Lynne Cheney pissed at Kerry over the lesbian issue... - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Stompy · 10-14-2004, 12:21 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html

I can't stop laughing. I wasn't sure if this was a joke or not... (article below).

First off, I already knew that their daughter was a lesbian long before last night's debate. My source of info? Dick Cheney himself.

Second, she mentions that he crossed the line into family privacy. HELLO, you're a political figure AND your husband already mentioned (in public) that your daughter was a lesbian. Therefore, your life, in that aspect, is no longer private.

It's not like Kerry was the one who broke the news to Lynne, Dick, and the world.

I think they're just upset because he made a good point when the very man that's on their side couldn't even do that

Quote:

CORAOPOLIS, Pennsylvania (AP) -- Lynne Cheney accused Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry of pulling a "cheap and tawdry political trick," apparently for invoking her daughter's sexuality in his debate with President Bush.

Asked Wednesday night whether homosexuality is a choice, Kerry noted that one of Vice President Dick Cheney's daughters is a lesbian, and said she would probably affirm that she was born that way.

"We're all God's children," Kerry said during the debate in Tempe, Arizona. (Domestic issues dominate debate)

Mrs. Cheney made clear she thought Kerry had crossed a line into family privacy when she introduced her husband to a supportive crowd of 800 after a debate-watching party in the Pittsburgh suburb of Coraopolis.

"Now, you know, I did have a chance to assess John Kerry once more and now the only thing I could conclude: This is not a good man," she said.

"Of course, I am speaking as a mom, and a pretty indignant mom. This is not a good man. What a cheap and tawdry political trick."

She was not more specific. The vice president did not raise the matter in his remarks.

In his earlier debate with John Edwards, the vice president expressed no objection when the Democrat brought up his daughter, Mary.

Edwards expressed "respect for the fact that they're willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter, the fact that they embrace her. It's a wonderful thing."

Cheney thanked his opponent for the "kind words he said about my family and our daughter. I appreciate that very much." (Differences dominate VP debate)

Bush said in Wednesday's the debate he did not know whether homosexuality was a choice or fate. (Special Report: America Votes 2004, the debates)

He and Kerry both spoke of their belief that marriage is the union of man and woman, but the president supports a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and the Democrat does not.

Kerry supports giving gay couples many of the civil rights that come with marriage, while stopping short of conferring that status on same-sex couples.

kutulu · 10-14-2004, 12:24 PM

They are just making a stink because they can. If they are truly upset about it then they need to rethink what Kerry said.

daswig · 10-14-2004, 12:26 PM

So it would be appropriate for Bush to make comments about Kerry's daughter looking sluttish for appearing in France in the see-through dress and no bra? After all, we've all seen the pics...

nospam · 10-14-2004, 12:28 PM

Public info or not, I think Kerry's statement was a cheap low blow.

Averett · 10-14-2004, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

So it would be appropriate for Bush to make comments about Kerry's daughter looking sluttish for appearing in France in the see-through dress and no bra? After all, we've all seen the pics...

Sure, if there were questions about the sluttiness of the youth dressers today. Or something.

Everyone knew when Kerry said that there would be fallout. It'll be sound and fury signifying nothing. As usual.

filtherton · 10-14-2004, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

So it would be appropriate for Bush to make comments about Kerry's daughter looking sluttish for appearing in France in the see-through dress and no bra? After all, we've all seen the pics...

It would be relevant if kerry was advocating a constitutional amendment banning see through dresses.

Get over it, pointing out hypocrisy is part of politics. The low blow is favoring a constitutional amendment to limit the freedoms of your daughter.

daswig · 10-14-2004, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

It would be relevant if kerry was advocating a constitutional amendment banning see through dresses.

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.

Superbelt · 10-14-2004, 01:10 PM

Kerry's daughter was NOT wearing a see through dress. It is an effect of a camera flash that momentarially makes a screen dress transparent. To anyone who was THERE, you couldn't see anything.

And, Lynn Cheney can go to hell, years ago she vehemently denied her daughter was gay. She kept her locked up in the family closet. Kerry wasn't denigrating her, he's fighting FOR her rights. And since Dick Cheney already brought her up, and her issue, willingly at the second debate, there's no reason for Kerry not to mention her.

Kalibah · 10-14-2004, 01:12 PM

Look I don't think John Kerry did anything "evil" but I do dislike the man, but that aside...

