How shocking!
While Dan touched on this in his earlier post about the latest case of Sullivanitis, I thought it was important to reprint the entire early word on Mary Cheney’s book.
Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Dick 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.’”
In an interview appearing in the June issue of Vanity Fair, national 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 that day, she recalls in the book, she had just broken up with her first girlfriend, skipped school, run 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.
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.”
Unfortunately, Mary… those in the gay community that claim they want the rest of society to be tolerant of us are the first to shield their eyes from the obvious: There are actually parents in America who love their gay children and have a great relationship with them.
As for Mrs. Cheney’s reaction, I’m pretty sure that the “pain and prejudice” she feared Mary would face would be from close-minded liberals who do not practice what they preach.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Very true. Thanks for posting this.
And the next words out of her parent’s mouth were “Judas Goat.”
Oh, right on the mark…
It’s LIBERALS who hate gays…
Just like it was Jews who told Hitler, “Hey, gas chambers are the new thing for the 1940s.”
Well, Ian… it is Liberals who coddle gay-killing Islamic regimes in their thinking that America is the real enemy.
It’s also liberals who give millions upon millions of dollars to candidates who lie to them and stab them in the back, then turn around and claim that others (who had looked at all candidates realistically and given money to none) are somehow the self-loathing ones.
It’s liberals who are stuck in a dark, hateful vision of the universe where homophobia lurks behind every corner, and most Americans are supposedly out to put them in death camps. (Words Ian has spoken on this blog, I believe.)
I’ve known a lot of gay liberals (since I was one, for many years). Yes, most of them had bad relationships with their families – often clinging tenaciously to a belief in their family’s hatred of them despite strong evidence of love and acceptance.
And Bruce, I think you meant to write “gay-killing Islamist regimes” 😉
Islamist-killing gay regimes – well, we can dream!!! 🙂
(GP Ed. Note — Ooops! Fixed it. Thanks ! 🙂 )
“Unfortunately, Mary… those in the gay community that claim they want the rest of society to be tolerant of us are the first to shield their eyes from the obvious: There are actually parents in America who love their gay children and have a great relationship with them.”
No kidding? Goodness what a revelation! Parents who love their kids. Imagine that. And just who in the gay community claims otherwise?
“I’m pretty sure that the “pain and prejudice” she feared Mary would face would be from close-minded liberals”
Liberals like Alan Keyes I suppose.
Just shut the hell up all of you! But I hold a special place of disdain in my heart for you heartless leftists! You believe the only people who have felt pain and rejection in life are people like you. I tell you GROW UP! Maybe your parents weren’t so good. So what? Did you ever think about a single person besides your self, ever? Maybe MOM or DAD needs your help – not your hate.
Who knew that “love” was such a political virtue today? You sound like a 60s hippie. Equality, citizenship, justice…yeah, but “love” is now being elevated and celebrated? (And keep in mind that one can certainly love and disrespect a person at the same time.)
And where’s the ‘professor’ when there’s a mess in #4?
I’m sure the Cheneys want their daughter to be happy. It’s that they don’t want anyone else’s gay sons or daughters to be treated fairly that’s the issue.
I really don’t care what goes on behind the closed doors of the Cheney household. I didn’t care what went on behind closed doors in the Clinton White House. It’s public policy that effects me. This personal stuff is really none of my business.
I’m reminded of a local Republican meeting where the speaker was anti-gay, to put it in the most polite terms. Then, latter, to assure my vote, he put his swarmy arm around my shoulder and said, “Of course, I don’t mean people like you.”
I quess I should be proud of the progress I made. He wasn’t afraid to touch me.
I’m sure the Cheneys want their daughter to be happy. It’s that they don’t want anyone else’s gay sons or daughters to be treated fairly that’s the issue.
Explain this?
Because I remember from the first Bush/Cheney election Cheney saying he supported civil unions, and I don’t remember him being anti gay in any other ways, but I may have missed something along the way.
Or is it solely because he is a member of the GOP that makes him anti gay.
