Posted on 05/02/2006 1:10:54 PM PDT by meandog
New York, N.Y. – In her new memoir, NOW IT'S MY TURN(Simon & Schuster/Threshold Editions, 2006), Mary Cheney writes that when she told her parents she was gay, the first words out of her father’s mouth “were exactly the ones that I wanted to hear: ‘You’re my daughter, and I love you, and I just want you to be happy.’”
VANITY FAIR editor Todd Purdum reports that Mary Cheney tells her story in a voice very much like her father’s, and that she came out to her parents when she was a junior in high school, on a day when, after breaking up with her first girlfriend, she skipped school, ran a red light, and crashed the family car. Cheney writes that her mother hugged her, but then burst into tears, worried that she would face a life of pain and prejudice.
When Purdum asks the vice president whether he thinks gay people are born that way, Cheney scrunches up his mouth, fixes him with a look that says “Nice try,” then says: “I’m not going to get into that. Those are deeply personal questions. You can ask.”
Mary Cheney tells Purdum that her father “has very little tolerance for bullshit, pardon my French.” She also says that one common reaction from people who have read the manuscript of her book is “‘Wow, you guys really have this close-knit, loving family,’ and it always strikes me as ‘Yeah, of course we do.’ It was very surprising to me that people would think we didn’t.”
When Purdum asks Cheney if he is fatalistic about his heart disease, Cheney says, “I am. I don’t even think about it most of the time. You do those things a prudent man would do, and I live with it.” Asked what he would have for breakfast at Nora’s Fish Creek Inn, his favorite pre-fishing spot in Wilson, Wyoming, Cheney responds without missing a beat: “I’d probably have two eggs over easy, sausage and hash browns,” then hastens to add that that is not his normal breakfast. “The day I go fishing, I get off my diet,” he says.” At a roundtable lunch with reporters a couple of years ago, two who were present tell Purdum that Cheney cut his buffalo steak in bite-size pieces the moment it arrived, then proceeded to salt each side of each piece.
Cheney tells Purdum that he has not changed over the years, but perhaps many of his contemporaries think he has “because of my associations over the years, or because I came across as a reasonable guy, people have one view of me that was not necessarily an accurate reflection of my philosophy or my view of the world.”
Purdum asks Cheney if, during his “darkest night,” he has even “a little doubt” about the administration’s course. “No,” he tells Purdum. “I think we’ve done what needed to be done.” Of the debate over whether or not the administration hyped the pre-war intelligence, Cheney says, “In the end, you can argue about the quality of the intelligence and so forth, but ... I look at that whole spectrum of possibilities and options, and I think we did the right thing.”
Cheney rejects the caricature of him as the power behind the throne, insisting, “I think we have created a system that works for this president and for me, in terms of my ability to be able to contribute and participate in the process.” When Purdum says that the cartoon characterization of him must not be accurate, Cheney says, “My image might be better out there, this caricature you talk about might be avoided, if I spent more time as a public figure trying to improve my image, but that’s not why I’m here.”
Purdum reports that Cheney travels with a chemical-biological suit at all times. When he gave his friend Robin West and his twin children a ride to the White House a couple of years ago, West commented on the fact that Cheney’s motorcade varied its daily path. “And he said, ‘Yeah, we take different routes so that “The Jackal” can’t get me,’” West tells Purdum. “And then there was this big duffel bag in the middle of the backseat, and I said, ‘What’s that? It’s not very roomy in here.’ And [Cheney] said, ‘No, because it’s a chemical-biological suit,’ and he looked at it and said, ‘Robin, there’s only one. You lose.’”
Purdum talks with former New York Times reporter and former executive editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer, James Naughton, who asks of Cheney: “Does he acknowledge that he is not as pleasant as he used to be?” Naughton knew Cheney as a fellow prankster during the 1976 campaign, and all but sighs in search of an explanation as to why he is so different now. “I guess I would like to believe,” he says, “without any evidence to support it, that coming very close to death has somehow compelled him to act as though he only has so much breath and so much life, that he’s only got so much time to accomplish what he has to do. But the public figure is nothing like the private one that I remember.”
