The Cheneys Are Cry Babies.

The Black Flag Cafe is the place travelers come to share stories and advice. Moderated by Robert Young Pelton the author of The World's Most Dangerous Places.

Moderator: coldharvest

Postby patriot » Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:27 pm

no dude, that was prodigal, not me.


My mistake.

No, that was prodigal not kilroy, and no he didn't wipe the floor with me. You reflexively think that anyone who verbalizes a disagreement with me automatically wins the argument, but considering you can't even figure out which person wrote what when it's right in front of your face, why the fuck should anyone care what you think?


Ok, forget what Prodigal said. I don't want to get involved in your partisan stoogery anyway.


Let's be real here, Tarkan. All Kerry did was mention Cheney's daughter, and the fact that she was a lesbian. And Lynne Cheney used it as an oppurtunity to slander Kerry publicly in the home-stretch of an election, instead of ignoring it like she did with Alan Keyes and Jim Demint. And you know that says it all right there. Alan Keyes can call Mary Cheney a selfish hedonist, but when Kerry merely mentions here then all of a sudden the Cheney attack squad roles into town? It seems their political interests are leading them instead of their morals.

They are trying to score political points off this debacle by blowing it way out of proportion, that's my issue with this whole thing. Sure maybe it was in bad taste and maybe it was ill-advised, but does playing politics make you immoral???
User avatar
patriot
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 8:35 pm

Postby Tarkan » Sun Oct 17, 2004 5:56 pm

Dim wrote:Just a few comments on Tarkans comments.

Cheneys daughter is already out, has been for years. Cheney has already made her sexual orientation a political issue by bringing it up in stump speeches (although, curiously, never south of the Mason-Dixon line).

It's also unlikely that Ms Cheney seeks anonymity since she's a prominent member of his campaign (part of her duties involve trying to convince gay and lesbian people to vote for Bush-Cheney, the rest of the time she pushes shit uphill with a sharp stick).


Well, hell, I had no idea this was going on. That's the last straw, I'm voting for Kerry.
I'd whore myself out just one more time if I knew who to screw to get out of this grind.
User avatar
Tarkan
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 6027
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:57 am
Location: Texas

Postby Tarkan » Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:05 pm

Let's be real here, Tarkan. All Kerry did was mention Cheney's daughter, and the fact that she was a lesbian. And Lynne Cheney used it as an oppurtunity to slander Kerry publicly in the home-stretch of an election,


Slander? Please. It wasn't slander to call Mary Cheney a lesbian, and it wasn't slander to call Kerry a slimeball. She is and he is. Slander has to be not true for it to be slander.

instead of ignoring it like she did with Alan Keyes and Jim Demint.


Alan Keys and Jim Demint aren't running for President. Furthermore, how do you know they weren't taken behind the tool shed privately? You don't.

They are trying to score political points off this debacle by blowing it way out of proportion, that's my issue with this whole thing. Sure maybe it was in bad taste and maybe it was ill-advised, but does playing politics make you immoral???


Explain to me why you are upset at Cheney for what you see as trying to score points from a slimeball move from Kerry, but aren't upset at Kerry for the same thing? I mean, explain why apart from your reflexive dislike of all things connected to Bush. Kerry, me thinks, is the big crybaby. Look how his campaign is now complaining about the Sinclair broadcasting group. Was he complaining about Michael Moore and the movie 9-11? Nope. Look how he complained about the Swiftvets for Truth. Was he complaining about MoveOn.Org? Nope. Did Bush try to get MoveOn.Org and 9-11 shut down? Nope. Has Kerry tried to get the Swiftvets shut down? Yep. How about Sinclair? Yep.
I'd whore myself out just one more time if I knew who to screw to get out of this grind.
User avatar
Tarkan
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 6027
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:57 am
Location: Texas

Postby Dim » Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:10 pm

Explain to me why you are upset at Cheney for what you see as trying to score points from a slimeball move from Kerry, but aren't upset at Kerry for the same thing? I mean, explain why apart from your reflexive dislike of all things connected to Bush. Kerry, me thinks, is the big crybaby. Look how his campaign is now complaining about the Sinclair broadcasting group. Was he complaining about Michael Moore and the movie 9-11? Nope. Look how he complained about the Swiftvets for Truth. Was he complaining about MoveOn.Org? Nope. Did Bush try to get MoveOn.Org and 9-11 shut down? Nope. Has Kerry tried to get the Swiftvets shut down? Yep. How about Sinclair? Yep.


