PDA

View Full Version : There's Something About Mary...


Brandon
Oct 18th, 2004, 02:12 PM
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=17889

Contrary over Mary
GOP social conservatives claim Kerry's comment about Mary Cheney's lesbianism is an attempt to 'suppress traditional-values voters'

by Bill Berkowitz

After more than two decades of unremitting gay-bashing, using gays and lesbians as fund-raising fodder for right wing organizations and candidates, demonizing gays at every turn and, in this election cycle, calling for a constitutional amendment that would deny gays and lesbians the right to marry, conservatives have finally found the outrage. You'll remember that in 1996, the Republican Party’s Presidential candidate, Senator Bob Dole, spent much of his time during the campaign looking for the "outrage." Outraged by Hollywood’s immorality, and outraged by the failure of the nation’s voters to stand behind the GOP’s effort to dump President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, Sen. Dole trucked around the country and demanded to know: "Where’s the outrage?"

It may have taken eight years, but the outrage has finally been outed.

On every cable television news network, in every newspaper, and for all I know, on every street corner in the battleground states, Team Bush’s spokespersons and surrogates are hammering home its message that they are outraged that during the final debate with President George W. Bush, Senator John Kerry dared mention that Mary Cheney -- the daughter of vice president Dick and his wife Lynne -- is a lesbian.

When debate moderator, Bob Schieffer of CBS, asked the president whether he thought homosexuality was a matter of choice, he responded by saying that he wasn’t sure. In his answer Kerry said, "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."

Was Kerry outing Mary Cheney? Was he bashing her for being gay? Was he denigrating the Cheney family? Were his comments too nuanced to be easily understood? Or was he in fact trying to make the common sense and simple point that being gay is not a choice, and that all parents should be proud of who their children are regardless of their sexual orientation?

The Cheney family was livid: Both Dick -- who acknowledged that his daughter is a lesbian several times in the past -- and his wife Lynne, the author of a hot lesbian romance novel several years ago, was outraged. At a post-debate rally in Coraopolis, Pa., she said "I did have a chance to assess John Kerry once more. And the only thing I could conclude is this is not a good man. This is not a good man. And, of course, I am speaking as a mom and a pretty indignant mom. This is not a good man. What a cheap and tawdry political trick."

But the Cheney’s collective outrage doesn’t seem to square with the facts. "In fact," the New York Times reported, "on Aug. 24, as Republicans were drafting their party platform and calling for a constitutional amendment that 'fully protects' the institution of marriage between man and woman, Cheney expressed his affection for his daughter at a rally in Davenport, Iowa, telling a forum that people should be free to enter 'into any kind of relationship they want to.'"

Matthew Dowd, spokesman for the Bush-Cheney campaign, said in a CNN interview that Kerry's remarks were "outrageous."

However, a few weeks ago, when Alan Keyes, the GOP’s African American candidate running against Democrat Barack Obama for the Illinois Senate seat, called Mary Cheney a "selfish hedonist," there wasn’t any outrage from Dick and Lynne Cheney. In late August, Keyes said that since gay couples were unable to have children other than through adoption or insemination, homosexuality was based "on the premise of selfish hedonism." Asked if the "selfish hedonist" label would apply to Mary Cheney, Keyes said "of course" it does. "That goes by definition. Of course she is [a selfish hedonist]."

(Interestingly enough, it appears that the family-values spouting Keyes might have a gay daughter. According to Southern Voice columnist Jennifer Vanasco, strangely enough, Keyes' daughter, Maya, "deferred her admission to Brown University so she can help her father’s campaign. After some initial publicity, the [web log]... where she ruminated about her girlfriend has been stripped of most lesbian references. And she has maintained a public silence.)

Fox News contributor Mort Kondracke reacted to Kerry’s remarks by saying: "I think it was totally underhanded -- the outing of Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter.... And it struck me as a low blow designed to weaken the Bush-Cheney team with right-wingers who might not know that Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter."

Long-time conservative activist Gary Bauer sees Kerry’s comments as a political maneuver aimed at keeping Christian voters at home: "I think it is part of a strategy to suppress traditional-values voters, to knock 1 or 2 percent off in some rural areas by causing people to turn on the president," Bauer said.

