Mike Benedetto sums up best my thoughts on why Kerry’s having mentioned Mary Cheney in the final debate wasn’t a big deal until the Cheneys made an issue of the “bad man” who stated the facts in a respectful way:
-
“Why are they angry? Because it is a political liability to have a gay daughter when they have no choice but to endorse anti-gay rhetoric. They can’t be angry at her — publicly, at least — so they’re angry at Kerry, who has done nothing more than quietly point out that their own lives contradict the policies they endorse. What nerve.
“They may not be able to be openly, overtly proud of their daughter, but they should at least be able to feign nonchalance about this issue for her sake. I don’t know whether it’s worse to think that they might really still feel such ambivalence, or that this ‘how dare you point out our family’s shameful secret’ line may be a put-on.
“Of course, I don’t give a shit about Mary Cheney. For all intents and purposes outside American politics, her family’s money has bought her heterosexuality — she will never be discriminated against in jobs or housing, she will never lose an inheritance or custody dispute, and she will never be the victim of a hate crime (unless she loves the bar scene and doesn’t bother with security). And when a person has everything she needs, she isn’t quite so interested in taking care of everyone else, is she? Hence, not a word on the subject from her.”
1 response so far ↓
1 jen a. // Oct 20, 2004 at 12:24 pm
yeah, still his bringing up mary cheney again made me cringe– i think it’s unnecessary and out of place in the debate. what would have been fantastic is if kerry grew some cojones and spat out an immediate, unequivocal, and resounding “NO!” to the moderator’s “is homosexuality a ‘lifestyle choice’?” BS question. i realize kerry did, eventually, kinda get there, sorta. but that’s just my two cents.