It would be the part where the administration in which he’s VP is pushing for a federal marriage amendment and opposing ENDA.
It would be the part where his party has an official platform of oppsing equal participation in society by gay and lesbian citizens.
It would be the part where they’ve been cozying up to the far right for years.
Regarding the 2d to last paragraph of the post, I’m sure that it’s sweet that M. Cheney has a good relationship with her parents, but that doesn’t derogate from the facts that
(i) she first came to fame as the liaison from the homophobic Coors family and brewing company who tried to break the gay boycott of the Coors beer, to increase the Coors’ family’s wealth of course, so that they could use the income to finance more anti-gay activities, and
(ii) she subsequently was a major participant in assisting her father’s ticket to be elected to the pResidency/vice-pResidency.
And, in so doing, I’m sure that she will become a very rich girl when her father kicks the bucket. Blood money from her father’s Halliburton stock, of course.
As far as I’m concerned, she is not that dissimilar to the KaPo at the Vernichtungslager, and I hold her in the same regard as, I suspect, Jews who survived Auschwitz held their KaPos.
Anyone? Why is it that the GayLeft usually ends up using the Nazi v. Jews metaphor when discussing conservative or pro-GOP gays? I’m trying to think… which group in America’s political subculutre supports the PLO and now stands mute in the presence of Muslim dictators killing gays? Would that be the GayLeft?
raj writes “And, in so doing, I’m sure that she will become a very rich girl when her father kicks the bucket. Blood money from her father’s Halliburton stock, of course.”
raj, save that petty hatefilled spew for Pams House Blend, BlogActive or BlogAmerica… where the politically impotent and patholgically rabid GayLefters hold court. No one actually believes Mary Cheney “sold out” except in those blog lairs of hyperventing intolerance like Pam’s, Mikey’s and John’s.
Ms. Cheney did not sell out, she only rented herself out.
Something has to be done to stop the absolute monarchy of the judiciary in this country. The amendment is a band-aid: it only addresses one issue. It also is going nowhere.
Utter nonsense.
Errrr… Something has to be done to stop the absolute monarchy of government, period. The destructive, insane notion that it is up to government to “fix” (i.e., criminalize) EVERY conceivable insecurity and/or injustice that a person might face or complain about. But – that’s another story, for another time.
#16 Michigan-Matt — May 5, 2006 @ 9:48 am – May 5, 2006
Why is it that the GayLeft usually ends up using the Nazi v. Jews metaphor when discussing conservative or pro-GOP gays?
I don’t know. Why don’t you ask someone from the GayLeft?
NB: “Left” is a noise word.
#19 Calarato — May 5, 2006 @ 11:18 am – May 5, 2006
Something has to be done to stop the absolute monarchy of government, period.
And what would you suggest?
Please, be specific.
NDXXX apparently believes that the voters will come to the desired conclusion for everyone. Fat chance
RWP wants to overturn the Supreme Court’s 1803 decision in Marbury vs. Madison, although is little more than a restatement of what the Federalist Papers indicated was what was included in “judicial power” bequeathed to the judicial branch (so much for originalism).
How would you suggest stopping the “absolute monarchy of government”?
It’s the all or nothing thinking of the left that is the problem.
Their so steeped in Marxism’s Hegalian dialectic, they have no remorse (but rather glee) in pitting a Daughter against her own Mother & Father. That’s what you get when the only allowable thinking is proletariat = ultimate victim, Oppressor = anyone who wont capitulate to every extreme of the Revolution.
Republicans, conservatives, social conservatives, committed faithful and the deeply religious, all have gay friends and family that they routinely treat with dignity, respect & love as a matter of course. In fact many do this precisely because of the values they hold.
The assumed moral superiority of the left actually breeds a certain paternalism that allows for grater prejudice & insensitivity than the supposed “opposition”.
ask the GayLeft? Fair enough, raj. So why is it?
NDXXX apparently believes that the voters will come to the desired conclusion for everyone. Fat chance.
Unfortunately for you, Raj, the Constitution is written so that the “desired conclusion” is that of a majority or supermajority of voters.