I do not see why he needed to bring it up again. With Dick Cheney in VP debate, sure it made sense, its SUPPOSE TO BE TALKING TO THE OTHER CANIDATE- obviously these debates are not... but in keeping with that- it made somewhat sense. To the president... why bring it up?- My opinion, ust to embarass them VP but dont flame me

Stompy · 10-14-2004, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nospam

Public info or not, I think Kerry's statement was a cheap low blow.

Uh, hahaha how was it a low blow?

He made a very good point. While Bush was more or less saying that "it's a choice", Kerry said that we are how we are and accepted it.

I'm sure Dick/Lynne don't think anything is "wrong" with their daughter and openly support her.

Flyguy · 10-14-2004, 01:19 PM

Fuck Lynn Cheney. She just can't come to the realization that her daughter's a lesbian. My opinion is that I think that the Cheney's are ashamed of their daughter and embarrassed to call her family. This is a typical conservative response to this issue. Especially if it's their kid. She's needs to come to terms with it. Kerry is trying to make sure that she has rights in this country. As far as Bush and Co. are concerned, she would be locked away forever to be conveniently forgotten about. Both the Cheney's need to grow a pair of balls and put the welfare of their family above bullshit politics just so Dubya can get re-elected. If I were Cheney's daughter, I'd be pretty ashamed to have them as parents.

Stompy · 10-14-2004, 01:20 PM

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.

So you're saying being gay is indecent? I'm not seeing the similarities with your analogy...

Being a lesbian and fighting for your rights has nothing to do with wearing a see through dress.

Taking a candid picture of someone and having the bulb flash in a way to expose what's underneath (it happens all the time at prom/homecoming) is very different than someone openly saying (in public), "our daughter is gay, we support her."

ObieX · 10-14-2004, 01:20 PM

I think it was a well made point by Kerry, and i agree that he is looking out for her rights, when her own father wants to help push for her oppression. And not only that, but to actually put such hate into the constitution of our country. I dont see how Chaney can look his daughter in the eye.

Stompy · 10-14-2004, 01:24 PM

Well, to be fair, didn't Dick say himself that he was supportive of her? I knew I read/heard that at some point recently because I thought, "That's funny... Bush is against gay marriage, but because Dick's daughter is a lesbian, he's for it."

If Bush's daughter was a lesbian, he'd change his tune too. I guess you can't see the err of your ways until it hits you in the face.

mml · 10-14-2004, 01:24 PM

I was dissapointed in Kerry. I think that most Americans know that Cheney's daughter is gay, but her could have just as easily made his point without mentioning her. I don't think he was trying to denigrate her or the Cheney's, but it really did not come across well. That being said, both Dick and Lynne Cheney are happy to use anything to their advantage and frequently do use personal and family attacks on their opponents, so it is a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black. Still, Kerry should not have brought it up.

This was a social faux pas, but hardly something to sway someone's vote away from Kerry. I don't think we have numbers big enough to count all of Bush's faux pas'.

FoolThemAll · 10-14-2004, 01:25 PM

Seems pretty clear that Kerry brought it up in order to embarass Cheney and Co. As has been said, it was completely unnecessary. Hell, gay marriage is turning out to be one of the most minor issues in this campaign, like it or not. I wouldn't consider it a low blow, but I would consider it shameful.

rukkyg · 10-14-2004, 01:26 PM

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.

If you think that mentioning someone as being a lesbian and saying that it's natural for them is negative, then YOU'RE inappropriate. That's what's wrong with Lynn.

kutulu · 10-14-2004, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

If Bush's daughter was a lesbian, he'd change his tune too. I guess you can't see the err of your ways until it hits you in the face.

That's a good way to sum up the whole gay rights issue. Most people are afraid of gays because they don't really know any gay people. I'm talking about having some sort of real social relationship either friendship or having a gay family member.

There are lots of people who say they know gay people. What they mean is there is that gay guy at work or down the street. They don't *know* what that person is about, they don't take the time to find out. If they did, they'd see that outside of the sexual mechanics of it they are so much like everyone else. Maybe then they wouldn't be so afraid.

I have never heard a valid arguement against gay marriage that wasn't based on a PERSONAL system of beliefs. It's one of the few issues that I really have against Kerry. I wish he would support it, but I understand that supporting it would be political suicide in these times.

ObieX · 10-14-2004, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rukkyg

If you think that mentioning someone as being a lesbian and saying that it's natural for them is negative, then YOU'RE inappropriate. That's what's wrong with Lynn.

