PDA

View Full Version : OMG!!! Kerry mentioned Cheney's daughter



nhp
10-15-2004, 03:37 AM
in a respectful fashion!!! How dare he say that Cheney's daughter is a lesbian, now THE WHOLE WORLD KNOWS!! I think Kerry should be disqualified of the presidency for that incident.

dg-in-centralpa
10-15-2004, 05:02 AM
Edwards did the same thing in the VP debate. I think this was in poor taste.

DG

highsea
10-15-2004, 05:14 AM
Yeah, sleazy.

Didn't we already have a thread on this?....Wally....?

Wally_in_Cincy
10-15-2004, 05:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote highsea:</font><hr> Yeah, sleazy.

Didn't we already have a thread on this?....Wally....? <hr /></blockquote>

The thread is gone.

WTF? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Wally_in_Cincy
10-15-2004, 06:03 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote nhp:</font><hr> in a respectful fashion!!! How dare he say that Cheney's daughter is a lesbian, now THE WHOLE WORLD KNOWS!! I think Kerry should be disqualified of the presidency for that incident. <hr /></blockquote>

Traditonally, the personal lives of the children of Presidential candidates are off-limits in the campaign.

What Kerry and Edwards did was just plain wrong and they know it. I hope it backfires.

I will give the media some credit on this one. It has been a lead story and they have given the American public Dick and Lynne's reaction in an unvarnished fashion.

Rich R.
10-15-2004, 07:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> Traditonally, the personal lives of the children of Presidential candidates are off-limits in the campaign.

What Kerry and Edwards did was just plain wrong and they know it. I hope it backfires. <hr /></blockquote>
It is not like nobody knew.
This has been in and out of the news for a long time. IIRC, Cheney's daughter is an activist for gay rights.

In this case, I don't believe it is out of line to mention her, and the fact that she is a lesbian, as long as it is done with respect.

pooltchr
10-15-2004, 09:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr>
In this case, I don't believe it is out of line to mention her, and the fact that she is a lesbian, as long as it is done with respect. <hr /></blockquote>

Rich..My problem is that the comment was not necesary or even relevent to the question. I think he just wanted to see if he could say "lesbian" on live tv!
This whole campaign is getting way too sleazy...this one just went way overboard.
While on the topic, If I hear either Edwards or Kerry say "We have a plan" again without explaining what the plan is or how they will pay for it, I think I'm going to explode! I see very little substance in their campaign, just a lot of complaining about how things have been done, and how they can do so much better.

Rich R.
10-15-2004, 01:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> While on the topic, If I hear either Edwards or Kerry say "We have a plan" again without explaining what the plan is or how they will pay for it, I think I'm going to explode! I see very little substance in their campaign, just a lot of complaining about how things have been done, and how they can do so much better. <hr /></blockquote>
Steve, I think this is normal politics.
I haven't heard any politician say anything of substance in at least 25 years. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Rich R.
10-15-2004, 01:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> While on the topic, If I hear either Edwards or Kerry say "We have a plan" again without explaining what the plan is or how they will pay for it, I think I'm going to explode! I see very little substance in their campaign, just a lot of complaining about how things have been done, and how they can do so much better. <hr /></blockquote>
Steve, I think this is normal politics.
I haven't heard any politician say anything of substance in at least 25 years. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

pooltchr
10-15-2004, 01:59 PM
[quote=Rich R.
Steve, I think this is normal politics.
I haven't heard any politician say anything of substance in at least 25 years. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif <hr /></blockquote>

Rich...A point well taken! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Popcorn
10-15-2004, 03:09 PM
I would wonder if Edward's would think it was OK if say a question about health care came up and Chaney was asked what he thinks is the problem with health care in this country.

He could answer that "One of the biggest problems is the poor state of health of people and the self inflicted health issues due to life style that is taxing the health care system. Case in point, obese Americans such as Mrs. Edward's". I think he would get punched.

Nostroke
10-15-2004, 04:28 PM
If Mrs Edwards constantly referred to herself as an obese American and had worked as a liason to the "Obese American Community" would it still be out of line?

