Hugh Hewitt, Mary Cheney and Gay Marriage
Just listened to Mary Cheney on Hugh Hewitt’s show. Mary did a great job and I delighted in discovering that Hugh and I do agree on one aspect of debate on gay marriage. Hugh wondered why Democrats were so afraid of discussing this. While Hugh and I come to different conclusions on a constitutional amendment defining marriage, both of us welcome the debate.
To that MPA supporter’s credit, he gave a full hour to an outspoken opponent of that amendment. To be sure, they discussed a great variety of issues and did not limit their discussion to gay marriage. I found myself agreeing with that opponent, i.e., Mary, on every political point she made. She stated her opposition to the amendment and noted that both her parents (i.e., the Vice President of the United States and his wife Lynne) have spoken out against it. But, like me, Mary finds the War on Terror to be a more important issue.
Hugh references the interview here where I assume he’ll provide a link to the transcript once it’s up. I’ll let you know as soon as I do.
On Hugh’s blog, his co-blogger Mary Katherine Ham did a short post on the Marriage Protection Amendment and linked a post that I had linked last April, Jane’s Galt’s “A really, really, really long post about gay marriage that does not, in the end, support one side or the other” I’m delighted that while Mary Katherine who apparently supports the amendment and I who oppose it, both agree that Jane Galt’s piece is one of the best on the topic. Like Dale Carpenter, Jane Galt has clearly contributed to the debate on the topic in a civil and responsible manner. I wish more people would so contribute.
Thanks to Mary Katherine Ham for reminding me of such an important piece and to Hugh for such a great interview with Mary Cheney.
It is telling that, since the release of her most excellent new book, conservatives have paid more attention to — and shown more respect for — Mary Cheney than have gay activists.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
WELCOME HUGH HEWITT READERS!!! While you’re here, please feel free to browse around what one writer called “the most reliably conservative gay blog on the Internet.” I have done a number of posts on Mary’s book, noting how it shows what a good man the Vice President is, recommending it as a “must-read” book and noting that a gay bookstore in West Hollywood doesn’t carry the book while it does carry books by America-hating leftist Noam Chomsky.
And I just concluded a lengthy post noting how most gay activists (including the ostensibly Republican group, Log Cabin) prefer to insult the president than debate him on gay marriage.
UPDATE: As Calarato reminded me in a comment, Hugh, like me, loved Mary’s book. Do yourself a favor and buy it!
(Sales on amazon have jumped from 4,563 yesterday to 1,767 today — must be because Mary came across so well on Hugh’s show.)
18 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Hugh loved Mary’s book. He raved about it this weekend, here: http://hughhewitt.com/archives/2006/05/28-week/index.php#a002338
Comment by Calarato — June 5, 2006 @ 8:44 pm - June 5, 2006
Calarato, thanks for reminding me. I saw the review and will now update the post accordingly.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — June 5, 2006 @ 8:50 pm - June 5, 2006
What can I say? It’s wonderful that an “OUT”, ADMIRABLE and DOWN TO EARTH lesbian is winning so many conservative, heterosexual fans.
Comment by Calarato — June 5, 2006 @ 9:02 pm - June 5, 2006
[...] Update: Dan at Gay Patriot discusses this issue, along with the lack of desire that many people seem to have to want to discuss it. he also links to an excellent article at Jane Galt, where she discusses some arguments for and against marriage protection. Although neither actually go to the trouble of reprinting the actual marriage amendment under debate, it is heartening to see some people at least willing to discuss the issue in an intelligent way. [...]
Pingback by The Bullwinkle Blog » Blog Archive » What Debate? — June 5, 2006 @ 9:10 pm - June 5, 2006
Dan, thanks for being the voice of reason. (I know, that is what Hugh Hewitt calls himself on the radio). You deserve the title as well. Thanks for linking both to Jane Galt’s piece and to Dale Carpenter’s pro gay marriage article. That is what debate on the issue should be. Not the name calling we are hearing from both sides now.
And keep up the discussion about monogamy in marriage, it is too serious a subject to dismiss, just because many married people fail at it.
Comment by Leah — June 5, 2006 @ 9:21 pm - June 5, 2006
Guys, please don’t start going off the rails on this gay marriage thing. Looking at the threads on this page alone, its starting to resemble the Daily Dish. I think something important happened in Canada over the weekend. Talk about it.
Comment by glisteny — June 5, 2006 @ 10:47 pm - June 5, 2006
“It is telling that, since the release of her most excellent new book, conservatives have paid more attention to — and shown more respect for — Mary Cheney than have gay activists.”
Yes, it tells me she has a rich and powerful father and is a queen bee. Not that it’s stopping them from villifying other gays and lesbians because they don’t have access to the money and power that Mary Cheney does. Are Dick & Mary Cheney using their positions to help stop this anti-marriage nonsense?
Comment by Kevin — June 5, 2006 @ 10:56 pm - June 5, 2006
Hugh Hewitt has forfeited any credibility on national issues. The Platonic shill for George Bush has to replace his knee-pads weekly.
He couldn’t argue his way out of a wet paper bag.
Comment by banachspace — June 5, 2006 @ 11:01 pm - June 5, 2006
Are Dick & Mary Cheney using their positions to help stop this anti-marriage nonsense?
(shrug) And there you have it, folks.
She (Mary Cheney) stated her opposition to the amendment and noted that both her parents (i.e., the Vice President of the United States and his wife Lynne) have spoken out against it.
