Cheney Daughter Remark

[dougrhess]

Look folks. Here's the facts:
1. She's openly gay.
2. The VP mentions her to make policy points.
3. She's held high profile corporate jobs working on gay marketing issues.
4. She's a political figure working on Cheney's campaign.
5. What Kerry said was nice, unless you think being gay is somehow bad in which case you see it like bringing up a  drinking problem or something.
6. I was in gay bar when Kerry said that and people cheered. Gays are at least 4 percent of the vote, Kerry needs to get the 25 percent that voted for Bush so he gave an answer that part of his base wants to hear. He probably didn't expect the response from Lynne Cheney considering her husbands response to a similar comment in his debate, but she's a nutcase.

Get over it. She's here, she's queer and her mom is a wacko (have you seen Cheney's "novels"?).

[dougrhess]

I wouldn't bring an opponent's family member into it or even comment about it. I just wouldn't go there. I think it was not a good choice of words on his part.

But was it fair for Cheney then? I mean come on, here's a fairly rabid presidency that is anti-gay and the VP has a openly gay high level staff member.  I haven't heard anybody in the gay community complaining about this yet.

[dougrhess]

If the person brings up family first in the middle of a discussion, then it is ok for the other person to comment on the family.  Cheney was not on stage with Kerry, so therefore it was not ok for Kerry to mention his family.

It is just that simple.

Please. That seems a little bit too post hoc of a ruling to me. Cheney didn't mind when Edwards brought it up.  Lynn Cheney has always acted a little wacko on this issue. Maybe this will help bring to light her past on this and her strange behavior in government, too.

[dougrhess]

My memory is imperfect and fading.. but...

Kerry's first wife suffered from depression if I recall.

In the context of a question related to health care, would it have been "correct" for Bush to say..

"Senator, since your ex-wife suffered from depression, you know what I speak of when I say..blah...blah about mental health...."

A perfect point no one has responded to

Still waiting

Simple. Is his ex-wife in politics and public life? Are medical records really the same at sexual orientation? Only if you think it's sick or shameful. Come on. Gay people thought it was fine, it's only some wishwashy or homophobe republicans that are bothered, and some queasy straight people who don't want to think about it or hear the L word.

Answered you?

[dougrhess]

Washington Post:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also, Kerry had to distance himself in Iowa from a Mary Beth Cahill comment that Mary was "fair game" in the campaign. Kerry said he disagreed with her characterization. The funny part? John Edwards called Mary "fair game" politically, too!

Intentional political stunt and refusal to take accountability by the esteemed Senator from Massachutes

Look, Mary Cheney used to do public relations to the gay community for Coors. If she's willing to use her sexual orientation in a business position and bring her partner to events, she's obviously not only not closeted, but views it as just who she is. The only people who are upset are people who are quesy about it.  If it was somehow "rude" wouldn't gays be up in arms??

Heck, Adrew Sullivan agrees: http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php

(Oh, Vorlan, still waiting....)

[dougrhess]

No democrats didn't like it when people like Rush called Chelsea a dog.  An obese child, generally, has a medical problem.  It would be wrong to call somebody's kid a tub of lard, that is an insult.  Lesbian is not a dirty word it is an accepted discription of a woman that has homosexual relationships.  It shouldn't be a big deal.  Who cares...she's a lesbian, good for her.

According to Washington Post 64% think it was inapporiate. Sounds about right; in this country we've got 35%-40% far left that think this is fine.  35%-40% far right, who will think it's wrong.  That leaves 20%-30% who are moderate.  At 64%, the moderates have spoken and spoken rather loudly

It's a thin opinion, it will change with time when they see the how hypocritical the Cheney conduct is. Also, just because people don't want to hear the word lesbian doesn't mean it shouldn't be discussed. It was, after all, a question about gays.

[dougrhess]

Washington Post:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also, Kerry had to distance himself in Iowa from a Mary Beth Cahill comment that Mary was "fair game" in the campaign. Kerry said he disagreed with her characterization. The funny part? John Edwards called Mary "fair game" politically, too!

Intentional political stunt and refusal to take accountability by the esteemed Senator from Massachutes

Look, Mary Cheney used to do public relations to the gay community for Coors. If she's willing to use her sexual orientation in a business position and bring her partner to events, she's obviously not only not closeted, but views it as just who she is. The only people who are upset are people who are quesy about it.  If it was somehow "rude" wouldn't gays be up in arms??

Heck, Adrew Sullivan agrees: http://www.andrewsullivan.com/index.php

(Oh, Vorlan, still waiting....)

Do you really believe that if Edwards had a lesbian daughter and Bush had brought that up in the answer, it wouldn't have been a firestorm?

That would be a real hard sell

It might have been a firestorm, but from the right, not the left. Jeez. I mean KandE aren't bringing it up to taunt, if anything they bring it up to neutralize the anti-gay bashing of Bush.