What you want is an oligarchy or monarchy in which you only have to be nice to and persuade a few people, not a whole mass of them.
That’s why gay leftists like to use the court system — you have a handful of arrogant, self-important people who have grown accustomed to rewriting legislation to their whims and getting their way because they’re the Court. They flatter, they cajole, and they suck up — and they’ve in a few cases gotten what they want, even if the Court has to cite foreign laws to get it for them.
Unfortunately, what voters have suddenly awakened to is the fact that they DO have the ultimate check and power over the judiciary — and they have mobilized to exercise it.
In other words, the shell game of you and your fellow gay leftists is over. You now have to convince the voters whom you regularly berate, criticize, insult, and denigrate publicly. And quite frankly, you’re rather pathetic at doing it.
LOL NDT. 🙂
#4. Do you read nothing? http://towleroad.typepad.com/towleroad/2006/05/iraqi_boy_murde.html
#24 North Dallas Thirty — May 5, 2006 @ 1:28 pm – May 5, 2006
I hate to break it to you, but the fact is that a minority of voters can effect an amendment to the US constitution. Do a little arithmetic.
#23 Michigan-Matt — May 5, 2006 @ 1:17 pm – May 5, 2006
So, to you, any gay person to the left of Atilla the Hun is a member of the GayLeft. Interesting, but not surprising.
#26 jimmy — May 5, 2006 @ 1:46 pm – May 5, 2006
Do you read nothing?
No, they don’t. I read about that this morning. Great job, Bush. Install a government in Iraq that murders gay people.
BTW, it was just reported that one of Bush’s darlings, Porter Goss, has stepped down as head of the CIA. He didn’t last long. He has been implicated in the (Republican) Randy Cunningham prostitution scandal. So much for Republican fam’ly values.
His appointment as CIA chief shows just how little Bush is interested in winning the “Global War on Tara.”
I hate to break it to you, but the fact is that a minority of voters can effect an amendment to the US constitution. Do a little arithmetic.
Of course — looking at it in reverse perspective.
If a minority is greater than 1/3 of the voting population, it can block approval of a constitutional amendment; if it’s greater than 1/4 of the voting population, it can (theoretically) block it at ratification, since three-quarters of the states must ratify any amendment.
But that really isn’t the point now, is it?
What’s important to you here is saving face when you just got your head handed to you on a platter.
You and yours, Raj, with your singular contempt and hatred for voters, are the single biggest threat to gay rights — because you give legitimacy to those who oppose them.
No, they don’t. I read about that this morning. Great job, Bush. Install a government in Iraq that murders gay people.
Yes, because, as you’ve claimed previously, Raj, Saddam Hussein absolutely did NOT imprison, torture, and murder thousands of gay people simply for being gay.
Not to mention the other millions that he did the same to for things like religion, race, being the child of dissident parents, that sort of thing.
And I hope you have the brains to recognize sarcasm.
#31. Maybe Saddam Hussein did “imprison, torture, and murder thousands of gay people simply for being gay”–although I would love to see where you get your data for this. Might it come from one of the organizations that you characterize as part of the Elite which you hate so much? Or, better, a human rights organization to which you selectively listen?
More to the point: The US had a hand in keeping Saddam in power. And it has an even bigger hand in installing this government that is on the hunt for gay people…NOW. And all you can do is sing a song about torture in the past. You might be comfortable comparing Bush’s Iraqi government with Hussein’s government and claiming it is an improvement. But many of us, instead, use a different yardstick by which to make comparisons.
Tell the kid killed today that Bush is better than Saddam. Go ahead, tell him.
raj baby, Porter Goss was never “Bush’s darling” as you try every so cutely to put it.
He was hired before the rise in power of Negroponte, never really liked the job and was vocal critic of the CIA’s innercircle of power brokers and govt/bureaucrat styled corporate culture. The CIA Goss admired and was a part of was vastly different from the one George Tenet left behind.
You really need to stop getting your “free fall” paranoid news from Left sources like Kos, TPM Muckraker, the Left Coaster and the democraticUnderground. To wit, raj baby….
