Usually, nothing really new emerges from these ritualistic duals, but during the last Bush/Kerry debate, we got a real-time rare glimpse at what lies behind John Kerry’s Potemkin façade. These are the moments that make a debate truly worthwhile, as we watch hoping to see the man behind the talking points, prepared statements and usual spin. When John Kerry decided to speak for Mary Cheney, the curtain parted and we realized that Kerry does indeed have a very ugly portrait in his attic.
Most of the world now knows that Kerry, in this grand moment during that last debate, decided to make a singular point about his view of homosexuality, and used Mary Cheney, noting she was a lesbian, and then remarkably declaring what Mary would have to say about whether homosexuality is a choice—that she would say she was “being who she was born as.” Wow, I had no idea he was so close to Mary, or could read the minds of lesbians. I better go think nice thoughts right now!
Reports from those in the auditorium indicated a general gasp from the mixed Republican and Democratic crowd. The gut instinct of the people in the room, and the millions watching, was that Kerry’s use of Cheney was more than inappropriate—it smacked of exploitation and an agenda based in something other than respect.
Those who are insisting this is a non-issue, or worse, a perfectly appropriate thing for Kerry to do, like Frank Rich of the New York Times, expose themselves as out-of-touch with what matters to Americans. We have recognized that this speaks volumes about John Kerry’s character, and we don’t like what we see.
Of course, Rich and the New York Times are not famous for understanding issues involving esoteric and mundane concepts such as decency and integrity. Why should they start now?
Ultimately, there are plenty of gay people John Kerry actually knows personally. If he really wanted to make a point about what the homosexual thinks he could have referred to the very out daughter of Dick Gephardt, Chrissy Gephardt, or very gay Barney Frank, or the newly “Gay American” and not-for-long New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevy.
While the Kerry behavior seems bizarre at best, there is a method to his and Leftist madness in general.
First, Mary Cheney is hated by the Gay Elite. There are discussions are direct efforts to make life uncomfortable for her. Why? Because she dares to be different. She has made the same mistake as I—she refuses to have her sexuality be the singular defining aspect of her identity, and she has had the gall to be her own person and not bow down to the leftist agenda. Yes, she commits the fatal mistake of not conforming to the conformist Gay agenda.
Cut to John Kerry on debate night. Here is a man who is trying to maintain the traditional base of Democratic party support. Women are abandoning him as they realize having a passive internationalist in the White House is not the best protection against a Beslan horror on American soil. President Bush had the support of nine percent of blacks in the 2000 race. At this writing it has doubled to eighteen percent. Not good signs for Kerry.
Now consider that supposed political monolith of homosexuals. Kerry says he’s opposed to gay marriage but supports civil unions, a position identical with the president’s. I contend Kerry was in part pandering to the Gay Elite to make up for his position on marriage. The targeting of Mary Cheney by the Gay Elite is a well known effort by liberals, and Kerry’s comment was his way of saying “I’m with you,” by attempting to further their punishment of her on international television.
Of course, pundits have argued that you can’t embarrass an openly gay person by referring to her as, well, gay. While Mary Cheney is out, she has made choices to lead a quiet private life, laden with that pesky dignity thing, and oh yeah, she’s a…a…Republican!! Neither one of those ideas can get out, oh no. The Gay Gestapo looked to Kerry to slap Mary and her family and he did. John’s a good boy. Or was Teresa speaking to the Cocker Spaniel? You can never really tell.
Secondly, and perhaps even more revealing of how disconnected the Kerry gang really is, his campaign truly feels that Christians will reject the Bush and Cheney families because of this issue. In the decade-plus of my work as a radio talk show host and writer, I have spoken with thousands of Christians from across this country. What I found from them, coming from the feminist establishment as I do, is that while they hold religious beliefs against homosexuality, they are the most tolerant, understanding, and kind people I have ever met.
Oh sure, there are fringe extremists on the right, just as there are on the left, but the hundreds of Christians and others I heard from by e-mail and on my radio program were insulted, but by Kerry’s presumption that they were as shallow as he.
To disabuse you of the notion that Edwards and Kerry meant to ‘compliment’ the Cheneys (which simply piles on the insult) consider Kerry campaign director Mary Beth Cahill’s interview remarks immediately after the debate. When asked if Kerry’s remarks about Cheney were appropriate Cahill said Mary Cheney was out so “it is fair game.” Others in the campaign have used the same phrasing.
Gee, “fair game.” A fascinating term to use when paying compliments. And remember, for the Democrats “it” in this instance is a woman. The issue here is one of integrity and the intentions of Kerry. As Lynn Cheney noted, this is not a good man.
All of this boils down to something pretty simple--the Bushs and Cheneys have something that the Kerrys and Edwards do not—dignity and class. The contrast between Laura Bush and Teresa Heinz Kerry has truly become the best illustration of those differences. The bottom line is, inheriting all the money in the world (from a wife, a husband or a jury verdict) cannot buy you the dignity and grace inherent in a certain librarian and schoolteacher from Texas and the man she married. Laura Bush has helped her husband become a better man. It seems Teresa and Elizabeth have a taken a page from Hillary as they enable to worst in their men.
It’s worth noting, Kerry’s pandering to the gay community continued after the debate with an interview with The Advocate, the premiere gay and lesbian news magazine in the nation. When asked if he would ever change his mind about same-sex marriage John “I-Hold-Every-Position” Kerry said, “I can’t tell you in 20 years or whenever [that’s my favorite part—whenever, say six months from now?] if someone made a persuasive argument [Teresa? Hillary?] the world changes. You know George Bush changed his mind on a national security director…so I don’t predict the future.”
Let’s predict the future for him. Let’s make it clear enough on November 2nd that John Kerry can predict where he will not be in January.