In National Review Online, Cesar V. Conda, who was Vice President Dick Cheney's assistant for domestic policy, concurred with Bauer: "In a desperate attempt to win the White House, John Kerry and John Edwards have sunk to practicing the lowest form of politics -- using the personal lives of the other candidates and their family members for political gain. Both John Kerry's and John Edwards's specific mention of the sexual orientation of Vice President Dick Cheney's daughter during the debates was a deliberate and calculated political attempt to suppress religious conservative voters from turning out to the polls for President George W. Bush."

Andrew Sullivan, a longtime gay and mostly conservative activist who has broken with the GOP over its advocacy of an anti-same-sex marriage constitutional amendment, pointed out on his web log that Bauer's response is an example of the GOP’s bigotry and hypocrisy on gay issues: "Bauer believes that his core supporters would be likely to 'turn' on the president just because the vice-president's daughter is a lesbian. Notice that there's no indication of homosexual 'acts', just a revulsion at Mary Cheney's simple identity as a lesbian. This is their base. This is why they're worried."

Speculating about Kerry’s motivation, Sullivan adds: "Some of the subtler arguments I've heard overnight say the following: it's not that homosexuality is wrong; it's just that many people believe that and Kerry therefore exploited their homophobia to gain a point. I don't buy it, but let's assume the worst in Kerry's motives for the sake of argument. What these emailers are saying is that Kerry should hedge what he says in order to cater to the homophobia of Bush's base. Why on earth should he? The truth here is obvious: Bush and Cheney are closet tolerants. They have no problem with gay people personally; but they use hostility to gay people for political purposes, even if it means attacking members of their own families. What they are currently objecting to is the fact that their hypocrisy has been exposed. To which the only answer is: if you don't want to be exposed as a hypocrite, don't be one."

Let's give Marshall Wittman, another longtime conservative activist who worked with Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition, the final word. Wittman sent Sullivan an e-mail that put the "outrage" episode in perspective: "As the former legislative director of the Christian Coalition, I find it hilarious, ironic and shameless that those who have long employed gay bashing as a political tool are feigning their outrage over Kerry's sensitive notation of Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation. This is truly a moment of desperation for the Bushies. On the one hand they are sending out gay bashing mail and on the other hand they are sounding like charter members of the Human Rights Campaign. You've got to laugh!"
----------

Anyone else find it hilarious that the Republican partisans -- as they're sniping about this -- are pretty much admitting that Bush's base is full of bigots?

Immortal Goat
Oct 18th, 2004, 02:17 PM
Moronic Republicans and moronic Democrats should never get together. Kerry could have referenced someone else, and the entire republican party could use their time for more useful activities. Like killing themselves.

Anonymous
Oct 18th, 2004, 02:25 PM
Kerry referenced her to illustrate the differences in the President and Vice Presidents' views on gay marriage and policy. You notice that out of all the people crying about this, Mary Cheney is not one of them.

For them to cry about how 'outrageous' mentioning a specific person in regard to homosexuality is just continues to alienate gays and push the gay & lesbian community further away from their platform. You'd think Kerry had called her a terrorist or something.

kahljorn
Oct 18th, 2004, 02:49 PM
I was thinking about gay marriage the other night....

Satanists can legally get married, as long as they are man and woman. So can buddhists, muslims, hindus, shamans, atheists and stupid scientists like the majority of the people in here. How is that protecting marriage? A union before God in people who don't even believe in God.

HNICPantitude
Oct 18th, 2004, 02:55 PM
Number one - it was inappropriate to be spoken of in the format it was. Kerry's comment was not the comment that irritated Republicans the most. It was Edwards wife claiming Cheyney's wife and he must be "ashamed" of their daughter being a lesbian. Is that the case? Dick Cheyney has mentioned it in public more than once. It was a cheap and devicive shot, and as irresponsible and off-point as the democrats themselves. It solves nothing. It was merely more hatred, which is all democrats of the modern day seem capable of.

glowbelly
Oct 18th, 2004, 03:01 PM
:lol

it isn't the democrats who want to change the constitution to declare who is allowed to love each other and who isn't.

silly man.

it also isn't the democrats who pander to crazy, right wing conservative christians and use stupid shit like gay marriage to SPLIT A POPULATION ON THE PREMISES OF HATE.

mary cheney has been gay for a long, long time. i didn't know it until recently and this was before i heard it mentioned by any of the candidates. i'm glad i know now. i'm glad to know that this woman's father is willing to put his political career before the well being of his own daughter. it makes it a whole hell of a lot easier for me to decide who i am going to vote for on nov 2.