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/27/212534/995
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000494.php
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007004.php
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364×1049281
Let’s see, didn’t you try to step aside from the GayLeft monicle I slapped on your weasely face in the last thread? Yeah, look who’s showing his lace panties now –it’s raj from the GayLeft.
You are such a tool.
#21 – Since I truly don’t care about you or respect you raj, you know I normally don’t answer. But there is always the occasional exception, and in this case, I have a tart answer.
I’d suggest honoring the Constitution.
I know you will have absolutely zero understanding or notion of what I would be talking about there. Hint: It would most definitely involve the total abandonment of collectivism, socialism – i.e., of your ugly brand of left-liberalism in particular.
Jimmy writes “More to the point: The US had a hand in keeping Saddam in power.”
Actually jimmy, for the last two decades, the US had little to do with keeping Saddam in power… that role went to the Russians, French and slimey little Germans. And even going back to the Reagan Administration –Rumsfeld met twice with Saddam to see if we could assist him in his war with Iran but was rebuffed when the US brought up that pesky issue of WMDs and he barely escaped Baghdad with his life.
Go figure. See how history repeast itself?
Like your last attempt to play the race card, you really do need to keep facts in front of your face when you talk. Otherwise, it doesn’t even take three snaps, a big Z, and little hip action to dismiss your nonsense.
Michigan Matt: restrictionist on immigration, revisionist on history. And beware: the girl snaps…three times in a row.
Bullshit alert.
jimmy, have you EVER contributed in a meaningful way to any debate or discussion on any issue?
Thought not.
#24 North Dallas Thirty — May 5, 2006 @ 1:28 pm – May 5, 2006
This leads me to believe that you can’t do simple arithmetic. No surprise.
Let’s see. To get an amendment to the US constitution ratified, you would need approval of the amendment by 2/3 of the members of the US House and the US Senate, and ratification by 3/4 of the states. (There is another mechanism that essentially bypasses Congress, but that is largely irrelevant for this discussion.) It is well known that, by gerrymandering various districts for House seats and for the state legislatures, it is very possible to get a bare majority of voters in states that elect 2/3 of the House members and the members of the 3/4 of the state legislatures, while at the same time huge majorities of voters in the other states elect the rest of the House members and the members of the legislatures of the other states. Thus, with gerrymandering, a minority of voters can control enough House members and legislatures to pass a constitutional amendment
The only issue is the US Senate, which would require passage by 2/3 of the members of the Senate–that is, 68 senators. That means, senators from 34 states. Doing a little arithmetic with the statistics from http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/population.shtml it should be obvious that a minority of voters can also control the US Senate.
#31 North Dallas Thirty — May 5, 2006 @ 2:21 pm – May 5, 2006
Yes, because, as you’ve claimed previously, Raj, Saddam Hussein absolutely did NOT imprison, torture, and murder thousands of gay people simply for being gay.
Oh, pray tell, where did I claim that previously?
What I have read is that Saddam, in the last few years leading to Bush’s invasion tried to cozy up to more fundamentalist Muslim regimes in an attempt to curry their support for him in an anticipation of an invasion by the Americans. That probably included a crack-down by Saddam against gay people, but it was in response to saber-rattling by the Americans.
#33 Michigan-Matt — May 5, 2006 @ 2:52 pm – May 5, 2006
Porter Goss was never “Bush’s darling” as you try every so cutely to put it.
Oh, really? So why is it that Bush bothered to hire him–former CIA employee and former Representative from the state of Florida–in Sept 2004 to be the Director of Central Intelligence? After the embarrassing debacle with Tenet?
And why is it that Bush waited over a year after Negroponte had been appointed “Intelligence Czar” (Feb 2005) before he fired Goss? And why is it that Goss was fired only immediately after it began leaking out that Goss’s protege Foggo had been implicated in the Cunningham/Wilkes/Wade scandal?
What is most interesting in the Goss firing is that the Bush administration had no back-up to replace him with. That suggests damage control, not an orderly transition. Whatever–it should be obvious from the Vallerie Plame “outing” that the Bush administration really has no interest in “intelligence.” They are only interested in spin.
