Of course.
But the point wasn’t just “Homosexuals don’t choose their orientation.” It was “Homosexuals don’t choose their orientation and those people want to punish them for it. Even if it’s their own daughter”
Everyone likes have someone below them on the ladder - it’s been that way all through history.
-Joe
Sure, Kerry could have mentioned another gay public figure. He could have mentioned Barney Frank.
And then how would the Republicans react? “Oh, Barney Frank. Like I’m supposed to take Barney Frank as an example of a decent gay person. Barney Frank.”
If Kerry wanted to use an actual gay public figure, it had to be someone on the Republican side. Otherwise, his entire argument can be shot down by small-minded people who would claim that the gay person in question is obviously corrupt and wrong-headed simply because he or she is associated with the other side.
To put it another way, many Republicans make jokes and laugh at Barney Frank’s expense. How does using Barney Frank as an example of a decent gay person make any sense if a whole group of people wouldn’t think Barney Frank is a decent person even if he were straight?
I think the decent thing for Kerry to do is apologize for mentioning here, stating that he did not mean any ill intent and that he only mentioned her as an example that gays can come in any family. If the Cheneys are genuinely upset, then give them the benefit of the doubt and apologize. Personally, I think they’re only acting upset in order to detract attention from Bush’s pathetic performance in the debates. They want any excuse for Kerry to be on the carpet. But this has gone on long enough, let’s bury it.
Well, I also think Kerry would be wise to apologize simply because two days later, it’s the only thing anyone in the news is talking about wrt to that debate. I don’t think it does Kerry any good to have this as a live news item.
Cheney’s non-reaction to that far more obnoxious incident (baseless speculation about what he may have done in private being given all the weight it is due) cements my judgment that he’s putting on a show of indignation for the rubes.
Patrick Guerriero, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, believes it’s political grandstanding by the Cheneys and other Republicans.
eris, your comment about Cheney
made me giggle out loud. Cheney … polite? I don’t think so.
Of course it is political pandering all around. Duh.
Who is listening?
The decideds to rah rah their guy. An aside that points out that Cheney’s daughter is gay will not effect their votes. On either side.
The very few undecideds. Some of them with conservative leanings. Some of them can be swayed on this, and the more they can identify the better. Some may be morally against the gay lifestyle and gay marriage themselves, but identifiy with the fact that they have family members who are gay, or suspect that they do, anyway. It normalizes gay issues in that they touch “even the most morally upstanding” of families, even families within this administration. It portrays advocating for some civil partnership rights much akin to marriage (even if called another name) as something not only effecting those who live in San Francisco, but in each of our own small towns and families … that effects not only the stereotyped them but the us - me and mine, as well. Even if they are still against gay rights, thinking about it effecting one of their own children can make them understand why you don’t have to be “a liberal from Massachussuts” to want civil unions.
That’s what Kerry gets out of it. Trying to get across that advocating for gay rights is not pandering to a liberal agenda for a few, but is something that touches many of us.
Cheney? His faux outrage also targets those few. Presidents shouldn’t hit below the belt; they have running mates and Swift Boat veterens to play dirty for them. (no point in objecting to Edwards saying it; he and Cheney are expected to be attack dogs.) Presidential canidates profit by not being percieved as fighting dirty themselves. This is a small chance to portray Kerry as someone not up to acting Presidential. It’s no “Yeeeehah” growl of Dean, but with Kerry it is the worst they’ll get out him. Make hay with what you got to work with. If a few voters think less of Kerry for the perception that he went across some line, then that’s a few voters. They could be the ones this time too.
“Sounds like one of those … exaggerations.”
Out of curiosity, who do you consider to be “anyone in the news”? Fox and MSNBC only? We’ve had to call you out for similar blanket statements from you before, ya know.
Seems to me that most of what I’ve heard about the debate, from sources I would certainly consider to be “news”, is Bush’s silly denial that he’d ever said he wasn’t concerned about Osama.
So why is Cheney mad about the mentions of his [cue Jon Stewart shouting] GAY DAUGHTER[/JS]? He has to explain how his ticket supports a measure to take basic civil rights away from a member of his own family. The anger may be a feint to deter such embarrassing questions. I don’t know if he genuinely supports Bush’s amendment, but if he does, then we’re just witnessing the kind of emotional turmoil that forces introspection and eventually changes attitudes.
Not really. Say “the most talked about item” if you prefer.
There’s a front page artilce on this in my paper today (San Jose Mercury News), and I’ve had CNN on most of the morning and it’s the most repeated story about the campaign. As I write this, it’s the lead-in topic for Crossfire.
And did you notice that this thread is the only active thread in GD related to the 3rd debate? Even the enlightened Dopers are talking about this more than any other topic from that debate. 
… and that initiated a whispering campaign during the 1994 gubernatorial race in Texas that Ann Richards is a lesbian. Talk about hypocritical.
Apologize?
Kerry?
Those two words refuse to share the same line of text.
I buy that. The inexplicable stupidity of the whole incident was bothering me a lot, for some reason. I feel much better now. That’s what words of wisdom suppose to do, bring consolation and relief. What is your name again? Oh, that makes sense…
There, fixed that for ya.
Somehow, the notion that Kerry should apologize for calling Mary Cheney “a child of God” strikes me as being so stupid that only a die-hard Bush-votin’ Republican can make it.
Bob’s secret is out!! 
[Moderator Hat ON]
rjung, DON’T fake quote people to make it appear they said something they didn’t!
[Moderator Hat OFF]
Actually, John, my extended family is large enough to have a few gays and indeed it does. But not myself. But like the Cheneys, I don’t care if they like girls, boys, or barnyard animals. Live and let live.
Was I unlcear about what I was getting at? I meant that, according to rjung, you must be a "die-hard Bush-votin’ Republican ".
** John Mace:**
Not me! 
The thread I’ve been most involved in has been about Mammy!
Sorry, I thought it was obvious that wasn’t the original quote.
Eh, he was probably just tryin’ ta appease y’all.
I misunderstood. I thought you were intimating I was gay, which wouldn’t have bothered me. But to accuse me of voting for Bush, why them’s fightin’ words!