Exactly, he didn't gay bash Dick's daughter. Saying someone happens to be a lesbian, when they ARE a lesbian (and are out of the "closet") isnt wrong. If someone mentions that i'm strait i dont take offense. I think people are upset because it was just a perfect example and truly cut deep. It was a very appropriate response and very powerful. An administration that doesnt care about even repressing their own family makes me worry.

Journeyman · 10-14-2004, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoolThemAll

Seems pretty clear that Kerry brought it up in order to embarass Cheney and Co. I wouldn't consider it a low blow, but I would consider it shameful.

It's mostly embarassing to Cheney and Co. because he supported constitutional amendments that limit his own daughter's liberty. It's not so much as trying to convey that the VP's daughter is a lesbian as much as it is trying to convey that the VP is a hypocrite.

filtherton · 10-14-2004, 02:02 PM

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.

powerclown · 10-14-2004, 02:18 PM

I think the reason why the Repubs are so pissed off is because they see it as Kerry callously and cynically reminding Bush's Conservative Base (read: fervently against homosexuality) that there just so happens to be a female HOMOSEXUAL!! in Bush's camp. Edwards did it too. Subliminal political warfare?

Kalibah · 10-14-2004, 02:22 PM

And its a personal issue. Just because someone came out of the closet and says yes im gay, that doesnt mean you should, when walking around town, say btw s/he is gay AND its her daughter, maybe the daughter came out the closet, but does all of America need to be told? Im sure, despite what the daugther says, shes a little embarassed over someone ANNOUNCING IT OVER AND OVER on national TV, even if she accepts it

Mephisto2 · 10-14-2004, 02:28 PM

Didn't Cheney come out and say he personally didn't support the Amendment, but that it was his job to support the President?

Either way, the comment filteron made is the most appropriate and telling of this thread. It's not as if Kerry mentioned the fact that Bush's daughters were illegally buying alchohol and alledgedly attending naked frat parties and repeatedly getting into trouble with the law... because none of that has any relevance to the debate.

But changing your Constituion DOES have relevance and is one of the tenets of the Republican's own farking campaign!

The truth hurts when it cuts deep. Get over it.

Mr Mephisto

FoolThemAll · 10-14-2004, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kutulu

I have never heard a valid arguement against gay marriage that wasn't based on a PERSONAL system of beliefs.

I have. They're just kinda hard to find. And ultimately flawed, in my view.

Quote:

It's mostly embarassing to Cheney and Co. because he supported constitutional amendments that limit his own daughter's liberty. It's not so much as trying to convey that the VP's daughter is a lesbian as much as it is trying to convey that the VP is a hypocrite.

Eh, it's not hypocrisy. It's choosing your battles. Gay marriage isn't worth a potential divide in the executive when there are so many other, more important issues out there. Compared to the economy and the war, this is trivial.

daswig · 10-14-2004, 02:30 PM

superbelt, so the nipples were fake?

FoolThemAll · 10-14-2004, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

But changing your Constituion DOES have relevance and is one of the tenets of the Republican's own farking campaign!

Which doesn't make the orientation of Cheney's daughter any more relevant.

FoolThemAll · 10-14-2004, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

superbelt, so the nipples were fake?

No, he's saying that while the transparency was caught on film, it was too brief for anyone there watching to notice.

daswig · 10-14-2004, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

I don't know why you can't see that the homosexuality of cheney's daughter is relevant.

So, based upon that statement, I assume you support non-voluntary "outing"? After all, if the sexual orientation of people (even people NOT running for office) is relevant to the political debate, don't we have a RIGHT to know if they're gay or not?

Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation is no more relevant than Kerry's daughters being hose-beasts. It was an inappropriate comment.

Kalibah · 10-14-2004, 02:37 PM

Hypocrite ? How is Cheney a Hypocrite because he opposes gay marriages, and his daughters a lesbian? I don't see how that fits into this scenario??? Ironic but not hypocracy

daswig · 10-14-2004, 02:37 PM

foolthemall, it's a strict liability offense. It doesn't MATTER how long it took place for, or who could see it.

rukkyg · 10-14-2004, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

So, based upon that statement, I assume you support non-voluntary "outing"? After all, if the sexual orientation of people (even people NOT running for office) is relevant to the political debate, don't we have a RIGHT to know if they're gay or not?

Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation is no more relevant than Kerry's daughters being hose-beasts. It was an inappropriate comment.

It's relevant because Cheney is on a ticket that supports an amendment that would curtail the rights of a group of people to which his daughter belongs.