BTW, it is nice that you know how to do searches on google.com. I also have done searches on google.com, the most recent using keywords “cunningham goss foggo wilkes wade” I’m sure that you are familiar with the search terms. I found it odd that that search string didn’t turn up any hits to obviously “conservative” websites. Maybe “conservatives” aren’t interested in activities of their gov’t officials that might be–shall we say?–potentially subject to being blackmailed. No surprise there, either.
#34 Calarato — May 5, 2006 @ 2:58 pm – May 5, 2006
I’d suggest honoring the Constitution.
Another non-responsive response. What specifically would you want changed? Cite chapter and verse. Those who bloviate over “honoring the Constitution” (actually, there are at least 51 constitutions, one for the federal gov’t and one for each of the states) don’t really provide a lot of insight as to what they really are objecting to.
BTW, let’s get something–er–straight. I don’t really care about you, either.
Re:
“It would be the part where his party has an official platform of oppsing equal participation in society by gay and lesbian citizens.
Utter nonsense.”
sorry prof, only one party’s official platform includes discrimination and bigotry. it’s the gop fool.
More bullshit.
I read that article. I particularly liked the line: “Cheney writes that her mother hugged her but then burst into tears, worried that she would face a life of pain and prejudice.” Yea, from her husband’s political buddies…
But see, the Cheney’s keep their tolerance in a closet and that is wrong. They’ve had a large platform from the past 6 years to change our society and they have nary raised a voice. Part of the reason i’m so proud of my parents is, it’s not that they just accept me, but they’ve taken on the mantle of basically, ‘my fight is their fight too’. The Cheney’s don’t do that. They don’t fight.
It’s nice that Vice-President Cheney hasn’t disowned his daughter. But are we really to be prod of that? Why doesn’t he take his own party to task for all the gay-baiting they do? It’s not like anybody can fire him for doing it. He’s the freakin’ Vice-President, for crying out loud.
And rightwingprof, the GOP’s platform does say being gay in incompatible with military service. So what the other poster was saying is not bullshit. The GOP has discrimination written right into their party platform.
Do you live in a constant fog of confusion? The Military Code of Justice states that HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT (not “being gay”) is incompatible with military service, as is adultery or sex outside marriage.
Right… and… that’s not a Republican platform plank, but a Democratic one. (It was written or last touched by a congressional Democratic majority in 1993, and Clinton signed it.)
#38. I’m waiting for ‘meaning’ to occur here. I just see pure, unadulterated humor.
#45. All you say is “bullshit”? So much ‘meaning’….
Love as a political virtue. ‘Gay’ ‘Patriot’ as 60s hippie… Still splits my gut!
#49. How many service members have been kicked out for adultery? Do they track down their profiles online?
The mental gymnastics that you general 30%, and smaller gay%, go through are absolutely astounding. But then again, a good bondage bottom or masochist does the same with their top.
In 1996, 2000 and 2004 the Republican Party platform had the following line in it, “homosexuality is incompatible with military service.”
It is not in the Democratic Party platform.
I just don’t get you people. You believe whatever you want, even if it isn’t true. You live in a fantasy world.
There was a very prominant case of a female Air Force pilot brought on charges of adultery. She probably would not have been except that it was with an enlisted man. The pilot, IIRC, compounded the problem by failing to abide by her promise to her command to end the affair. She broke more than one rule in the UCMJ and as far as I’m concerned deserved a dishonorable discharge at the very least.
The military isn’t civilian life and there are reasons to have very strict rules about personal relationships. Many the career of a heterosexual has been destroyed by events in their personal life. (And considering the level of responsibility involved, I approve.)
And Erik, I’m not surprised that the Republican party has that as a platform plank. Do you know how those are determined and what they are for? The majority of people in the whole country believe, for one reason or another, that homosexuality is incompatible with military service. I could be for no other reason than the lack of privacy available to recruits. People react the same way as they would if basic training was co-ed with co-ed showers.