Popcorn
10-15-2004, 04:50 PM
The only reason the comment was made was, just in case someone does not know, they wanted to be sure they did, no other reason. Lets face it, Kerry is a piece of dirt and Edward's is a political nobody who brings nothing to the ticket. What a joke on the American public this pair is. The real tragedy is, in a country like this, this group, and I mean on both sides, is the best we can do for presidential candidates?

dg-in-centralpa
10-15-2004, 05:19 PM
I think Cheney showed more class in his response to Edwards than Edwards will ever have.

DG - wondering why Edwards is on the ticket when Kerry ridiculed him in the Democratic race

Keith Talent
10-15-2004, 07:46 PM
No matter how cheesy it might have been to bring up Cheney's daughter, why is it suddenly such a big deal NOW, but not when Edwards said it, or when Alan Keyes ripped her in Old Testament fashion a few weeks ago?

Why??? ... because in the debate Bush was made to look like the sorry doofus he is once again, and starting up this phony political brushfire is a way to distract the media and voters from the reality of W's incompetence.

So, who's using whom by making a big deal out of Mary Cheney all of a sudden?

Fair_Play
10-15-2004, 08:26 PM
Reference the remark made by Kerry:

Members of the audience could be seen wincing in reaction to Kerry's words. I do not think they were wincing because they saw what Kerry said as something to admire, not in the least.

The reaction of the audience was not applause, nor smiles, nor nods of approval. If one cannot understand that, well, one cannon understand. Not one or two people in the hall, the entire audience.

As it was of some media interest, the clip was shown quite a few times. To listen to the phrasing of Kerry, to note the hesitation, and the strain in his voice - he was awkward and hesitant. Why would that be? He is noted for being a skilled orator. It does not take one much thought to see why he was awkward. He was taking a cheap shot, and he knew it. This was a gratuitous attack, not necessary, and not to the point of the question he was asked. It was an oviously and very cheap shot.

You believe in coincidence, uh huh. Coincidence that Edwards made the same 'gaffe'? And coincidence for the Kerry campaign manager to dismiss the incident by saying that Cheney's daughter was 'fair game'. Watching her, Kerry's campaign manager, after she made that statement was to see a face that did not look proud, did not smile, looked very uncomfortable, frowning. Why? Shooting at 'fair game' should be, well, a good thing, something to smile about, not to produce a frown.

Fair game is something you shoot at, for a reason, and Kerry's campaign used their biggest two guns to shoot with. Coldly, and with deadly calculation. This attack was planned simply for political gain. And then their campaign manager had the unmitigated gall to state that Mary Cheney was 'fair game'? This had to have been discussed, and planned, it was too ready a comment for her to make otherwise, esp. after Edwards had done the same.

If this is no big deal to you, well, then that is who you are, and shows. by extension, how you might react should something like this happen to one of your loved ones.

Go ahead and admire Kerry's deed, his words, all you like. Do not bother to wonder why the explanation he now gives sounds phony, makes no sense, simply because it makes no sense, and IS phony. Have a yuck, and yuck it up.

Fair Play

Qtec
10-15-2004, 10:05 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Activist accuses GOP of 'attacking gays'
Head of gay GOP group Log Republicans lashes out



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The head of the nation's largest gay and lesbian Republican group slammed fellow Republicans Friday for "feigning outrage" over comments by Sen. John Kerry, and called on President Bush to "stop attacking gay families on the campaign trail."

Patrick Guerriero, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said Democratic presidential nominee Kerry was "not wise" to refer to the daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney during the answer to a question about homosexuality during a presidential debate Wednesday night. (Special Report: America Votes 2004, the debates)

But he said Republicans "who are expressing outrage at the debate comments really have been outrageous themselves."

"The reality is the type of outrage that is being expressed by some Republicans should be expressed at themselves. They've decided to use gay families as wedge issues across America in swing states -- that is truly outrageous," he told CNN's "American Morning."