The true hypocracy would be if Dick himself were gay. His daughter's being gay makes it close enough for most people who disagree with him.

filtherton · 10-14-2004, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

superbelt, so the nipples were fake?

The nipples are irrelevant.

Maybe bush could bring up kerry's daughter if she were a member of some sort of terrorist organization. This would be a good way to point out that kerry didn't have what it takes to fight terrorism, because he has a terrorist in his own family. If this were true, i have no doubt that most of the people in this thread currently feigning offense for cheney's daughter (someone they've never even met, and whose right to marry they would probably deny) would have no problem mentioning kerry's "unmentionable terrorist daughter".

Back here in this reality, kerry's vp's family doesn't exist in direct opposition to kerry's proposed policies, whereas bush's vp's family does exist in direct opposition to bush's policies. Accept it and move on.

Admit it, you're just pissed because kerry exposed one of those, what do they call them, exagerati- i mean, inconsistensies?

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

So, based upon that statement, I assume you support non-voluntary "outing"? After all, if the sexual orientation of people (even people NOT running for office) is relevant to the political debate, don't we have a RIGHT to know if they're gay or not?

Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation is no more relevant than Kerry's daughters being hose-beasts. It was an inappropriate comment.

She wasn't "outed" by kerry. She's been out for a long fucking time.

You should stop calling it innapropriate if you can't provide a rationally based reason to support the idea that it was innapropriate.

If the president chooses to run a campaign based partly on the promise of denying the rights of a certain portion of the populace, he shouldn't be surprised if his opponent points out the fact that the president and the vp are working against the interests of the vp's daughter.

FoolThemAll · 10-14-2004, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Admit it, you're just pissed because kerry exposed one of those, what do they call them, exagerati- i mean, inconsistensies?

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoolThemAll

Eh, it's not hypocrisy. It's choosing your battles. Gay marriage isn't worth a potential divide in the executive when there are so many other, more important issues out there. Compared to the economy and the war, this is trivial.

It's not a matter of inconsistency in this case, it's a matter of being politically shrewd. Weren't there a couple of people giving Kerry a pass on opposing gay marriage because it would be "political suicide"? Well, can't that apply to Cheney's situation as well?

filtherton · 10-14-2004, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoolThemAll

It's not a matter of inconsistency in this case, it's a matter of being politically shrewd. Weren't there a couple of people giving Kerry a pass on opposing gay marriage because it would be "political suicide"? Well, can't that apply to Cheney's situation as well?

I guess i see inconsistency in the idea of being pro-family and anti-big government, yet still advocating for big government to tell someone in your family that they aren't entitled to the same rights as everybody else.

rukkyg · 10-14-2004, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

I guess i see inconsistency in the idea of being pro-family and anti-big government, yet still advocating for big government to tell someone in your family that they aren't entitled to the same rights as everybody else.

The republican party is socially AND economically conservative. The platform says that the government should protect conservative social values such as not being a fag and not letting people fuck before they're married. Economically, economic conservatism IS de-regulation and big-corporation.

I disagree on both positions of their party, but it's not really inconsistant.

pan6467 · 10-14-2004, 03:01 PM

Ok look, during the VP the gay rights were brought up and Edwards talked about Cheney's daughter.

Do you GOP'ers who are so vehement about Kerry using her as an example, remember what Cheney's response was?

He didn't even answer the question. He took the TIME HE WAS ALLOTTED AND THANKED EDWARDS FOR THE KIND WORDS EDWARDS HAD SAID!!!!!!! THAT WAS CLASS from Cheney.

I have very little respect for Dick Cheney, but at that moment in the debate he showed class and compassion for his daughter.

Kerry and Edwards use Cheney's daughter, because 1) people can say, "oh yeah, we know of her." 2) to show the hypocrasy in the GOP and 3) because they do it not to be hurtful but to show her dignity and compassion.

The point has been brought up, if Kerry and Edwards were truly trying to just bash the other side they could discuss W's daughters drinking and legal problems, his neice's drug abuse and legal problems BUT THEY don't. Neither do the Dems or anyone. Why? Because that would be hurtful and mean spirited and uncalled for.

filtherton · 10-14-2004, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rukkyg

The republican party is socially AND economically conservative. The platform says that the government should protect conservative social values such as not being a fag and not letting people fuck before they're married. Economically, economic conservatism IS de-regulation and big-corporation.

I disagree on both positions of their party, but it's not really inconsistant.

