mary Cheney during the whole debate and was looking for the right time. Since it hadn't arisen yet, this might be his last time. The reason it appeared that way to me was his "if you ask Mary Cheney . . . " Instead of saying "if you ask . . . " he could have easily said "I've talked to Barney Frank and Elton John and Melissa Etheridge (insert names here) and . . . " I had no doubt that Kerry wanted to bring her up by name for a political reason, and that's why it was out of bounds.

If perhaps during a discussion of health care benefits, Bush had opined that treatment for the obese was something that the goverment shouldn't be paying for, what would have been the reaction if he said "If you ask Elizabeth Edwards, she'd tell you that pushing yourself away from the table is the first step". (Edwards has discussed her battle to keep the weight off.) There would be howls of protest for him putting words and thoughts into Mrs. Edwards' mouth (assuming she hadn't said the same thing). It was the "she'd say . . . " part that made the whole thing so blatantly political, and using someone's child in such a context just rubs many the wrong way.

why is this even an issue?

i dislike everything about conservative ideology--but that does not mean that i think people who subscribe to that ideology are completely subsumed by it as human beings---that they are incapable of differentiating public positions and personal life of talking one way about public matters while living very different lives beneath the surface----conservatives, like anyone diverse population, are often nice, loving people who happen to think the world through a series of premises i basically disagree with.

i see no contradiction whatsoever between people ascribing to a bizarre-o worldview and at the same time loving and accepting their children, even when that acceptance runs counter to the ideology.

nor do i see on what basis pointing out this distinction--by invoking mary cheney--- could be hurtful to cheney or bush. i really dont. if anything i imagine it would be helpful politically, in that it would point to the complexity that lay behind the conservative simplification of the world, even for those prominent within conservativeland.

on the other hand, it might function to point out the hypocrisy of the ideology--that you would have to make a distinction between public and private, that one set of prescriptions would hold for everyone else, but you yourself make exceptions, are flexible, etc etc etc,

maybe that is the problem.
and if the right sees this question in these terms, i can certainly see why they would squirm.
so squirm away.
but i do not see a cheap shot in it.