<hr /></blockquote>


The question asked was;

[ QUOTE ]
On Wednesday night, moderator Bob Schieffer of CBS asked Bush and Kerry whether they believe homosexuality is a choice.

Bush said he did not know. <font color="blue"> So he thinks it is a possibility that DC,s daughter CHOOSE to be gay!!!!! </font color>

Kerry said, "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."

<hr /></blockquote>

All kerry is saying is,
"if you want to know why people are gay George, just ask a gay person.There is one pretty close to you. "

I wonder how many married men who come'out'would say "I just fancied a change".


If Kerry had left out the "who is a lesbian"line, it would have been ok.That wasnt neccessary.Then again, there are probably many people in the US who dont know that she is gay.
I dont think any malice was intended. But thats JMO.

At least he answered the question, which is more than Bush did.

Q

Alfie
10-15-2004, 10:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> It is not like nobody knew.
This has been in and out of the news for a long time. IIRC, Cheney's daughter is an activist for gay rights.

In this case, I don't believe it is out of line to mention her, and the fact that she is a lesbian, as long as it is done with respect. <hr /></blockquote>I agree. This is small potatoes really. Let's move on to the next big outrage.

Ross
10-15-2004, 11:01 PM
I also think it was a cheap shot and did not really fit into the debate. I winced when Edwards said it and I winced again when Kerry said it. My cynical guess is that Kerry's campaign people said that pointing this out would help get out the gay vote. I'm guessing they also thought it might help Kerry since it would "tar" Cheney with the same gay-friendly brush that Repubs were trying to use against Kerry in WV and elsewhere.

It's not as bad as Repubs out-and-out lie telling WV citizens that Kerry would ban the bible, but it still was not right.

However, while it doesn't show a lot of integrity, I'm not sure it was a strategic mistake. Varying degrees of reprehensible vote manipulation behaviors often pay in politics. Repub operatives gave Bush a big boost in his 1999 nomination race by phoning voters to tell them McCain "had a black baby." It was despicable but it worked - McCain got crushed in SC and it ended his nomination hopes. In this case Kerry's operatives may have correctly guessed that more was gained by identifying with the gay vote (10-15% of the US is gay) than would be lost since it would mainly piss off conservatives who weren't going to vote for Kerry anyway. Just like Bush knew the anti-gay marriage admendment would go nowhere and piss off liberals but also endear him to the far right enough to get them out to vote.

I still think it was a cheap shot, though. So there, Highsea, Wally, Pooltchr and others, I do agree with you sometimes, as much as it pains me. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Fair_Play
10-15-2004, 11:54 PM
Hello Ross,

Good post, sir!

My reaction (wince) was in sync with yours.

What hurts my sensibilities, perhaps even more, quoting you: " <font color="blue"> It's not as bad as Repubs out-and-out lie telling WV citizens that Kerry would ban the bible, but it still was not right. </font color> " <font color="red"> Talk about Reprehensible!!! </font color>


Ross, I had not heard that, and while I would normally be reluctant to believe it, I do not doubt it for a moment because you have proven to be a straight up guy.

Totally freaking incredible. I do hope that statement was the property of some gene deficient subhuman who chokes on his own puke, the sooner the better.

Whew, now I feel just a little (very little) better.

It just burns when things like this happen. It runs one into the repeated realization that life is not always fair.

Excuse the rant, but <font color="blue"> fairness </font color> and politeness should be a tad more prevalent, IMO. ( <font color="blue"> typed with a straight face! </font color> ) /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

All the Best to you and to yours,

Fair Play

nhp
10-16-2004, 03:01 AM
Can someone please explain to me why noting that someone else's daughter is a lesbian in a respecful fashion is an attack, or is distasteful? Is Cheney ashamed that his daughter is a lesbian? The world already knows. When Edwards mentioned it, Cheney seemed very pleased. This was no attack, and there was no intention of an attack, it's not like she was the butt of a joke. I think the Cheney's are too sensitive.

eg8r
10-16-2004, 07:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone please explain to me why noting that someone else's daughter is a lesbian in a respecful fashion is an attack, or is distasteful? <hr /></blockquote> I guess this is an interpretation issue. For some unknown reason you thought it was tasteful for Kerry (and Edwards) to mention it.