I guess under those definitions i see the republican idealogy as fundamentally inconsistent. To claim that the goverment hasn't the foresight to regulate business and also claim that it does have to forsight to regulate social behavior seems a little inconsistent to me.

But all this is beside the point of this thread.

FoolThemAll · 10-14-2004, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

2) to show the hypocrasy in the GOP and 3) because they do it not to be hurtful but to show her dignity and compassion.

The point has been brought up, if Kerry and Edwards were truly trying to just bash the other side they could discuss W's daughters drinking and legal problems, his neice's drug abuse and legal problems BUT THEY don't. Neither do the Dems or anyone. Why? Because that would be hurtful and mean spirited and uncalled for.

2) As I put it above, I don't really see the hypocrisy.
3) I really, really doubt this was their motive. I don't doubt that they want this to be seen as their motive.

I think they picked this route because of your #3, because they thought they could easily disguise it as compassionate, rather than purely political. But the Bush daughters drinking? Clearly that would be a politically motivated low blow.

I don't think it will work as well as they hoped, though.

pan6467 · 10-14-2004, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoolThemAll

2) As I put it above, I don't really see the hypocrisy.
3) I really, really doubt this was their motive. I don't doubt that they want this to be seen as their motive.

I think they picked this route because of your #3, because they thought they could easily disguise it as compassionate, rather than purely political. But the Bush daughters drinking? Clearly that would be a politically motivated low blow.

I don't think it will work as well as they hoped, though.

I agree with what you are saying, probably more than I want to.

I was just trying to say that Lynne Cheney sounds like she wants to bitch and turn it into something that her husband really doesn't want to, because he understands and knows he'd do the same.

Course that's just women...... ummmm errrrrr not all women. The ones here on the TFP and my wife would NEVER bitch about something that their husbands don't see as an issue.

10-14-2004, 01:19 PM	#11 (permalink)
Flyguy Banned Location: Swooping down on you from above....	Fuck Lynn Cheney. She just can't come to the realization that her daughter's a lesbian. My opinion is that I think that the Cheney's are ashamed of their daughter and embarrassed to call her family. This is a typical conservative response to this issue. Especially if it's their kid. She's needs to come to terms with it. Kerry is trying to make sure that she has rights in this country. As far as Bush and Co. are concerned, she would be locked away forever to be conveniently forgotten about. Both the Cheney's need to grow a pair of balls and put the welfare of their family above bullshit politics just so Dubya can get re-elected. If I were Cheney's daughter, I'd be pretty ashamed to have them as parents. Last edited by Flyguy; 10-14-2004 at 01:22 PM..

10-14-2004, 01:20 PM	#13 (permalink)
ObieX Pickles Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)	I think it was a well made point by Kerry, and i agree that he is looking out for her rights, when her own father wants to help push for her oppression. And not only that, but to actually put such hate into the constitution of our country. I dont see how Chaney can look his daughter in the eye. __________________ We Must Dissent.

10-14-2004, 01:24 PM	#14 (permalink)
Stompy Banned from being Banned Location: Donkey	Well, to be fair, didn't Dick say himself that he was supportive of her? I knew I read/heard that at some point recently because I thought, "That's funny... Bush is against gay marriage, but because Dick's daughter is a lesbian, he's for it." If Bush's daughter was a lesbian, he'd change his tune too. I guess you can't see the err of your ways until it hits you in the face. __________________ I love lamp.

10-14-2004, 01:24 PM	#15 (permalink)
mml Adrift Location: Wandering in the Desert of Life	I was dissapointed in Kerry. I think that most Americans know that Cheney's daughter is gay, but her could have just as easily made his point without mentioning her. I don't think he was trying to denigrate her or the Cheney's, but it really did not come across well. That being said, both Dick and Lynne Cheney are happy to use anything to their advantage and frequently do use personal and family attacks on their opponents, so it is a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black. Still, Kerry should not have brought it up. This was a social faux pas, but hardly something to sway someone's vote away from Kerry. I don't think we have numbers big enough to count all of Bush's faux pas'. __________________ Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." -Douglas Adams

10-14-2004, 01:25 PM	#16 (permalink)
FoolThemAll Walking is Still Honest Location: Seattle, WA	Seems pretty clear that Kerry brought it up in order to embarass Cheney and Co. As has been said, it was completely unnecessary. Hell, gay marriage is turning out to be one of the most minor issues in this campaign, like it or not. I wouldn't consider it a low blow, but I would consider it shameful. __________________ I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

10-14-2004, 12:24 PM	#2 (permalink)
kutulu Junkie	They are just making a stink because they can. If they are truly upset about it then they need to rethink what Kerry said.

