Mary Cheney, the vice president’s openly gay daughter, is pregnant. She and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, are “ecstatic” about the baby, due in late spring, said a source close to the couple.

In short, the WaPo gossip column broadcast the news, and the Cheney’s spokesperson responded when asked a question. Gay leftists and Democrats started spinning the lie that Mary (or the Vice President) had put out a press release announcing it as a means of backing up their whining that she and the Vice President were “hypocrites” for telling Wolf Blitzer where to stick it.

Considering you live in a liberal area, I’m not surprised you aren’t getting a negative reaction from conservatives. From what you said, I’m not sure there are many around there. While I’m sad that you face this reaction, that doesn’t change my point about how many times gay parents face an ugly reaction from “concerned” straight parents. You may be upset at how gays treat you, but they aren’t going to schools to complain about students finding out gays exist, or if a teacher is gay, or if a gay parent wants to participate in classroom activities.

Since you choose to live in that area, obviously the gay left doesn’t bother you all that much. This is why people sometimes have a hard time taking gay conservatives seriously, Matt. You take all the opportunities that gay liberals have given by helping to create this nice place to live, yet you act like they are just too much for you to bear.

-If you think that was the motive of Blitzer’s stunt, then Blitzer should have been apologetic when Veep Cheney said the matter was outside of bounds…-

The problem with this is that Mary Cheney publicly announced her pregnancy. There was no reason for Wolf Blitzer to be apologetic about something she wanted all of America to know about. Dick Cheney released a statement at that time saying he was happy to have another grandchild. He didn’t say “asking my opinion is out of bounds.” So for it to suddenly be out of bounds when he goes on a talk show – sorry, but that doesn’t work for me.

-because Clay is considered less lefty than other Hollywood types, he needs to be outed?-

Clay isn’t exactly a Hollywood type. He also isn’t very conservative.

Kerry stated he and Bush had the same ‘fundamental’ belief about equality. I said homophobic is homophobic, regardless if you’re a Bush-lover or a Kerry-lover. I’m no Kerry apologist. You go on about ‘gay leftist Democrats’ while nary saying word about ‘gay rightist Republicans’ who aren’t exactly good and pure and holy themselves. It’s like we’re in some kind of race to the bottom on who is the worst on gay rights. You bitch about Democrats, I do the same for Republicans.

Michigan-Matt I’m a girl, just so you know. Violence does not appeal to me, never has, never will. But on the net, even a milquetoast can become a fire-breather. I am a proud lefty, bleeding heart liberal and I do get dander up seeing a blog called ‘Gay Patriot’ attack Democrats and the blog commentors who heartily add their voices to the anger-choir. That’s why I like moderate or centrist blogs, rather than the strident left-wing/right-wing blogs., it keeps my blood pressure low.

Pat There are always those who follow the party line with blinkers, be it Republican, Democrat, Green, Libertarian or Communist party. I’m from South Dakota and I see that in action too often. Many people had to vote for either Bush or Kerry while holding their noses.

Of the two top Democratic contenders, Obama and Clinton, they appear to be left of Kerry on gay rights issues. Kerry just came across as pandering to me when he made that statement about marriage. I think Clinton herself has changed her view on same-sex marriage and I wouldn’t be surprised if she comes out in support of gay marriage or at least civil unions or other forms of marriage. Guiliani is the Republican front-runner so far, and he appears to be leftist when it comes to gay rights, but he might abandon that if he feels he needs support from the social conservative. Romney and Huckabee have pretty much declared their stance, but I don’t know if they will win the magic middle since they have taken pretty harsh stands. TIF all they have to offer the voter is support for ‘traditional marriages’, it doesn’t bode well for their chances outside of a certain wing of the Republican party. Either candidate might wind up being a Republican version of Kerry, not exactly winning the hearts and minds of moderates. However, all this might be pissing in the wind, and that a particular stance on gay rights will wind up at the very bottom of what issues the people will be concerned with in 2008. When it comes to the 2008 elections, every candidate will no doubt wiggle out of whatever stance they took to some degree. I see Guiliani being the one who changes his tune the fastest.

How, exactly, is quoting precisely what John Kerry said and what gay leftist Democrats were doing on his campaign, with links to prove it, “spewing right-wing bigotry”?

You claim to believe that “homophobic is homophobic”.

Prove it.

Say that John Kerry was homophobic and that Democrats like him who oppose gay marriage are homophobic — and that gay staffers who work for them, gay voters like yourself who support them, and gay organizations who give money to them are supporting homophobia.

I daresay that, instead of following through, you’ll just try another diversionary attack, whining about how Republicans are allegedly building and want to send every gay person to concentration camps.

My view has been that the Democrats are, in general, better than the Republicans on gay issues. There are exceptions, like Robert Byrd, who is probably worse than Bush on gay issues. Further, most Democrats do have at least one anti-gay stance, such as opposing gay marriage or failing to endorse some comparable non-separate but equal form of legal relationship status. In subsequent elections, the Democratic candidate for President have steadily moved towards gay equality. Even Clinton, despite signing DADT and DOMA was more pro-gay than his predecessors. Bush, wanted to go further than DOMA, and certainly has not proposed dropping discrimination totally from the military. Kerry voted against both, and has endorsed civil unions. Whether or not you call Kerry pro-gay or not is semantics at this stage. But he was clearly less anti-gay than Bush.