[ QUOTE ]
When Edwards mentioned it, Cheney seemed very pleased. <hr /></blockquote> This I don't believe is an interpretation issue, I just don't think you were paying much attention. Cheney was obviously not happy about it since he did not offer anything except thank you. He did not even bother to address the question. Edwards fell flat on his face on that one.

[ QUOTE ]
I think the Cheney's are too sensitive. <hr /></blockquote> I think they have acted quite admirably about the whole issue. I remember the dems telling everyone to quit talking about Clinton and Monica, simply on the basis that it was a personal affair, I guess the dems have flip flopped on this issue also (Cons have also).

Since I have never had to deal with a situation like the VP, I really don't know how I would have reacted. It appears you would not mind were you in the VP's position. Doesn't really matter, different things matter different people tick, it is a great thing. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

eg8r
10-16-2004, 07:36 AM
[ QUOTE ]
On Wednesday night, moderator Bob Schieffer of CBS asked Bush and Kerry whether they believe homosexuality is a choice.

Bush said he did not know. <font color="blue"> So he thinks it is a possibility that DC,s daughter CHOOSE to be gay!!!!! </font color>

<hr /></blockquote> You are wrong. His statement in ABSOLUTELY NO WAY means he thinks it is a possiblity. All he is saying is that he does not know. This might be one of the times to say he is not bright enough stand up for what he believes and state matter-of-factly that, yes it is a choice.

This is definitely another short-coming, the other being gov't spending. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

Wally_in_Cincy
10-16-2004, 07:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote nhp:</font><hr> Can someone please explain to me why noting that someone else's daughter is a lesbian in a respecful fashion is an attack, or is distasteful? .... <hr /></blockquote>

It was gratuitous, by Kerry and Edwards.

Ross
10-16-2004, 10:07 AM
FP, thanks for the kind words. Here is what I found on the "liberals (Kerry) want to take away your bibles" campaign carried out in both WV and Arkansas. This occurred less than a month ago, by the way. The leaflets did a little gay-marriage fear mongering as well:

( http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/24/politics/campaign/24bible.html?ex=1253764800&amp;en=e610b7f6cc429a67&amp;ei= 5090&amp;partner=rssuserland )

Republicans Admit Mailing Campaign Literature Saying Liberals Will Ban the Bible
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Published: September 24, 2004

The Republican Party acknowledged yesterday sending mass mailings to residents of two states warning that "liberals" seek to ban the Bible. It said the mailings were part of its effort to mobilize religious voters for President Bush.

The mailings include images of the Bible labeled "banned" and of a gay marriage proposal labeled "allowed." A mailing to Arkansas residents warns: "This will be Arkansas if you don't vote." A similar mailing was sent to West Virginians.

A liberal religious group, the Interfaith Alliance, circulated a copy of the Arkansas mailing to reporters yesterday to publicize it. "What they are doing is despicable,'' said Don Parker, a spokesman for the alliance. "They are playing on people's fears and emotions."

In an e-mail message, Christine Iverson, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, confirmed that the party had sent the mailings.

"When the Massachusetts Supreme Court sanctioned same-sex marriage and people in other states realized they could be compelled to recognize those laws, same-sex marriage became an issue,'' Ms. Iverson said. "These same activist judges also want to remove the words 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance."

The mailing is the latest evidence of the emphasis Republicans are putting on motivating conservative Christian voters to vote this fall. But as the appeals become public, they also risk alienating moderate and swing voters.

An editorial on Sept. 22 in The Charleston Gazette in West Virginia, for example, asked, "Holy Moley! Who concocts this gibberish?"

"Most Americans see morality more complexly," the editorial said. "Many think a higher morality is found in Christ's command to help the needy, prevent war and pursue other humanitarian goals. Churchgoers of this sort aren't likely to believe childish allegations that Democrats want to ban the Bible."