Gerald Ford tells Purdum: “He may have changed a bit, but that was required for the change of circumstances.” Ford, who will turn 93 in July, adds, “Times change, and people change as a result of that.”
“If you’re looking for a change from one point to another, being vice president is sui generis,” Lynne Cheney tells Purdum. “It’s not quite like any other job.”
The June issue of Vanity Fair hits newsstands in New York and L.A. on May 3 and nationally on May 9.
As anyone who has encountered some of their groups face to face like ACT UP can attest.
Yet you advocate a reasoning that flies in the face of Christian Tradition and Scripture by treating a principle as an absolulte when it quite obviously is not.
Do you not think that before Paul spoke on the matter there were people arguing for withholding judgment against the man that had his father's wife at the Church of Corinth as you are, here?
That was my thought.
Was the "friend" an adult? Was this really a molestation by adult?
I think this is another effort by the homolobby to influence november elections.
At this point democrats are seeking to reduce turnout.
Cheney is not running for president so this is an irrlevant story otherwise.
Written by the Apostle Paul, the Pat Robertson of his day and a man who NEVER knew Christ in the flesh...
And you are deviating from the analogy to justify yourself.
Its Troll a palooza...
Talking point of how parents are just supposed to "accept" a homosexual behavior in ofspring.
Sorry but that is pure BS.
This is a sick sex fetish that needs to be treated the same way as a admitting to having sex with animals.
I can't make anyone turn to God. God gave man free will. It is by that free will that man may choose to return his life to God. But I will never equate myself to God by judging others. Never. You can question that all you want. But it is what I've been taught as a Christian and it is what I believe. You may not agree with it, which is fine.
I don't have a problem acknowledging a parental relationship no matter what. I don't have a problem acknowledging parental love no matter what. But I do have difficulties with the idea of wishing dysfunctional sexual behavior as the basis for happiness.
Sure, I want my children to be happy, but I'm not going to be elated if they choose to seek happiness through--for example--homosexuality, adultery, pedophilia, or promiscuity. I'm a big Cheney fan--I've voted for him four times, twice for VP, and twice for congressman. I'd be happy to see him as our president. However, his attitude being trumpeted here is something less than admirable.
I'd expect a better response from a professional litigator, but I suppose you know when to withdraw even if you don't possess the nobility to concede.
I annually support GSA through yearly contributions, in hoping that more girls would become seniors and reach for the oppportunities and citizenship that GSA proports to provide (sadly, most girls seem to quit at age 13 or so)...I thought GSA was philosophically linked with BSA in opposition to ACLU-sponsored agendas. I would be extremely disappointed if this is not the case.
Girlscouts is a waste of time as they are pro homo and allow lesbians to be den mothers etc.
No way in heck would I allow a daughter anywhere near that organization. They are moral relaitivsts.
And what is the example you are leading by with the line of reasoning you have consistently advocated?
Do you not see a discrepency between that leadership and the evaluations given by Jesus Christ to the seven Churches in the book of Revelation?
More confirmation that you resemble your remarks.
Someone who loves others with wisdom and not just ooey gooey sentimentality can be soft like a rose, and yet hard like a thunderbolt (when needed).
Jesus is the perfect example.
Personally, I do not hate homosexual individuals, and would never be rude or hateful to any persons. But I am angered by the "gay" agenda, especially the targeting of children. The problem is that homosexual activists (and their assistants) do not feel the same way. I have been (and people I know have been) the target of some vicious behavior at the hands of homosexuals, solely because of our stand on morality. Up to and including violence.
That I *try* to live the life God wants me to. I am fallible, I am a sinner. I am not perfect. Do not I use that as an excuse to sin? No. I use it as a way to elevate God above me, as He should always be.
I don't see a differentiation in the Bible.
Interesting that Paul lumps all of the sins together in this passage. Greed, Adultery, homosexuality -- all the same.
Thanks for that (excerpt?) from Alan Keyes. It is true and hits the target.
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.