I'm totally baffled by what point you're trying to make here? Was the GOP upset about Swift Boat Vets for truth? Of course not. Were they upset at CBS for attacking the president with forged documents? You bet! But so what?

Alan Keys and Jim Demint aren't running for President. Furthermore, how do you know they weren't taken behind the tool shed privately? You don't.


Isn't that just another way of saying Lynne's a hypocrite? And presumably if Alan Keyes had been taken behind the woodshed at any stage he would have stopped screaming hysterically about how homosexuality is sinful and wrong - he hasn't.
The reader this message encounters not failing to understand is cursed.
Dim
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:01 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby patriot » Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:35 am

Slander? Please. It wasn't slander to call Mary Cheney a lesbian, and it wasn't slander to call Kerry a slimeball. She is and he is. Slander has to be not true for it to be slander.


Tarkan...just the facts please. Kerry fought for his country and has dedicated his life to civil service, policy and politics aside he's served his country well, and that, in my mind, makes him a good man. You can't actually believe that Kerry being a slimeball is a factual statement? She slandered him, end of story; and it just so happens she's doing it after Bush got spanked in all three of the debates...scare-crow anyone?

Alan Keys and Jim Demint aren't running for President. Furthermore, how do you know they weren't taken behind the tool shed privately? You don't.


So as long as you're not running for President it's ok to slander the Cheney's daughter without worry of a rejoinder from the Repubs? SWEET! Damn dirty dyke!!! C'mon Tarkan, that's having it both ways. Alan Keyes is running for a seat in the Senate on the Republican ticket no less. I think that a Senate postition is worthy of scrutiny...don't you think? And don't even say that just because he hasn't a chance at winning means it's different; we're talking about principals here.

Explain to me why you are upset at Cheney for what you see as trying to score points from a slimeball move from Kerry, but aren't upset at Kerry for the same thing? I mean, explain why apart from your reflexive dislike of all things connected to Bush. Kerry, me thinks, is the big crybaby.


I don't think it was a slimeball move on Kerry's part. Maybe it was stupid or in bad tatse like I've been saying, but it wasn't immoral. It just seems awfully convienant that whenever Kerry and Bush start talking about real issues (the debates) that the Bush team will inevitably short-change the American people by redirecting their attention towards something that has absolutely no relevance to any of the country's problems. They got their butt's whipped when it came time to discuss the issues, now their reverting back to their old tactics of attacking and slandering Kerry. So instead of the American people thinking about the debates and the pertinent issues, they're thinking about Kerry mentioning a lesbian. Thank you Republicans!

Look how his campaign is now complaining about the Sinclair broadcasting group. Was he complaining about Michael Moore and the movie 9-11? Nope. Look how he complained about the Swiftvets for Truth. Was he complaining about MoveOn.Org? Nope. Did Bush try to get MoveOn.Org and 9-11 shut down? Nope. Has Kerry tried to get the Swiftvets shut down? Yep. How about Sinclair? Yep.


We could move this debate to another thread. But I'll say a few things...

The owner of the Sinclair group is forcing his networks to show this movie. It stinks of partisan hackery. He can prove me wrong by accepting Moore's offer of airing F-9/11. Moore's giving him the highest grossing documentary of all time for free. If he's any kind of buisnessman he'd accept.

F-9/11 was in the middle of a Republican effort to stop theaters from showing the movie. But unlike Sinclair no theater was forced to show it, and it wasn't free either.

The Swifties bellittled and dishonored Kerry's service to his country. I think that's worthy of a complaint. And that's besides the fact that their attacks were baseless and fradulent. Everything they said was contradicted by the Naval records, and the statements of Kerry's crew-men.

Moveon.org:
I haven't heard Kerry complain about any anti-Kerry websites.
User avatar
patriot
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 8:35 pm

Postby SoloPilot » Tue Oct 19, 2004 5:26 pm

No, Patriot, the question was not legitimate. It was not even really a question, it was a comment on something which wasn't even part of the discussion.

However, it seems to have backfired on the Johns. Even longtime Democrat politicos have thrown rocks at Kerry and Edwards about it, becuase it has always been tradition to leave candidates children alone in the political fight.

If the Johns are so desperate that they have to attack their opponents CHILDREN, that shows that their campaign is really pretty weak.
SoloPilot
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:02 pm
Location: There I was, flat on my back, outta fuel, outta ammo, no commo . . .

Postby Dim » Tue Oct 19, 2004 5:54 pm

Kerry said: "We're all God's children, Bob, and I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was. She's being who she was born as. I think if you talk to anybody, it's not a choice."