In statement, Senator John Edwards, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, said President Bush "should condemn the practice immediately and tell everyone associated with the campaign to never use tactics like this again."

Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, called the mailings an ugly contrast to Mr. Bush's public statements. Although the president has called for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, he often emphasizes the need for tolerance as well.

"The president takes more or less the high road and his henchman and allies on the right have been let loose to conduct these ugly, divisive smear campaigns," Mr. Foreman said. "It is wedge politics at its worst."

In any event, the Bush campaign appears confident about its religious appeal.

The mailing seeks to appeal to conservative evangelical Protestant pastors and political leaders who say they worry that legal rights for same-sex couples could lead to hate-crimes laws that could be applied against sermons of Bible passages criticizing homosexuality.

Conservative Christian political commentators often cite the case of Ake Green, a minister in Sweden who was jailed in June for a month for a sermon denouncing gays as sinful.

Mr. Parker, of the Interfaith Alliance, said, "I think it is laughable to think that someone could be arrested for reading out loud from the Bible.''

But Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, argued, "We have the First Amendment in this country which should protect churches, but there is no question that this is where some people want to go, that reading from the Bible could be hate speech."

Still, Mr. Land questioned the assertion that Democrats might ban the whole Bible. "I wouldn't say it," he said. "I would think that is probably stretching it a bit far."

Qtec
10-16-2004, 11:04 AM
No way egor.
[ QUOTE ]
Bob Schieffer of CBS asked Bush and Kerry whether they believe homosexuality is a choice <hr /></blockquote>
Being gay is either a choice or it isnt!
If GW says he doesnt know, how can he exclude the possibility that it isnt a choice? If you dont know, then it could be. GW doesnt know!

Q

Wally_in_Cincy
10-16-2004, 11:07 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr>In an e-mail message, Christine Iverson, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, confirmed that the party had sent the mailings.

"When the Massachusetts Supreme Court sanctioned same-sex marriage and people in other states realized they could be compelled to recognize those laws, same-sex marriage became an issue,'' Ms. Iverson said. "These same activist judges also want to remove the words 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance."


<hr /></blockquote>

Ross,

The RNC was simply engaging in a bit of good-natured hyperbole, don't you think?

/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Wally &lt;~~ j/k, not a purple kool-aid drinker, almost but not quite /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Wally_in_Cincy
10-16-2004, 11:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
Being gay is either a choice or it isnt!
If GW says he doesnt know, how can he exclude the possibility that it isnt a choice? If you dont know, then it could be. GW doesnt know!

Q <hr /></blockquote>

Huh?

silverbullet
10-16-2004, 12:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Popcorn:</font><hr> . The real tragedy is, in a country like this, this group, and I mean on both sides, is the best we can do for presidential candidates? <hr /></blockquote>

tap tap

eg8r
10-16-2004, 01:56 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If GW says he doesnt know, how can he exclude the possibility that it isnt a choice? <font color="red"> This is BS and you know it. This is illogical and it does not surprise me that you are the one posting it. </font color> If you dont know, then it could be. <font color="red"> However, it does not mean there could be, simply because he cannot answer. You are being ridiculous. </font color> GW doesnt know! <font color="red"> No kidding Sherlock, he is the one that said it first. </font color>
<hr /></blockquote> eg8r

Nostroke
10-16-2004, 05:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> No way egor.
&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Bob Schieffer of CBS asked Bush and Kerry whether they believe homosexuality is a choice <hr /></blockquote>
Being gay is either a choice or it isnt!
If GW says he doesnt know, how can he exclude the possibility that it isnt a choice? If you dont know, then it could be. GW doesnt know!

Q <hr /></blockquote>

That is so cut and dried- I cant believe the responses.

TomBrooklyn
10-25-2004, 04:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr>The thread is gone. WTF? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>Someone has taken to deleting threads here. I assume it's some admin person. Makes coming here a lot less fun.

TomBrooklyn
10-25-2004, 04:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> I also think it was a cheap shot <hr /></blockquote>So are you and those who expressed similar views, saying that Lesbianism is something to be ashamed of?