HNICPantitude
Oct 18th, 2004, 03:04 PM
How is it he put his political career ahead of his daughter, who actively campaigns FOR HIM?

glowbelly
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:01 PM
by forcing her to make that kind of decision in the first place.

i wonder who your daughter would pick given the same situation? daddy or herself?

Preechr
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:17 PM
Not all gay people support marriage equality, surprisingly enough.

I'm not saying that Mary falls into that category, but just that it's not as universal even among gays as most people assume.

Either way, I'm pretty sure Mary has parsed out her father's decision and supports him AS WELL AS his boss... I mean, campaigning for Cheney is pretty much campaigning for Bush, no?

Cheney has mentioned it, but only a couple of times and not on TV, so as to make it a non-issue: something he's not hiding from but is private and thus not "fair game."

FS
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:20 PM
ha! ha! ha! @ this.

I love that the whole fact they're upset is about is that he mentioned her. As if it would only be polite to pretend she doesn't exist.

HNICPantitude
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:22 PM
The argument falls on states rights vs. a federal constitutional amendment, which by the way, I oppose - so dont jump on my back. The point I'm making is that is that the democrat's approach was, as usual, tasteless.

Preechr
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:24 PM
It's political gaming on both ends.

Kerry & Edwards smile and say "How nice it is that you have a GAY GAY duaghter, Mr. I'm-OK-with-Shitting-On-Gays" in a nice way after a REPUBLICAN (Alan Keyes) candidate gets away with personally insulting Mary Cheney, followed by this horsecrap (http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-gay17.html).

kellychaos
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:28 PM
Number one - it was inappropriate to be spoken of in the format it was. Kerry's comment was not the comment that irritated Republicans the most. It was Edwards wife claiming Cheyney's wife and he must be "ashamed" of their daughter being a lesbian. Is that the case? Dick Cheyney has mentioned it in public more than once. It was a cheap and devicive shot, and as irresponsible and off-point as the democrats themselves. It solves nothing. It was merely more hatred, which is all democrats of the modern day seem capable of.

As Chojin pointed said, he was merely trying to point out the dfferences between his personal beliefs and the beliefs that he tries to peddle off to his followers. He was called on it. Was it sneaky and mean? Yeah. So what?! Both sides have been running a smear campaign and are equally under-handed. I think that it's pretty pathetic that he can't reconcile the hypocrisy of the two "belief" systems for fear of the fickle and homophobic nature of the support he is trying to garner.

sspadowsky
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:28 PM
How is it he put his political career ahead of his daughter, who actively campaigns FOR HIM?

Pantydude wins the "Rhetorical Question of the Day" award, but not for the reasons he probably thinks.

HNICPantitude
Oct 18th, 2004, 04:33 PM
I'm referring to prioritization, not life-paths.

Stabby
Oct 18th, 2004, 05:34 PM
The point I'm making is that is that the democrat's approach was, as usual, tasteless.

Bullshit. It's an issue in this election isn't it? If it's "okay" to be gay, why are the Republican's so outraged over the mentioning of her name? They didn't say she supported the Democratic position or even gay marriage. Her name was just mentioned alongside the G word and the Repubs are flipping out. So if "being" gay is not what the Repubs are against, why is it a controversy to bring her up?

FS
Oct 18th, 2004, 06:20 PM
I would like to say that I don't find it fair to draw Mary Cheney into the public debate or turn her into the figurehead of an issue. It's not her fault her father's a vampiric demon who drinks dollars, and happens to be comedy sidekick to the man who rules the world.

But the way the Republicans are responding is just hilarious. I bet none of these 'outraged' people could even put into words what they're getting pissed off about.

Brandon
Oct 19th, 2004, 12:08 AM
I'll let Andy Sullivan (http://www.andrewsullivan.com/) say it for me:

We've been inundated these past few days by Republicans bemoaning John Kerry's alleged gay-baiting in this campaign. Bob Novak, Bill Kristol, Bill Safire (whose appalling column today I've just done fisking), the entire NRO crew, and on and on. They've referred to Kerry's comments in clear and bold terms: "indecent," "shameless," "outrageous." I have a simple question. Does anyone have a single leading Republican voice objecting to Republican Senate candidate Jim DeMint's statement that gays should be barred from teaching in public schools? Has any leading conservative criticized the RNC flier claiming that a vote for Kerry would mean banning the Bible and forcing gay marriage on the entire country? Has any leading conservative columnist criticized some of the anti-marriage state amendments because of their vast scope and banning of any protections for gay couples? I noticed that Jay Nordlinger did object to Alan Keyes' description of Mary Cheney as a selfish hedonist. But did Kristol? Or anyone else? The Cheneys ignored it. I'm just trying to be fair here. I'm relieved that Bill Kristol cares so deeply about not demonizing gays. I'd just like to hear of a single instance in which he has said such a thing before. That would get to the core of his sincerity, would it not? Or his sickeningly shameless opportunism.

