Regards,
Peter H.

Regards,
Peter H.

When the NGLTF start asking these questions, instead of standing beside this candidate,I will start taking them seriously.

I don’t believe you.

And for the strawman as to why I don’t defend Cheney and her partner and their pregnancy: I didn’t attack her, and no one asked me to defend her. What I defend is the right of all of us (and that includes Cheney) to have kids and be partnered without the government interfering: something which the Republican party by and large is dead set against, some more than others. Unlike the right-wing right now, I don’t think that only daughters of important Republicans should be able to do this. Spin however you want; it’s still true. Are the Ds steadfast defenders of our rights? Hardly. They vacillate from empty rhetoric to half-hearted support, but they don’t actively seek to make our lives harder.

It is possible for FOTF and Blitzer to be out of line, and honestly I don’t think Cheney is obligated to engage either on the issue publically-not sure why you think he should be.

Then Blitzer tries for a second question, a follow-up

There’s no “second question” whatsoever. You can’t come up with a quote even resembling a second question, instead you attempt to spin and declare that there was one. Truly pathetic. Now show me where the Cheney’s great concern over their lesbian daughter has led them to indignantly take to task Dobson like Dick did with Blitzer.

(1) want to somehow make it about BusHitlerCoCheneyBurton, as always; and
(2) couldn’t care less about the pregnant lesbian - i.e., defending her from FotF or Blitzer.

The second one, especially, I find pathetic.

As for the interview transcript issue: Ian, I suppose you could have just been given a bad transcript by Kos or CNN, or one that was over-edited… and I suppose the good CNN web site people edited the tape I transcribed, pretty heavily. But in either case, please remember: (a) source tape always trumps a transcript; and (b) quoting snippets of remarks with zero surrounding context is essentially dishonest.

Now THAT is what I call “shock and awe.”

Regards,
Peter H.

Kindly notice… that FotF wasn’t the interviewer… Blitzer was. If Cheney’s whole point to Blitzer was that he simply doesn’t want to respond to FotF’s text — then, Ian — it wouldn’t make much sense for Cheney to give a response to FotF’s text. Now would it?

Here is what’s on CNN’s tape (refer back to earlier link):

B: [irrelevant repetition of FotF question about what's best for the child] Do you want to respond to that?

C: No, I don’t.

Question and answer, Ian.

Then Blitzer tries for a second question, a follow-up:

B: She’s obviously a good daughter. I’ve interviewed her -

C: [interrupting] I’m delighted, I’m delighted to have a sixth grandchild. Wolf, um, obviously I think the world of both my daughters. And all of my grandchildren. And, uh, I think, frankly you’re out of line with that question.

Again, Ian: If you’re going to quote it, quote it right.

I think, frankly, you’re out of line with that question.

When Blitzer tried to respond, Cheney repeated himself

I think you’re out of -I think you’re out of line with that question.

Again, to my knowledge, neither Dick nor his wife have publicly claimed that Dobson was out of line for his attack on Mary and her partner and their relationship.

You are no libertarian. I know libertarians, because I am a libertarian. I truly believe in liberty. Which means: laissez-faire capitalism and small government. And I believe in analyzing the government’s alleged violations of liberty rationally, to discern which are real and which are just politically-motivated ruckus (from lefties such as yourself, or the far right). Finally, I believe, as Barry Goldwater put it, that patriotic “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice”.

TP (good one ): I don’t absolutely buy the premise that the FotF text quoted by Blitzer constitutes an attack on Mary or other pregnant lesbians. BUT - if it does - and if you do care about gay rights so very much - why don’t you just defend her?

You know, in a fashion that would be, like, honest and straightforward and effective?

#13 - Actually Ian, VP Cheney responded to Blitzer’s irrelevant question by saying calmly, “No, I don’t [care to respond].” If you’re going to quote it, quote it right. Click here to review the tape.

Kindly notice also, Ian, that FotF wasn’t the interviewer. Umm… Blitzer was. If Cheney’s whole point to Blitzer was that he simply doesn’t want to respond to FotF’s text — then, Ian — it wouldn’t make much sense for Cheney to give a response to FotF’s text. Now would it? LOL.

In conclusion: The twisted contortions y’all are going through to make this about the Vice President, not about FotF or Blitzer (who are both silly and contemptible) are something to watch. Keep it up!