I’ve had no problem with gay organizations supporting Kerry on the basis of gay rights, and giving money to him. However, they should have made it clear that he was not for total equality. They should have said something like “We conditionally endorse Kerry, because we believe that gay rights will advance, and that he is much better than his opponent on gay issues. However, we are disappointed that he not only opposes gay marriage, but has actively supported state anti-gay amendments. We hope in the near future that we can endorse a major candidate who is for equality.”

What has happened as a result of the 2004 and 2006 election was that Democrats believe that they have had to regress a bit on gay rights. The Democratic candidates from the 2006 election have been less supportive of gay rights than the candidates of the 2004 election. And it looks like with the current crop of Democratic candidates for President, that they are not going to be more progressive on gay rights than Kerry, and in most cases, more anti-gay. Further, individual candidates themselves are becoming more anti-gay in their stances. This is unfortunately, also true for Republican candidates (see John McCain). So I will be more cautious in giving support to any candidate, especially if gay organizations don’t take a stand and speak out against ANY candidates anti-gay positions.

You need to be afraid; be very afraid.

North Dallas Thirty So that’s your response? Demonize ‘gay leftist Democrats’. Mary Cheney was campaigning on behalf of her father. She specificially said in her book, I believe, that she sacrificed pushing gay rights for other issues. When will Mary get a chance to advance her own rights? Once she made herself subservient to the right-wing homophobic agenda, she made it that much harder for herself, her child and her partner.

Homophobic is homophobic, regardless of where you are on the political spectrum. Now try to spin all that Republicans have done to advance gay rights. As I recall Republicans are the primary movers and shakers with all the banning and whatnot, or do you bury your head in the sand and ignore what Republicans are doing to ensure gays/lesbians don’t exist legally? A version of ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’? Don’t ask what your Reublican leaders are doing for gay rights and they won’t tell you they are doing squat?

Are you just gonna spew right-wing bigotry against Democrats? You’re not a self-hating gay are you?

Don’t make me laugh.

Do you know what John Kerry said about his position on gay “equality” in the 2004 election?

The president and I have the same position, fundamentally, on gay marriage. We do. Same position.

Which he proved, again and again, with his pushing to ban gay marriage in Massachusetts, his support of state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage, and his repeatedly saying that gay marriage was wrong and that bans on it were justified.

Meanwhile, as I pointed out elsewhere, gay leftist Democrats were running Kerry’s campaign and pumping tens of millions of dollars into it, money taken away from campaigns fighting the antigay intiatives that Kerry supported, all while screaming that Kerry was “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive”.

Now watch as Elias starts to spin, explaining why bans on gay marriage, supporting constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights, and whatnot are not homophobic when Democrats do it – and that gay staffers of Democrats who are against gay equality are not “Uncle Toms”, even though they support homophobes.

We all have a role to play in attaining equality. Some are activists. Some are politicians. Some protest in the streets. Some rant and rave on blogs, in publications, and on the air. Some throw themselves into political parties and whatever promise that holds.

But most people just live their lives, demonstrating that we’re more alike than different, and that, in time, over generations, is what will win us equality in the end … far more than all of the efforts of us politicians, activists, and talkers.

Dave K.

Her father has spoken out against the FMA, but does anyone believe him? What rights does Cheney want for his daugher? Why isn’t he advocating civil unions? Doesn’t he want his daughter to have the same protections as he and his wife enjoy as a married couple? All he talks about his how wonderful it is to have a new grandchild. His joy is all about HIM, not Mary or her partner.

It’s not enough to say you oppose something, and then sit on your hands and do nothing. It seems to me Mary Cheney thinks that her mere existence as a lesbian is enough to turn the tide of Gay-hating Republicans into giving her basic rights that everyone else has. If that worked, then African-American’s would have gotten equal rights a long time ago. Women would have gotten equal rights a long time ago. It is not merely enough to simple exist as a member of a minority and speak. You actually have to DO something otherwise you will never get it. You can’t get equality sitting on your ass. What as Mary Cheney actually done besides bleat that she doesn’t like FMA or other anti-gay legislation? What policies, bills has she actively encouraged the Republican party to adopt? What is she doing to change of the thinking that leads to Sen. ‘Man On Dog’ Santorum or Sen. ‘Box Turtle’ Cornyn?

How can Gay Republicans fight effectively if the Republican Party doesn’t lift a finger to help one of their own?

Carl (49), you write: “You mention being a father. All the time we hear about gay parents who are shunned or treated poorly by the other parents when they find out the child has gay parents”

Actually Carl, the people that I’ve been mostly shunned by are GayLeft single men and politically radical gay couples who see the family my partner and I are building and nuturing as a sell-out…

LOL. (Matt, thanks for who you are!)

On the point about Blitzer bringing up Mary Cheney’s pregnancy as some sensitive, caring moment amongst Dads taking delight in a new grandchild… Right.