Anonymous
Oct 19th, 2004, 12:22 AM
I love that the whole fact they're upset is about is that he mentioned her. As if it would only be polite to pretend she doesn't exist.
Exactly my feelings again.

It's a shame that we can't get married in this country :tear

Ricky Glue
Oct 19th, 2004, 01:51 AM
I would like to say that I don't find it fair to draw Mary Cheney into the public debate or turn her into the figurehead of an issue. It's not her fault her father's a vampiric demon who drinks dollars, and happens to be comedy sidekick to the man who rules the world.

But the way the Republicans are responding is just hilarious. I bet none of these 'outraged' people could even put into words what they're getting pissed off about.

Not to suck up to Fat Satan, but he's ridiculously right here. Mary Cheney has NOTHING to do with politics or this election for that matter. Also, the comedy sidekick line was just...damn good.

FS
Oct 19th, 2004, 04:52 AM
It's a shame that we can't get married in this country :tear

We can over here :love

Ant10708
Oct 19th, 2004, 02:47 PM
Jonah Goldberg's opinion on the matter:

There’s Something About Kerry
Using Mary Cheney.



I was traveling when the Mary Cheney thing erupted and I've been trying to keep up ever since. I feel like I have an odd personal insight into this story because I know what it's like for people to make a public issue of a relative. For those of you who don't recall, during the Clinton-Lewinsky stuff my mom was the second-most-hated woman in "enlightened" liberal circles. And for quite a while, I was the only person willing to publicly defend her. For months on end, Clinton's hatchet team and their friends in the media slimed her, mocked me (Esquire gave her a "dubious achievement award" for giving birth to me), and generally sought to make the case for Clinton by demolishing my mom (this, of course, was always the way Clintonites made their case — crush the inconvenient women). There's no need to revisit all of that, but it did leave me with something of an insider's perspective on how families play in politics. After all, the other great Clintonite defense was that the commander-in-chief's baron-and-the-milkmaid act with an intern was a "family" matter.


Anyway, as for Mary Cheney, it seems to me that a lot of the commentary has missed the mark.

First, Mary Cheney wasn't "outed." As Andrew McCarthy, Andrew Sullivan, and others have noted, outing has a specific meaning. It was well known that Mary Cheney is gay, even if it was news to some of the millions watching the debate. It may have been Kerry's intent to publicize her status more widely — and I'll get back to that in a second — but if outing means anything it means taking away from a specific individual the decision to inform friends, family, and colleagues that he is gay. Kerry didn't do that.

Second, almost all of the references to gay-rights pieties or anti-gay bigotries swirling around are beside the point. Sure, Andrew Sullivan is correct to note a certain double standard when the Cheneys in particular and Republicans in general have been fairly silent on far-worse anti-homosexual insults bandied around in conservative circles. Why? Because with family — but most especially with children — all standards are double, or triple, or whatever they need to be. We have a special ownership over our kids, a zone in which all abstract or partisan points must be made with great care or, better, not at all.

Sullivan and others ask, What about Alan Keyes's nastiness toward Mary Cheney? Why didn't the Cheneys speak up about that? Fair enough. Go ahead and ask them. My guess is that the Cheneys probably did make their displeasure known. But what they didn't want to do is call attention to the fact that Keyes is unhinged or give him more attention to insult their daughter.

But all such questions — about the Cheneys' position on gay marriage, on Alan Keyes, on the alleged "homophobia" running through the mainstream of the Republican party — are irrelevant. Maybe the Cheneys have a double standard. Maybe their anger is just a pose. I highly doubt it, but maybe it is.

So what?

