The continued reference to Mary Cheney by the Dems

This is just amazing, really.

It was a dig, yeah -- at the fact that the President's own Vice President doesn't agree with the DOMA. Why? Because he has seen firsthand what life is like for gays and lesbians in America, and he -- the VP -- the guy who has a lesbian daughter -- thinks the President is wrong. He'll support him anyway, but he thinks DOMA is wrong.

That's the dig, it's a legitimate dig at how dumb and unnecessary DOMA is -- the VP is even against it!! -- and Mary is secondary to it.

This sad scene reveals callous disregard for the person and the privacy of members of the family of their opponents on the part of the Kerry tribe. It suggests a John Kerry who is so consumed with his own ambitions and advancement that he can thoughtlessly exhibit such complete disregard for what was once consitered the manly virtues required of the participants in such contests.

I don't think it is either fair or accurate to suggest that Edwards' initial reference to this matter during the VP debate was accepted willingly by the Vice President.

Edwards spit out the observation about Cheny's daughter without warning,

What I find odd is that, given the repetitions of this strange emphasis on the daughter of the VP, first by Edwards

then by Kerry and today by Edward's wife, all at very public events, one is left with the inescapable conclusion that all this is both deliberate, and likely the result of some planning and discussion.

Ya'll need to stop hitting that partisan poison pipe, and think about this one. Of course it's wrong to bring the off spring into it. Would you want your child to have to suffer this type of public attack...

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Ya'll need to stop hitting that partisan poison pipe, and think about this one. Of course it's wrong to bring the off spring into it. Would you want your child to have to suffer this type of public attack...

If my adult daughter becomes a gay rights activist, I expect her to be prepared to deal with the jerks that think its an attack for someone to say what Kerry said. I certainly wouldn't become the mother lioness, given her age and decision to be a public activist. That makes it hers to defend if she chooses.

The fact that this is seen as her "suffer(ing) this type of public attack" says more about YOUR view of homosexuality than it does that of the candidates.

Why on earth are we in the year 2004 with people considering homosexuality a closet issue? A shameful thing? An attack?

PP, love the avatar. That was a gracious move on your part.

"I have two wonderful daughters. I love them very much. They are bright; they are hard-working; they are decent. And I simply am not going to talk about their personal lives," Cheney told Roberts.

Nationally, many gay leaders were alarmed by Lynne Cheney's remarks. The distaste implied by her use of the term "such a thing" to describe her daughter Mary's sexuality didn't come across as ringing acceptance. And some see it as an attempt to force Mary Cheney -- who has in fact publicly "declared" herself a lesbian, and has worked as the gay and lesbian corporate relations manager for Coors Brewing Co. -- back into the closet, at least on the campaign trail.

What is a "gay leader"? Do they have special status in our society or government? Do they have a special right to speak for any special segment of our population? Do others have any obligation to listen to them? Were they elected, or are they self-appointed to this exhaulted status?

More importantly what gives them the right to interpret or judge the inflection of a mother's voice or the small details of her word choice when speaking of her own children?

Does the fact that a person (of whatever sex or description) has told some people about some aspect of their lives give others the unlimited moral right to repeat it in a public forum for their own purposes? There is certainly a legal right here, subject only to the weak restraints of our liability law, however, is this in accordance with our generally accepted standards of public behavior?

[ quote]Gay leaders wasted no time blasting Lynne Cheney's remarks to Roberts. "They were horrible," said Human Rights Campaign spokesman David Smith. "She said she is proud of both her daughters, but there was definitely a sense this was one aspect of who her daughter is that she was not proud of. That came through loud and clear."

Evidently the self-appointed thought police are out in force.

There is little doubt in my mind that Lynne Cheny is partially motivated here by political considerations in her response to the very odd Edwards/Kerry remarks. However they started it, and their premeditation and political purpose in this vile matter are all too evident. A new low in American politics.

Soz - You exaggerate - No one asked Edwards if Cheny's daughter is homosexual. Your assertions in this regard are nonsense.

The reference was gratuitous and not at all called for in the question.

IFILL: The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President. 


I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting: "Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when you were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used your family's experience as a context for your remarks.


Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional ban on same-sex unions?

My apologies, Bill. The Your was intended as a collective of those finding this to be a taboo subject given the premise of the question and topic of discussion. Certainly not a personal attack.

This was not the first I have heard of Mary being gay. I've known it for several years. Don't really find it to be any big deal.

BTW, her mother, Lynne Cheney wrote a very saucy lesbian romance novel back in the early eighties if I remember the timing correctly. Many are familiar with that as well, though it is impossible to get ahold of now. THAT speaks to the hypocrisy of her feigned indignation as much as anything, IMO.