[dougrhess]

But it doesn't mean you have to mention one particular lesbian-- the out-of-the-limelight daughter of your opponent.

She's NOT out of the limelight! 

[dougrhess]

And another thing.  Isn't it funny that the media constantly complains that modern American political discourse has largely become devoid of real substance, and yet in a presidential debate they end up obsessing about candidate's facial expressions and remarks like Kerry's that have very little to do with substance?  Maybe I'm taking a cheap shot at the media here, but it seems they fuel the "vacuous debate" fire as much as any innate public demand for such material.

I agree the media is partly to blame. That and the use of tv advertising. However, I'm not sure when it was that substance counted....

[dougrhess]

Whether it was right or wrong for Kerry to make the remark is immaterial.  What is important is: 1) whether the story has legs, 2) whether a substantial proportion of likely voters believe it was a low blow, and 3) whether those voters who believe it was a low blow will be decisively influenced by the event when they cast their vote. 

So far the answers seems to be: 1) yes, 2) yes (see quoted ABC poll) and 3) unknown at this time.  I still tend to be skeptical about whether this will truly have any effect (as the DUI story did in 2000), but I didn't think the story would have legs either .

This was an intentional political stunt that backfired.  It continues again today, Kerry suggesting Bush's policies could lead to a draft.  THe party that introduced that into the debate was the DEMOCRAT's.  Bush said an empathic NO.  Kerry and the Dem's keep bringing it up.  Let's decide this election on the characther issue that when Bush takes a position he means it and when Kerry takes on it's something you can be sure of.  

It won't have legs. The democrats didn't introduce it into the debate is was some kind of rumor, understandably, among the young. Plus, there is a "back door draft" going on which is related. It also brings home the truth that Rice/Cheney/Wolfowitz, et al., completely miscalculated.

[dougrhess]

I think both Edwards and Kerry's real motivation for mentioning Cheney's gay daughter was to try to keep any small number of right wing Bush supporters they could from the polls.  Face it, they are in this battle to win at any cost.  If they can keep 10,000 "red neck" Bush supporter from voting in FL (because they react with shock that his VP has a gay daughter), then it is fair game to Kerry/Edwards.  The downside risk for them was probably judged to be less as their core supporters are all fully "enlightened" about homosexuality.  

Off topic, but in the VP debate, one question I thought inappropriate was when the moderator asked Cheney if he was mad at Edwards for making so much money in mal-practice suits (my wording based on my recollection of the thrust of the question).  Recall that Cheney was momentarily flustered before responding.  He should have said, "I don't see how that question properly addresses a substantive issue in this election.  What you really are asking me is what is my position on tort reform."  

Once again, the media failed to keep the campaign debate relevant with this type of question.

At their most devious, it was likely mentioned by K and E to keep the Bush campaign from asking more about gay marriage in the remaining weeks. Afterall, the Rs have used this a wedge issue. It was raised this year just as it was in 1996 and 2000 by the Republicans as a cheap trick to 1) push gay voters to not vote if the Dem supports the anti-gay issue, or 2) remind the Republican right wing base that they are culturally with them.

It can also be seen as an attempt to remind Republican gays of the hypocrisy of voting for people that you may like on taxes, but who are trying to destroy your family. Gays voted 25% for Bush in 2000. I think we'll see much less this time.

[dougrhess]

She's NOT out of the limelight! 

Yes, she is. How many times have you seen her campaigning? It's Liz who is out campaigning.

She's help public affairs posts that traded on her sexual orientation and she's a senior person on her dad's staff. She attends the debates with her partner. Of course, she's not giving speeches. Why? Republican party has a part of its base that is rabidly homophobic. I agree that it is sad that Cheney is willing to sell his daughter's rights (largely) out to this party.

[dougrhess]

Do you understand the distortion of the Kerry/Edwards campaign when they introduced the phrase "back door draft".  You see, you just made my point about Kerry keeps bringing up the draft to distort as part of another cheap political stunt.  A draft is something that used to refer to required service.  Joining the national guard is a choice, it is not required service.  Yes, individuals who voluntarily joined the guard have had their tour of duty extended, that is absolutely nothing to do with a draft.  If you cannot see that Kerry/Edwards have worked this phrase for political purposes to get the Bush associated with a draft.  Cheap political stunts never win elections, America is not that stupid no matter what the party of the "intellectually superior" believe

I think the phrase was brought in by people writing about the military, not the Dems. It is not a draft, but a phrase to capture the feelings of some guard members and their families. Cheap political stunts do win campaigns, look at Bush the Elder and Willie Horton.

[dougrhess]

She's ashamed of her daughter, and angry someone brought her up.

Where are the blind Bush followers going with this?

The GOP wants to gay-bait for social conservative votes, but then they get outraged about Kerry mentioning Cheney's lesbian daughter.

I guess the GOP just wants homosexuals to be invisible as real people and just be a pinata political symbol.

Brilliant summary. That is exactly right!