10-14-2004, 12:26 PM	#3 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	So it would be appropriate for Bush to make comments about Kerry's daughter looking sluttish for appearing in France in the see-through dress and no bra? After all, we've all seen the pics...

10-14-2004, 12:28 PM	#4 (permalink)
nospam Tilted	Public info or not, I think Kerry's statement was a cheap low blow.

10-14-2004, 01:10 PM	#8 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Kerry's daughter was NOT wearing a see through dress. It is an effect of a camera flash that momentarially makes a screen dress transparent. To anyone who was THERE, you couldn't see anything. And, Lynn Cheney can go to hell, years ago she vehemently denied her daughter was gay. She kept her locked up in the family closet. Kerry wasn't denigrating her, he's fighting FOR her rights. And since Dick Cheney already brought her up, and her issue, willingly at the second debate, there's no reason for Kerry not to mention her.

10-14-2004, 01:12 PM	#9 (permalink)
Kalibah Insane Location: Padded Playhouse	Look I don't think John Kerry did anything "evil" but I do dislike the man, but that aside... I do not see why he needed to bring it up again. With Dick Cheney in VP debate, sure it made sense, its SUPPOSE TO BE TALKING TO THE OTHER CANIDATE- obviously these debates are not... but in keeping with that- it made somewhat sense. To the president... why bring it up?- My opinion, ust to embarass them VP but dont flame me

10-14-2004, 02:18 PM	#22 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	I think the reason why the Repubs are so pissed off is because they see it as Kerry callously and cynically reminding Bush's Conservative Base (read: fervently against homosexuality) that there just so happens to be a female HOMOSEXUAL!! in Bush's camp. Edwards did it too. Subliminal political warfare? Last edited by powerclown; 10-14-2004 at 02:25 PM..

10-14-2004, 02:22 PM	#23 (permalink)
Kalibah Insane Location: Padded Playhouse	And its a personal issue. Just because someone came out of the closet and says yes im gay, that doesnt mean you should, when walking around town, say btw s/he is gay AND its her daughter, maybe the daughter came out the closet, but does all of America need to be told? Im sure, despite what the daugther says, shes a little embarassed over someone ANNOUNCING IT OVER AND OVER on national TV, even if she accepts it

10-14-2004, 02:28 PM	#24 (permalink)
Mephisto2 Junkie	Didn't Cheney come out and say he personally didn't support the Amendment, but that it was his job to support the President? Either way, the comment filteron made is the most appropriate and telling of this thread. It's not as if Kerry mentioned the fact that Bush's daughters were illegally buying alchohol and alledgedly attending naked frat parties and repeatedly getting into trouble with the law... because none of that has any relevance to the debate. But changing your Constituion DOES have relevance and is one of the tenets of the Republican's own farking campaign! The truth hurts when it cuts deep. Get over it. Mr Mephisto

10-14-2004, 02:30 PM	#26 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	superbelt, so the nipples were fake?

10-14-2004, 02:37 PM	#30 (permalink)
Kalibah Insane Location: Padded Playhouse	Hypocrite ? How is Cheney a Hypocrite because he opposes gay marriages, and his daughters a lesbian? I don't see how that fits into this scenario??? Ironic but not hypocracy

10-14-2004, 02:37 PM	#31 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	foolthemall, it's a strict liability offense. It doesn't MATTER how long it took place for, or who could see it.

10-14-2004, 03:01 PM	#37 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	Ok look, during the VP the gay rights were brought up and Edwards talked about Cheney's daughter. Do you GOP'ers who are so vehement about Kerry using her as an example, remember what Cheney's response was? He didn't even answer the question. He took the TIME HE WAS ALLOTTED AND THANKED EDWARDS FOR THE KIND WORDS EDWARDS HAD SAID!!!!!!! THAT WAS CLASS from Cheney. I have very little respect for Dick Cheney, but at that moment in the debate he showed class and compassion for his daughter. Kerry and Edwards use Cheney's daughter, because 1) people can say, "oh yeah, we know of her." 2) to show the hypocrasy in the GOP and 3) because they do it not to be hurtful but to show her dignity and compassion. The point has been brought up, if Kerry and Edwards were truly trying to just bash the other side they could discuss W's daughters drinking and legal problems, his neice's drug abuse and legal problems BUT THEY don't. Neither do the Dems or anyone. Why? Because that would be hurtful and mean spirited and uncalled for. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"