Posted on 10/18/2004 9:00:35 AM PDT by JustaCowgirl
I won't even bother going after this uninformed comment, but please, the focus is NOT on Mary being a lesbian or about sex. It's about using the opponent's child in an opportunistic manner. It's a violation of the unwritten rule against using opponent's children, adult or not, for political gain. I suppose the days of being civil are long gone.
I think you're living in a fantasy world. One too many girlie mags, dearie! =^O
No, I am correct.
He didn't actually refer to Mary Cheney as a Lesbian....if you listen to a tape of the debate he said "who is a ....
....lesbianshewouldtellyou....." He could have tripped himself up, intending to say "gay", but used the article "a", and had to finally settle on the word "lesbian" which was uttered at warp speed, and quickly appended to the following words "she would tell you".
Either way, he's a scumbag, the renewed "outing" of Mary Cheney was intentional, so that no one should forget, and whoever could use it negatively against the Bush Administration could go ahead and use it, and it finally culminated in the most disgusting and outrageous words uttered thus far, by Tubby Edwards, Breck GIrl's wife: that Lynn CHeney apparently feels "shame" about her daughter's "sexual preference". With these words we are right back at the worst Carvile-ian tactics during the worst weeks of the Clinton scandal(S).
Ha! I'm still waiting for you to say something "quick and thoughtful."
LOL!!! You've never been to lunch with a bunch of women!
The thing that got me the most was his saying she was living what she was born as.
That clearly shows his view that people are born homosexual which is based on false science.
So he was putting his opinion in her mouth.
For all we know she knows it is a choice.
It's none of our business.
He could have mentioned Barney Frank or even his close relationship with his running partner Edwards.
Yea I know, a cheap shot but what two men hug each other that much???
It is interesting to not that the donks are playing defense - and are rather offensive about it.
Here's what gets me: Why on earth didn't Mr. & Mrs. Edwards and John Kerry himself say they were sorry for offending Mr. & Mrs. Cheney and their family? I have yet to hear an apology. Instead they went on the defensive and even accused the Cheney's of being "ashamed of their daughter". It's the most amazing thing. It's because the democrats have no moral compass from which to steer.
I assume you're thinking of that lovely quote from the Divine Mr. Devine? Should we just say that the Dems are never more offensive than when they're playing defense?
Give Liz Edwards comments about Mrs. Cheney's attitudes (more of Dems presuming to know and state what another person thinks), maybe we should just anoint Liz as the new James Carville. Different shape, different gender, but equally obnoxious and ugly. Meeoooww!
Several possibilities:
Because their sense of entitlement is so profound that they have no inkling why people are offended by this.
Because they're complete b*ttholes.
Because being His Kerriness means never having to say you're sorry.
Take your pick. Or take all.
Who the heck is he to speak on behalf of Mary Cheney and state what she believes, feels, etc. He does not speak for her...probably never met her and never spoke with her.
How can someone who desires to be President show such lack of respect and poor judgement on a personal issue with a private citizen!
This has NOTHING to do with her being gay...that's what the Dems WANT us to be discussing. He had no business speaking on her behalf for ANY issue. Period. Apology required.
sorry for use of CAPS...that moron irritates me to no end!
I don't think everyone misses that point, but it bears repeating.
He picked that because it's a hot button issue, and he used the word 'lesbian' because that's a hot button word. He thought there were enough Bush voters out there that he could turn off that way (same for Edwards).
If being purple were a hot button issue with Bush voters, they would have found somebody in Bush's sphere of influence or campaign who was purple and gone after them. When the Bush people complained, they would have explained that the complainer was 'ashamed' of being associated with someone who is purple. It's just as simple as that.
Well, as far as looks are concerned, she is no Helen Thomas, but I really am not too enamoured of a person who goes around with her tongue tied in the middle and flapping on both ends.
Yes, idiots like the sneering Tad Devine. Every time that smarmy prick appears on TV, I want reach out and choke the life out of him. He is a despicable POS who will say and do anything to get faggot kerry elected. Devine personifies the modern-day democrat party in all its ignominy.
Yup. This looks like Kerry's tank ride.
Kerry demonstrated to the undecided's what we have known all along.
What if someone publically said one of your kids has curly hair (assuming, again)?
Would that be offensive?
What is the difference here?
My point was that no one has the right to riducule or say personal things about your kids to a public audience that they did not want said. I am sure saying they are tall etc. does not compare to saying to 55 million people that they are gay or stupid or drug users or idiots or slime bags or drunkards.
I think you understood perfectly what I was saying!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.