What is important and revealing is not what Kerry said about Mary Cheney but what Kerry's comments about Mary Cheney say about him. Andrew Sullivan, Hilary Rosen, and others can complain all they like about double standards and false outrage — none of that changes the fact that what Kerry did was creepy. Think of it this way: If Kerry had said that Dick Cheney's daughter is a "deviant," Andrew Sullivan would be furious at Kerry and he wouldn't care one whit if Dick and Lynne Cheney were upset with Kerry. Because it is Kerry's actions that are at issue, not the Cheneys' reactions.

So what did Kerry do? He tried to score political points by using the status — for want of a better word — of his opponents' family. He claimed to know the mind of someone else's child as a way to hurt the parents. It's the ultimate wedge issue, trying to divide or ridicule a family because of an abstract or partisan political point.

Bill Safire says that it was all premeditated. Bob Novak's reporting seems to indicate it was off-the-cuff. I suspect that it was Kerry off-the-cuff — which is the more damning interpretation if you ask me. If you actually watch the tape of Kerry's comments, you can see he's struggling to say something profound. You can tell that he was on the defensive — as he was on all the values questions — and, I think, you can tell that he was searching for a way to put Bush on the defensive instead. That was clearly John Edwards's intention when he mentioned Mary Cheney in the vice-presidential debate. All of the attention, by the way, to Cheney's graciousness in response to Edwards also misses the point. Cheney's motives for taking the high road were surely political. But Cheney's feelings and motives don't change the objective fact of the Kerry camp's intent.

I cringed when Kerry explained, "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." Others in the room groaned. But it was obvious to everyone that Kerry was searching to score points, to twist the knife, to use Mary Cheney as a cudgel. The fact that Kerry used Mary's homosexuality was secondary. Gay rights, gay marriage, etc. — all of that is incidental to the fact that Kerry relished the opportunity to use Mary Cheney.

I'm no huge poll watcher, but the polls clearly show that most Americans "got it." Kerry can't resist the gravitational pull of a political opportunity. Indeed, as Brit Hume noted on Fox News Sunday and as I've written before, I think this goes further in explaining Kerry's flip-flops than anything else. He has terrible political instincts. And I don't think anyone can deny that his comments were driven by political instinct and not the "integrity, integrity, integrity" he claims his mother drilled into him.

When trying to explain why it was wrong, people have offered hypotheticals of Kerry mentioning an alcoholic or drug addict in his opponents' family. Kerry's defenders take immediate offense at the suggestion that being gay is like being a drug addict. We can discuss all that another day. But what if George W. Bush had said "divorce is a difficult issue. On one hand we all think society is healthier when marriages are healthier. On the other hand, we understand that good and decent people sometimes have irreconcilable differences. I'm sure if you asked John Kerry's first wife, she would tell you that there are no easy answers..." Or if he had said, "I'm sure if you asked John Kerry's lovely daughters whether it was easy for them to cope with their parents' divorce..." Or what if Bush had said, "America is a land of great opportunity for immigrants. I'm sure John Kerry's second wife Teresa, who was born in Africa, would agree..."

In any of those scenarios, I guarantee you that "getting it" would not have been a problem for the press.


In my opinion Kerry didn't do anything wrong. He didn't call her a bloodthirsty demon but I can see people considering her being mentioned inappropiate or unnecessary.

Bass
Oct 19th, 2004, 02:56 PM
Yeah wasn't the question where he brought up her name not even about gay marriage or gay rights? I was under the impression that the question was about if people were born gay, or made gay (a question which I believe GW just avoided)

kellychaos
Oct 19th, 2004, 04:29 PM
This just in! They've isolated the gay gene ... and it's FABULOUS!

Spectre X
Oct 19th, 2004, 04:53 PM
Kelly is like an optimistic little beam of sunlight to me in this gray, depressing world.

Even if this only goes for me.

kellychaos
Oct 20th, 2004, 04:34 PM
I would like to say that I don't find it fair to draw Mary Cheney into the public debate or turn her into the figurehead of an issue. It's not her fault her father's a vampiric demon who drinks dollars, and happens to be comedy sidekick to the man who rules the world.

But the way the Republicans are responding is just hilarious. I bet none of these 'outraged' people could even put into words what they're getting pissed off about.

Not to suck up to Fat Satan, but he's ridiculously right here. Mary Cheney has NOTHING to do with politics or this election for that matter. Also, the comedy sidekick line was just...damn good.

They can't reconcile the fact that their glorious leader can be a leader in homophobic legislation yet still have lesbian skeletons in his closet. It's like computer overload.