The continued reference to Mary Cheney by the Dems

Yer sweet, Bill. ;-)

Oh and the speaking thing could go either way, too -- she could have demurred (which was not the wording in the article) or she could have been flat out not offered a spot.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

Cheney could have nipped it in the bud by stating he was not happy his daughter was brought into a debate. He did not.

I thought his curt, dignified answer said exactly that.

We're over speculating about the convention here. She may have been present because she was proud of her dad and chose not to take the stand, because she didn't want to steal the show or maybe her life was threatened if she didn't do it that way It could have been a million things.

0 Replies

Curt and rather cold. But, that's Cheney. I'm sure they're bristling that the religious right is apalled at Cheney accepting his gay daughter, not just that she is a Lesbian. What better reason not to show up on stage and "steal the show."

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

If he was simply trying to show the division between Bush and Cheney: Wouldn't it be at least as effective to open with "I agree with Dick Cheney... "... Wouldn't that have delivered that part of the blow just as effectively (without the potentially inferred slight)?

This would've been quite effective, and if that was his sentiment, which seems plausible, I'm guessing that he's slapping himself up the side of his head for not wording it along those lines. Lynne Cheney would've had a hard time objecting to that presentation, wouldn't she?

0 Replies

Great reason LW... but it's still long on speculation and short on fact. The offended group in question can kiss my ass when they get done with yours, but we can't just assume that was the reason.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

But, you just brought an article that says she chose not to be on the podium. If she wouldn't do that, surely she demured from speaking as well.

Which, to me, almost proclaims she HATED being used during the debate. Wouldn't you say?

Not necessarily. Idea

Could it have been in deference of the president and his ideas/ideals? To keep peace with her mother? Perhaps her girlfriend, or her girlfriend's mother worried about what sort of attacks such a declaration would leave them open to? We can speculate from here to Tuesday (Novemebr 2) and not necessarily guess what it really proclaimed.

0 Replies

You know, I wish she'd say something. I'd really like to know how she feels about this, and the Convention.

0 Replies

It's a logical reason rather than all of a sudden being miffed that their daughter was mentioned in the context of acceptance of gays. She wasn't outed, after all. They protesteth too much. Of course it involves some conjecture -- I'm going along with the way a politician's mind works. That Mary and her partner are working closely on the campaign could also be discerned as pandering to the gays, especially the Log Cabin Republicans. I don't think that will work -- I think they've stuck their hands in the can-of-worms and found, "Hey, it's a can-of-worms."

0 Replies

So, if the Cheneys are really so sincerely protective about their daughter's privacy - if their outrage about her being used as political fodder in the campaign is truly sincere - then they'll be calling the Republican surrogates to a halt pretty soon, eh?

I mean, considering that the outrage now already seems to have sparked (as far as I can tell from here) at least as many mentions and discussions of her sexuality than Kerry's mere debate line ever would have by itself, that would be the right thing to do, no, in terms of Mary's interests - if you accept the Cheneys' premise that it's wrong for it to be discussed in the public domain like that?

If they don't tell those talk radio hosts and other surrogates off, what does that say about their sincerity, their motivations?

0 Replies

MSNBC weighs in---
an excerpt--

Gasps in the press room

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

If they don't tell those talk radio hosts and other surrogates off, what does that say about their sincerity, their motivations?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. You are not being realistic. A radio host is not on par with a future king or runner up... speaking to an incredibly large audience... and who's words will be repeated to the 4 corners of the earth... Furthermore, my friends can get away with lots of stuff my enemies couldn't. Couldn't yours?

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

A radio host is not on par with a future king or runner up... speaking to an incredibly large audience...

You really think the one line, as it was used by Kerry in the debate, would have led to more publicity around Mary, itself, than the concerted backlash now does? Purely in terms of Mary's interests, isn't the 'cure' worse than the 'disease', as we say here?

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Furthermore, my friends can get away with lots of stuff my enemies couldn't. Couldn't yours?

Not if it'd be about my daughter. But then I'm no politician, I guess ...

