During both the Vice Presidential and third Presidential Debates, Senators Kerry and Edwards made a concerted effort to bring up the fact that one of Vice President Cheney’s daughters is a Lesbian. One has to ask why would they purposefully bring up this intimate detail in such an oddly inappropriate manner?

At the very least they were trying to embarrass Vice President Cheney and make political gains at the expense of Mary Cheney. Regardless, one can be assured that they did not bring up the matter to evoke a positive response from the Vice President, or in an effort to show their respect for people who live a Gay Lifestyle. The Senators’ smarmy actions speak volumes about how they truly view homosexuality, which is something worthy of mockery. If I were a Gay Liberal, this would really (*)(*)(*)(*) me off.

Alan Keyes accused her of practicing "selfish hedonism" and said she was a sinner.

The Mary Cheney thing really is a fascinating Rorschach test. Many conservatives are appalled and cast their anti-Kerry opinion as a defense of Mary. Here's one:

Last night he allowed his obsession with his own selfish desire to win a point overshadow the appropriate boundaries of taste, compassion, and kindess. Lynne Cheney has the right to call him a bad man. And woman across the nation have the right to see for themselves that he is willing to victimize THEM if it comes to padding his advantage, reputation, position, or standing.
Victimize? All Kerry did was invoke the veep's daughter to point out that obviously homosexuality isn't a choice, in any meaningful sense. The only way you can believe that citing Mary Cheney amounts to "victimization" is if you believe someone's sexual orientation is something shameful. Well, it isn't. What's revealing is that this truly does expose the homophobia of so many - even in the mildest "we'll-tolerate-you-but-shut-up-and-don't-complain" form. Mickey Kaus, for his part, cannot see any reason for Kerry to mention Mary except as some Machiavellian scheme to pander to bigots. Again: huh? Couldn't it just be that Kerry thinks of gay people as human beings like straight people - and mentioning their lives is not something we should shrink from? Isn't that the simplest interpretation? In many speeches on marriage rights, I cite Mary Cheney. Why? Because it exposes the rank hypocrisy of people like president Bush and Dick and Lynne Cheney who don't believe gays are anti-family demons but want to win the votes of people who do. I'm not outing any gay person. I'm outing the double standards of straight ones. They've had it every which way for decades, when gay people were invisible. Now they have to choose.


You won't read this or reply, but that's fine. Your support of Kerry's bringing up Mary Cheney in the debate just lost my respect completely. The best analogy I can think of would have been Carter mentioning Betty Ford's addiction or someone mentioning Martha Mitchell's instability and alcoholism in a presidential debate. Just beyond the pale. The young woman, and the family, are entitled to their privacy on private matters.
First, the equation of gayness with some sort of embarrassing problem or, worse, some kind of affliction. For people who believe this, of course Kerry was out of line. That's why Rove's base is so outraged. But if you don't believe this, it's no different than, say, if a candidate were to mention another candidate's son in the Marines. Or if, in a debate on immigration, a pro-immigrant candidate mentioned Kerry's immigrant wife. You have to regard homosexuality as immoral or wrong or shameful to even get to the beginning of the case against Kerry. That's why it's a Rorschach test. Secondly, Mary Cheney isn't private. She ran gay outreach for Coors, for pete's sake. She appears in public with her partner. Her family acknowledges this. She's running her dad's campaign! Whatever else this has to do with - and essentially, it has to do whether you approve of homosexuality or not - privacy is irrelevant.


http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php

__________________
The war on terror involves Saddam Hussein because of the nature of Saddam Hussein, the history of Saddam Hussein, and his willingness to terrorize himself. George W. Bush

I really don't understand why people, including many independents that have "SUDDENLY switched their vote to Bush from Kerry. WE'VE SEEN John Kerry's character, IN ACTION long before this incident.

1. Who comes back from Viet Nam, & knowing that there are knives at American POW's throats & makes international atrocity statements? And also admitted in his 1st book, that he met with the enemy in private, in France, while the war was on-going, & without authorization from anyone within the U.S. government to do so?
2. Who votes to send American troops into battle, then votes against supporting them? Then complains that there was not ample body armor & items they need while they are in combat?
3. Who takes a KID, of a Vice Presidential candidate, who is really not that involved in Dick Cheney's re-election campaign. And brings her name out on International T.V. for all to hear, without her consent to do so?
4. What Vice Presidential wife, (John Edwards wife), then ATTACKS Lynn Cheney as, "she must be embarrassed by her daughter," while Lynn Cheney was only defending her daughter?

And I saw it in him long long ago. John Kerry has ALWAYS shown a propensity through out his life, to walk all over anyone, including dangering other's life's, for nothing more than personal political gain.

JOHN KERRY IS TRULY A BAD MAN, as described by Lynn Cheney in defense of her own daughter.

How could you call it "at her expense" when she is open and proud about the fact?

__________________
Why are they called the "right", if they are so wrong?

Who freaking cares about Alan Keyes? You are trying to bring him in as a straw man. Means nothing. We're talking about what John Kerry said. And his runnign mate...and for political purposes.

Well, I for one, am glad that people have now gotten to see the "real John Kerry." Better before the election....than after.

__________________
"What exactly is this foreign policy experience?" Obama said mockingly of the New York senator. "Was she negotiating treaties? Was she handling crises? The answer is no."

Because it was done in a gratuitous fashion. There was no reason to name anyone....in the point he was trying to make. He threw her name in there for purely hateful political purposes. And it was practiced....and planned. This wasn't just a spur of the moment thing. Did they plan to bring Dick Gephardt's gay daughter into the debate? Nope. They PLANNED to bring in Dick Cheney's gay daughter. It's different if Dick Cheney wants to bring up his daughter....he loves her and would not do anything to hurt her. John Kerry does NOT love her...and doesn't give a "you know what" if he hurts her. Even IF you are openly gay....doesn't mean you want your name brought into a national political debate that some 50 million people are watching. She and her partner chose NOT to come up on stage at the end of the Republican Convention. And VP Cheney did NOT drag her up there against her will. But John Kerry had no problem dragging her against her will into a presidential political debate. Shame on him!

__________________
"What exactly is this foreign policy experience?" Obama said mockingly of the New York senator. "Was she negotiating treaties? Was she handling crises? The answer is no."

And if Edwards had a gay daughter, who Bush brought up, it would be because 'Bush is showing his compassion and respect for the Edwards' family'...get real!!!!
'Cause, you know, Bush can do no wrong...right JP5?

__________________
Why are they called the "right", if they are so wrong?

"We're all God's children, Bob, and I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was. She's being who she was born as. I think if you talk to anybody, it's not a choice." - Kerry during debate.

“I love my daughters. They love their daughter. I was trying to say something positive about the way strong families deal with this issue,” - Kerry's effort at damage control.

Any of you Kerry supporters want to try to explain how the first one is a comment on strong families? Kerry is not the genius you'd like to think he is.

__________________
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~Ronald Reagan

I actually happen to agree with you. It's obvious that Dick and Lynne are ashamed and embarrassed to have a lesbian daughter, otherwise they would not have found Kerry's innocent remark insulting or inappropriate. Their family values are far from strong.

__________________
The war on terror involves Saddam Hussein because of the nature of Saddam Hussein, the history of Saddam Hussein, and his willingness to terrorize himself. George W. Bush