Now the Democrats, who don’t have such a statement, believe it as well. They just aren’t going to say so because it will ruin their reputation as being “for” the gay community. They are also “for” the black community and the hispanic community (way *way* tolerant of homosexuality, huh? All those Catholics and Southern Baptists.) and for *labor*, and you *know* those auto workers throw a party if their boy announces that his new girlfriend’s name is Brad.
The gymnastics aren’t done by gay Republicans, who know where they stand with people, but by gay Democrats who have to find a way to continue to believe that being gay defines their economic, domestic and foreign policy opinions.
The treatment of Mary Cheney by liberal gays (such as Aravosis) has been abominable. I’ve talked to a number of my friends about this – and said that no matter what you think about Dick Cheney and his policies, you can’t fault him on the gay issue – he’s been loyal to his daughter – and he publicly disented from the President on the FMA. That’s huge.
The cases of Maya Keyes and Phyllis Schlafly’s son etc. are totally different cases. Alan Keyes is a nutjob – as is Schlafly.
I think there’s some fair criticism of Cheney if you oppose the Administration position on the war in Iraq – but the hits he’s taking for “betraying his daughter” are totally off base.
LOL….thanks for your tripe, Raj, but here’s the problem, in bold:
It is well known that, by gerrymandering various districts for House seats and for the state legislatures, it is very possible to get a bare majority of voters in states that elect 2/3 of the House members and the members of the 3/4 of the state legislatures, while at the same time huge majorities of voters in the other states elect the rest of the House members and the members of the legislatures of the other states.
Unfortunately, Raj, as any graduate student learns, “it is well-known”, “various”, and “very possible” are not sufficient grounds for an absolute theory, especially not a mathematical theory. You are substituting conjecture for reference and thought.
Meanwhile, your continued rationalization of your hate and contempt for voters merely confirms my previous statements.
I just don’t get you people. You believe whatever you want, even if it isn’t true. You live in a fantasy world.
Of course not. You’re still explaining how DOMA, DADT, state constitutional amendments, and the FMA are all “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive” when Democrats support them, and that gays should give Democrats their money and support for doing so.
To you, reality DOES appear to be fantasy.
NDXXX, you’re right of course, Erik isn’t the only one here who lives in a fantasy world eclipsed by reality –raj invented the concept.
Just in his last comments, raj baby takes the Porter Goss resignation and spins it into three wild-assed pure speculative conjectures: 1) Goss was fired; 2) the WH didn’t have a replacement for him furthering the notion that the WH is in a state of confusion; and 3) the firing was due to a direct, incontrovertible link of Goss to his aide and prostitutes for Duke Cunningham’s frat parties ala Wilbur Mills’ spirit (1970’s era disgraced Democrat Chair of House Ways & Means).
The point raj baby missed was his last spew and vent was pegged line-and-verse to a series of radical Democrat spin websites… taking items verbatim from those blogs of partisan hate; raj use to try and cover the sources, but now he just cuts and paste. It’s a shame to waste anyone’s mind, but really a shame when it’s a BlameAmericaFirster.
Let’s recap raj baby’s latest lie-time:
Lie #1 Goss was fired. No he resigned after making it clear 2 months earlier in a speech at the RR Library he wanted out.
Lie #2 Goss is linked to scandal and that’s why he was fired. No –he resigned and the “scandal” link is pure wishful thinking and fantasy conjecture on raj’s part as mouth for the radical Democrat left.
Lie #3 The WH was caught unaware and doesn’t have a replacement. No, the WH has a replacement and it’s someone who will be able to look Chuckie Schummer and others in the face and stop their lying horsesh*t about “domestic spying by the NSA”.
Raj baby is reality-challenged, just like others here who would rather take the radical Democrat spin and cultivate it, rather than use independent, critical thinking to sort out life’s social and political issues. It’s a tired old game of the GayLeft that’s left them discredited with American voters and increasingly schreeeeeechy when it comes to all things Bush.
You’re cover is blown, raj baby. Have fun in Germany.