0 Replies

Compliments, by the way, to Sozobe for this post, which was good enough to deserve being the end all on this whole topic; and to Bill for making his case as clear as it can get in this post. Cant really think of much thats left to be said after those two.

0 Replies

Thanks for the condensed version Nimh. Those posts you highlighted were both excellent. Bill and Soz, thanks for the great posts.

Although, I don't really see why this is such a big issue. I mean, who cares if Cheney's daughter is Lebanese?

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

You really think the one line, as it was used by Kerry in the debate, would have led to more publicity around Mary, itself, than the concerted backlash now does? Purely in terms of Mary's interests, isn't the 'cure' worse than the 'disease', as we say here?

I blame both on the provocateur. The response was very predictable... and he chose to do it anyway.

nimh wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Furthermore, my friends can get away with lots of stuff my enemies couldn't. Couldn't yours?

Not if it'd be about my daughter. But then I'm no politician, I guess ...

Now that is an interesting response, especially coming from you. You are as steady as anyone on A2K, but you bristled in a hurry when considering an insult to your daughter. I can't believe your answer accurately answers my question. Surely, you can think of a situation where only your friend gets a pass. Come on?...

Thanks for the props Nimh... but I gotta talk about something. :wink:

Thanks and LOL Kicky! Laughing

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

Why didn't the Cheney's lay in on Alan Keyes when he referred to Mary as "a 'selfish hedonist' because she is a lesbian." (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040901-093347-1067r.htm)

uhhh, because he's a conservative politician running in this election?

0 Replies

Make that agent provocateur... Check out this definition! :wink:

Main Entry: agent pro·vo·ca·teur
Pronunciation: 'ä-"zhän-prO-"vä-k&-'t&r, 'A-j&nt-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural agents provocateurs /'ä-"zhän-prO-"vä-k&-'t&r, 'A-j&n(t)s-prO-/
Etymology: French, literally, provoking agent
: one employed to associate with suspected persons and by pretending sympathy with their aims to incite them to some incriminating action

0 Replies

I think that what is ultimately sad in this election is that if we (the left) don't play the same game that these shameless republicans are willing to play that we'll lose that edge going into the final stretch, and subsequently lose the election.

When Kerry didn't respond quickly enough against the Swift Boat Veterans, the damage became real, and it gave Bush the opportunity to deflect his own questionable service in the National Guard, and throw all the attention on Kerry's Vietnam record.

I still haven't heard a rational explanation from any neoconservatives why Edwards can be complimented and thanked by Cheney for offering respect towards his family (especially Mary Cheney), and yet when Kerry does the same thing, this fallout takes place.

I still also haven't heard from any neoconservatives why reading off the names of our servicemen who have died in Iraq is considered politically motivated, but broadcasting a screed full of lies about Kerry during his role in the Vietnam anti-war movement is not.

This is the most telling (IMO) of the utter hypocrisy behind the Bush-Cheney campaign.

Kickycan:

And who cares if John McCain's adopted daughter is black? :wink:

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

I can't believe your answer accurately answers my question. Surely, you can think of a situation where only your friend gets a pass. Come on?...

You "can't believe" a lot of things I'm saying in this thread ... Razz

You seem to think that partisanness had suddenly blinded me. But it hasnt - I think our not-understanding-each-other on this one actually probably goes deeper than that. I mean, basically, I just cant imagine why or how anyone would get all offended because someone mentions that his daughter is a lesbian - I mean, so what? But then - I live in the Netherlands ... you know, culture gap an' all, I'm guessing.

As for your question, I tend to be harder on my friends than my enemies when it comes to stuff like that (in as far as I have enemies). Someone who really doesnt like me I expect to say something less than pleasant or respectful about, say, my gf. But if someone who's supposed to be my friend - someone who's supposed to be on my side - does it, I'm shocked and outraged.

Course, the question for Cheney now is to identify who is "on his side" on this matter, and who's not.

0 Replies

Quote:

uhhh, because he's a conservative politician running in this election?

No, no, that's the obvious answer. I wanted to hear the conservative spin on this question.

0 Replies

The continued reference to Mary Cheney by the Dems

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know