LOL again. Yup. All the dads I know quote FOCUS ON THE FAMILY ATTACK PIECES when sharing those special, caring and sensitive moments with the other dads.

Enlighten me on your thinking, please.

Regards,
Peter H.

Actually Carl, the people that I’ve been mostly shunned by are GayLeft single men and politically radical gay couples who see the family my partner and I are building and nuturing as a sell-out to their sense of true gay identity. Like I wrote, most str8 parents I interact with don’t see any consequence to us being Dads or raising a family… so you’ll have to rework your fallacious reasoning a tad. Sorry.

On the point about Blitzer bringing up Mary Cheney’s pregnancy as some sensitive, caring moment amongst Dads taking delight in a new grandchild… Right. If you think that was the motive of Blitzer’s stunt, then Blitzer should have been apologetic when Veep Cheney said the matter was outside of bounds… in fact, Blitzer used the FOF perception as a link to his “congratulations on being a grandfather”… come on, Carl, get real. It was another example of a stunt by the very liberal drive-by journalists at CNN to snark the Veep… and it didn’t matter to them if they had to use a gay couple’s children to do it.

I think what really pisses off the GayLeftBorg is that Veep Cheney had the balls to determine and say what was and wasn’t appropriate… instead of caving to the liberal MSM and fluffing a response.

You’ve made the point repeatedly that GOPers view homosexuals as evil, bad, sinners, abnormal, etc. We can disagree on that uninformed opinion but the truth you jumped over is that Kerry and Edwards used Mary Cheney’s sexual preference as a tool to divide GOPers because they think there’s something inherently wrong with being gay. Just like, despite all the nonsense about supporting the troops, they dislike and distrust and (in Kerry’s case, clearly despise) the military.

I think it’s more telling that you can’t get beyond the GayLeftBorg spin on this issue. Pull away from the tubes, detach and think on your own… you can do it Ian. The Borg will continue to spin without your blind loyalty and submission.

I meant to type George Michael there, thanks. As for Clay, there have been a series of webcam photos released of him talking to people; the people say they talked to him at gay sex websites. His fans just say the whole thing is a lie. Over and over.

Kerry’s statement was, if you throw away the political and any other external meanings, was complimentary towards Mary Cheney. But he knew how people would react, and so he saw it as a situation that would make Republicans uncomfortable, partly because it involved Cheney, but more so that they do not want to address how gay persons should be treated in the country, and in the Republican Party. I wouldn’t have had any issue with Kerry’s point if he didn’t use Cheney as a pawn. I think he had every right to bring the issue of gay rights, and attitude towards gay persons to Bush.

We also did see during the debate how Bush sidestepped the issue by pulling the “we are all sinners” crap. Although no one that I know was bothered by it, I was much more offended by that than by Kerry’s statement. To me Bush’s answer was as bad as saying “we all have our crosses to bear” in response to “do you believe ethnic group X is inferior?” And it got him out of taking a real stand on the issue. I am also convinced that Bush personally does not believe that homosexuality is a sin, that sexual orientation is not chosen, and that gay persons are wrongly and unfairly denigrated by the religious right. But he chose not to say so. So gay people are pawns to both political parties, in my view.

That’s news to me. The only other “seemingly straight to the American public” (yeah, right) star caught “inflagrante delecto” in the john was George Michael.

Regards,
Peter H.

I think this says it all. You live in a very liberal city. The dreaded, horrible “gay left” helped to make that city a place where people can tolerate you. Many gays are not as lucky. Many straight people continue to assume someone is straight unless that person is out there in public toilets (see Clay Aiken). To them, homosexuality is something so uncomfortable that they just don’t want to ever admit anyone they might know or be close to is that way, or is around people they know. You mention being a father. All the time we hear about gay parents who are shunned or treated poorly by the other parents when they find out the child has gay parents.

-And, besides, the point was that OUT gay guys usually distain or outright loathe closeted gay guys because they aren’t apparent on the gaydar screen-

I think that’s wishful thinking. You claim that straight-acting gay guys are hard to buy once they’re out. Yet you think that they’re easier to buy as long as they stay in the closet. Is Sean Hayes believable as a straight man because he’s not out?

The reason that many openly gay men resent closeted gay men is because closeted gay men often enable bigotry and punish homosexuals to try to hide their own shame. Do you think that the gays and lesbians who were persecuted in the 50′s were jealous of Roy Cohn because he was so believable as a heterosexual stud? I doubt it.

-It doesn’t mean she has to open up all aspects of her personal life to inspection by drooling journalists like Wolf Blitzer… just so he can bait and sell his show?-

You mean “inspection” like congratulating her father on the pregnancy? If she didn’t want such horrible treatment, then publicly announcing the pregnancy was sort of a mistake, wasn’t it? Why is this considered shameful?

-Save the outrage for the pass that your brethen on the GayLeft give to Anderson Cooper -

I haven’t exactly seen the gay right being all that critical of him either.

use being gay as a badge of dishonor.

The only people who regard “being gay as a badge of dishonor” are those in control of the Republick party to which you continue to give your vote and your money.