As you can see, Kevin, in his leftist hate, is so completely blind that he misses one of the most obvious statements in GPW’s post.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 5, 2006 @ 11:30 pm - June 5, 2006
NDXXX, you are bad to the bone. Here you are counting on Kevin reading and comprehending… those standards are simply too high. The GayLeft never –ever– let facts get in the way of angered speech. (See Gramps for a catalog of angry speech topics)
Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 5, 2006 @ 11:37 pm - June 5, 2006
Hugh loved Mary’s book. Oh, goody. I’ll !run out and !buy it.
I had read mention of Hugh Hewitt on a couple of other blogs and message boards, but I had never heard much of him and knew nothing about his background. This post caused me to do a little investigation.
From my investigation, he graduated from Hahvahd in 1978 with a degree in government and thereafter did a stint in Reagan’s !Justice Department before going on to his gig in talk radio. I have long found it odd that very few of the bloviators in the right-wing media had actually studied anything useful–like engineering, (hard) science or mathematics. I am reminded of Brent “Bozo” Bozell of the Media Research Center and the Christian, no Conservative, no CyberCast News Services (CNSnews), and Reid Irvine of the ridiculously named Accuracy In Media operation, both of whom were also Reagan malAdministration apparatchiks. Or Rusty “Lamebrain” Limbaugh, who was largely a failed sports broadcaster before he hit the “big time.”
Whatever. They tell you what you want to hear. And enough people are stupid enough to buy the products that they advertize to pay their bills. Ain’t Amer’ca wonderful? Even de’ grosste Dep’ can hit the big time.
Comment by raj — June 6, 2006 @ 8:52 am - June 6, 2006
raj baby, your sneering contempt for America and Americans is apparent to all… I guess we just aren’t contrite enough on the world stage for past errors like freeing Europe from the vicious boot hold of Germany and Italy… freeing the world from self-serving colonial control… freeing Asia from the dual threat of Japan and later Russia… crippling Russia and single-handedly bringing down the most corrupt, evil empire of the 20th C save Germany… and helping to establish freely elected govt leaders in a former despotic kingdom of a deranged madman AKA Saddam Hussein.
Americans sure are dumb, raj. Conservatives sure are dumb, raj. Conservative commentators sure are dumb, raj.
I guess that’s why conservatives control the WH, SCOTUS, the Federal Cts, the House, the Senate, the popular (and successful) major media organs, organized religion (by and large) and other institutions.
Now we have to just get control of Hollywood, more of higher education and a few more governorships to complete the movie picture started by RR… the one that opens with a shining city on a hill.
It’s going to make you Euro-centrist effete GayLefties howl with horror.
Wait, I can almost hear the howl begin….
Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 6, 2006 @ 10:12 am - June 6, 2006
No, that was just HowieDean firing some more gay staffers at the DNC for being too political and not deferential enough.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 6, 2006 @ 10:13 am - June 6, 2006
Michigan Matt, do you have your own blog, I’d love to add it to my favorites along with this one of course.
Bravo, BBRRAAVVOO!!
Comment by Ed in Tampa — June 6, 2006 @ 11:59 am - June 6, 2006
Nothing is more ludicrous or laughable than Euroweenies feeling superior about anything — except their castration.
Comment by rightwingprof — June 6, 2006 @ 4:24 pm - June 6, 2006
Comment by vet — June 6, 2006 @ 10:41 pm - June 6, 2006
#16 vet — June 6, 2006 @ 10:41 pm – June 6, 2006
How many bloviators in the left-wing media have studied anything useful; like engineering, hard science, or mathematics.
Just wondering, you know?
Good question, and I don’t know the answer. If and when I am prompted–by something that is posted here or that I see elsewhere–to do an investigation, I’ll let you know. The problem with doing an investigation, though, is that most of the bloviators that I encounter in the American media bloviate with their right wings flapping.
On the other hand, and what prompted my comment above, was that Mr. Hewitt’s bio that I read (it read like a press release) appeared to have emphasized his education (government?), his affiliations with the Reagan malAdministration, and the fact that he teaches law at some university (big deal).
The long and the short of it is that he had political connections and somehow got himself a gig as an entertainer on the radio. I’m not sure that those are bases to fawn all over him, as appears to be the case with the post and with other posts (including those from lefty blogs) that give him the time of day.
Comment by raj — June 7, 2006 @ 12:18 am - June 7, 2006
Going up a bit
#12 Michigan-Matt — June 6, 2006 @ 10:12 am – June 6, 2006
I guess that’s why conservatives control the WH, SCOTUS, the Federal Cts, the House, the Senate, the popular (and successful) major media organs, organized religion (by and large) and other institutions.
Poor baby. You actually believe that it is conservatives who control all of those things? It isn’t conservatives that control them–it is Republican borrow-and-spend liberals. Republicans learned early on that the way to obtain and maintain their electoral advantage was through corporate welfare and reduce taxes–hence their borrow and spend strategy. If borrow-and-spend liberalism and corporate welfare is what you consider to be “conservative,” well, so be it.
Frankly, I don’t give a tinkers damn, because I want my tax cuts, too. I’m not going to pay the bills when they become due–your children will. I guess I’m a perfect conservative–er–Republican.
What I am amused at, though, is the number of even gay people who have deluded themselves into believing that the Republicans are actually interested in “national security” or the “War on Terra.” If the Republicans were actually interested in “national security,” why is pResident Bush spending time stumping for the Marriage Rejection Amendment? And why is Bill Frist even bothering putting it on the Senate’s calendar, instead of, for example, doing the 2007 defense authorization bill?
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/51_132/roadmap/13658-1.html
Republicans in government don’t care about American national security–as has been clear forever. So, why should I?
Comment by raj — June 7, 2006 @ 12:18 am - June 7, 2006