Now Mary Cheney has been publically out for years and Dick Cheney has referenced his daughters sexuality in his own stump speeches. It's interesting that you consider this an attack - speaks volumes, really.
The reader this message encounters not failing to understand is cursed.
Dim
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:01 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby SoloPilot » Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:14 pm

Dim:

It's an attack when it is used in an attempt to gain the "high ground."

You don't go after a candidate's kids. They belong to the candidate in any way he or she chooses, but they are not legitimate fodder for opponents. Mary Cheney has taken great pains to stay out of the spotlight. Her parents have acknowledged her sexual preference and lifestyle, but have never trotted her out to bring in the "gay" vote.

The Johns have dragged her out in a non-sequitur attempt to get Cheney's supporters to draw back in disgust. Instead, they got their own supporters to cry "foul!"
SoloPilot
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:02 pm
Location: There I was, flat on my back, outta fuel, outta ammo, no commo . . .

Postby Buzzsaw » Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:18 pm

Come on, people, it's all politics on both sides.

Kerry made a calculated gamble to try to do one or both of the following...

1. Try to erode some support from Bush's base by repeatedly pointing out that the Bush campaign is "harboring" a homosexual.

2. Try to point out the conflict in the ranks of the Bush administration over the issue of gay marriage/gay rights.

The Bush Camp/Cheney made a calculated response by painting Kerry as an insensitive jerk who doesn't know how to handle himself with grace.

Who wins out of this? Probably no one. Maybe the edge to Bush so far. And in an election this close, every little edge matters.

There are no uncalculated manuevres by these guys. The election is just around the corner.
Buzzsaw
Gynecology Enthusiast
 
Posts: 5312
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 1:53 pm
Location: Lavaca

Postby Dim » Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:33 pm

Mary Cheney was the face of 'compassionate conservatism' for the GOP in 2000 and a major gay advocate for the Republican party. This time around she's director of Vice-Presidential operations for the republican campaign. That's not exactly staying out of the spotlight.

The Bush vote aren't chasing the gay vote this time around for roughly the same reasons they aren't chasing the islamic terrorist vote.

I agree that Kerry mentioned she was a lesbian for pretty calculated political reasons - but he's pointing out the hypocrisy of the republicans, not attacking an individual.
The reader this message encounters not failing to understand is cursed.
Dim
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:01 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby Buzzsaw » Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:36 pm

Kerry should be criticized for leaving himself open to such an obvious retaliatory strike after throwing this ill-advised punch (which doesn't seem like it actually connected).

What's the point of making a big deal about the conflict over gays in the Bush camp? The only votes he'll get on that are people that are already voting for him anyway.
Buzzsaw
Gynecology Enthusiast
 
Posts: 5312
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 1:53 pm
Location: Lavaca

Postby SoloPilot » Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:48 pm

Dim:

I dunno about the political and campaign structure in NZ. Here in the US, the VP (and his staff) are about as vital as an afterburner on a turtle. The VP is pretty much a spare tire, and until he is actually needed, he is pretty much ceremonial, like the sword in the hands of an Air Force cadet.

Mary Cheney is not making an issue out of her being a lesbian, any more than she's making an issue out of having spontaneous respiration. She's not the "token gay" in the RP.

BTW, let me mention that I have no great love for the RP. I am not a Republican, they are pretty much as annoying as the Democrats. But taking cheap shots at a candidate's kids is low even for the Johns, and their party loyals are
SoloPilot
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:02 pm
Location: There I was, flat on my back, outta fuel, outta ammo, no commo . . .

Postby Dim » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:05 pm

The VP is usually a third wheel, but Dick Cheney is the most powerful Vice President the US has ever known.

It doesn't matter how often and how many ways you try and tell me the Cheneys haven't used Mary's sexuality for political purposes when their well documented deeds and words show that they have.
The reader this message encounters not failing to understand is cursed.
Dim
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:01 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby SoloPilot » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:11 pm

Dim:

You must be very young.

Ever heard of LBJ?
SoloPilot
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:02 pm
Location: There I was, flat on my back, outta fuel, outta ammo, no commo . . .

Postby Dim » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:24 pm

SoloPilot wrote:Dim:

You must be very young.

Ever heard of LBJ?


Yep - if him and the Kennedys hadn't hated the site of each other he could have been a real powerful vice-President.
The reader this message encounters not failing to understand is cursed.
Dim
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:01 am
Location: New Zealand

PreviousNext

Return to Black Flag Cafe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 23 guests