Yes, homosexuality and politics here. But I’m just looking for opinions not a debate.
In response to the homosexuality question in D#3, Kerry invoked the image of a high profile lesbian who just happened to be the VP’s daughter. I keep hearing headlines saying what a major mess Kerry got himself into by saying what he said - but that’s the only place I hear it.
Kerry did not drag Mary Cheney into the campaign. She is already deeply involved in the campaign. But mom and dad both seem incensed. I get the impression that they still have major issues with their daughter and still aren’t comfortable with/haven’t accepted her sexuality. Likewise for most of the republicans who are crying foul at Kerry’s remarks.
Thumbs down at the Cheneys. They didn’t care when Keyes® called her a selfish heodnist.
And no one is asking Mary what she thinks. From a friend:
[ul]
[my husband] was just telling me that CNN just showed part of a “town hall” type meeting in which Cheney’s other daughter was going on and on about how hurtful Kerry’s comment about Mary was, and the moderator asked if Mary herself was hurt/did the other sis talk to Mary, and the respponse was basically, “I stand by what I said. It was very hurtful to the family.”[/ul]
Well, this morning on Today, Katie Couric brought up the fact that perhaps it had something to do with the three major polls showing Kerry winning the last debate. She insinuated that the Republicans were nitpicking on this in an attempt to draw attention away from the real issues. Interesting point, I thought.
I’d sure love to know why Elizabeth was hurt by somebody calling her sister “one of God’s children” and “a lesbian”. Sound like she’s ashamed of her own sister.
I just watched the director of the Log Cabin Republicans talk about this. He said Kerry’s comments were “not wise” but he directed much more indignation towards Rove and company who have really tried to use the gay family issue as a political wedge in this campaign.
That should read a simple honest woman who just happens to be the daughter of a vice-president. It may come as a surprise to you but most people do not define themselves by their sexual orientation.
She chooses to keep a low profile. Kerry did not respect that choice.
She has deliberately avoided taking a political position on gay issues. Kerry had no right to invoke her name as a representative of the gay community.
Yes Mary Cheney is involved in the campaign to support her father, but not in a public way. I still don’t think I’ve ever seen a picture of her or heard her voice. She’s never said a word publicly about Kerry. Thats the way SHE wanted it and Kerry should have respected that.
I believe that Mrs. Edwards said something about Mary’s choice or lifestyle (after the debate). I don’t think she should have used that terminology. In my opinion, and I thought this was the point that the Democratic candidates were trying to make, being a homosexual is not a choice but simply something you are. Either you are straight or gay; you don’t wake up one morning and say to yourself, “Hmmm…I think I want to be gay from this day forward! At least I’m going to give it a try!”
Everyone should just leave Mary alone. That being said, I have no earthly idea why she would work for the Republican Party. I mean, I know she loves her dad and all, but geez!
We don’t have to–lots of other people, most notably the GOP, are happy to define us solely by our sexual orientation. Have you paid zero attention during this campaign. Gay folks are being used as the new boogieman to scare the voters into supporting Bush.
But she has taken a political position on gay issues–she is working for the party that wishes to suppress civil rights for gay Americans. As Jayjay pointed out in another thread, we will permit folks to stay in the closet until they help demonize their fellow gays to get in good with the hetero supremacists.
Nope, as long as the Bush team try to show that gay folks are the Othr, the Alien, it is only fit that the Kerry team show that there are homos in the woodpile on the Bush/Cheney side.
I think it was okay for Edwards to mention her in his debate since the moderator did it first. I think Kerry should have left her out of it but I don’t think what he said was hurtful or a huge gaffe on his part either. I agree that it’s just an example of how the Bush camp tries to deflect focus from the actual issues.
Here’s what I posted in another thread, which didn’t seem to get much traction:
I’d like to know what people’s opinions of Kerry’s mention of Dick Cheney’s daughter are. There’s currently an AP article where Cheney expresses some outrage. Personally, I think he has a right to be angry - Kerry’s quote just doesn’t resemble what he’s now saying it means:
Something just doesn’t parse correctly.
It was a poor, out-of-place question, so I don’t fault either candidate for an awkward response. But Kerry’s debate quote says nothing about families, or the Cheneys. The mention of Mary Cheney just seems forcefully shoehorned into his comment. I dunno.
I doubt that. All inside accounts say that the Cheneys are very accepting to Mary and her partner, but that they hate to see her reduced to a sexual orientation, or a debate trump card.
In her home state of Wyoming, Mary worked as the liaison between Coors Brewing Co. and the national gay and lesbian community, and was interviewed by the lesbian magazine Girlfriends, at the time her father was in the U.S. Senate. She later served on the advisory board of the Republican Unity Coalition, a gay-straight alliance, while her father was Vice President. So in that sense, she was, yes, say it with me, both “high profile” and a “representative” of the gay and lesbian community.
In 1981, when Mary was only 12, her mother Lynne Cheney wrote a historical novel Sisters, about pioneer women in Wyoming. It included a positive portrayal of a lesbian couple:
Kerry used her as a weapon, per se, knowing the Cheneys would get bent out of shape. In that sense, I think he was wrong; no one likes being a pawn. I feel sorry for her. I mean, geez…her family is acting insulted. They should have kept their mouths shut instead of carrying on about what a bad man Kerry is. We know the Cheneys are against who their daughter is, or they would be working for the other side. But it’s got to hurt to see them wailing like someone shot them, when all Kerry did was mention that she’s gay.
Pretty simple, really. **One candidate used the other’s child for political gain. ** Regardless of the “label”, it’s taboo. Resultant can of worms aside, Kerry was wrong to have done this.
Mary Cheney was instrumental in ending a 20-year boycott by the gay community of Coors. Gay groups had long boycotted the company because the Coors family bankrolled conservative, anti-gay causes. But by funneling Coors’ money to gay-sponsored festivals and events, and travelling across the country to reassure bar owners that the company’s views on gays had changed, Mary Cheney by all accounts did well.
My problem with the comment was that it was entirely needless. Who was it for? [ul][li]It wasn’t for the miniscule portion of the population who didn’t know that Mary Cheney is gay. Why should they care?[/li][li]It wasn’t for the far right wing. They know who Mary Cheney is, and if they’re not going to vote for Bush?cheney because of it, they made that choice long ago.[/li][li]It isn’t for the left wing. They’re not voting Bush. If they didn’t know that Mary Cheney is gay, was that revelation supposed to do, reinforce their position that Bush is not their candidate of choice?[/li][li]It wasn’t for the undecided, because those who remain undecided at this late date aren’t terribly likely to make a candidate choice based on gay-rights grounds and even if they are, the news that Mary Cheney is a lesbian (if they didn’t know) alone wasn’t enough.[/ul][/li]
He name-checked her because he could. (The same way he keeps quoting John McCain and using his name at every opportunity, even though McCain has campaigned for and endorsed President Bush.) It was a weird, inexplicably futile attempt at embarrassing someone, I suppose, though I don’t know who. (In thinking on it, I think it says something fairly significant about Kerry that he’d use sexual orientation as a means to that end, but that’s neither here nor there.) I’m bothered, though, by Kerry saying things just because he can. It shows a disconnect between thought and speech that is far from presidential.