Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
This is sorta starting to sound like:

She's fair game - she campaigns!

No, she doesn't.

Well, that's because they won't let her!

She's out and she works for the B-C campaign. So what's the issue?

[dtb]

Originally posted by bilmore
This is sorta starting to sound like:

She's fair game - she campaigns!

No, she doesn't.

Well, that's because they won't let her!

Um... just because she didn't make a speech at the convention (that was what we were talking about, no?) doesn't mean she doesn't campaign.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
No need for his Fu.

Atticus linked to when I referred to the campaign - by the left-wing ragsheets that I'm sure you and your NYC societal friends all subscribe to - to get people to refer to the "fecal matter and lubrication that drips out of someone's anus during and after anal sex" as Santorum, as disgusting and representive of the "politics of personal destruction" [so often claimed by the Dems]

Yes, crocodile tears. Right.

Yep. Bring up Santorum in a conversation on the Left's hostility to gays. That's a bright move, Sparky.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
Yeah, Kerry thinks gay marriage should be prohibited through other means.

Actually, I believe he's on record as opposing it but acknowledging that there is no Constitutional means of prohibiting it. Much the same way that most of us find white supremacists, nazis, and other hate-mongers abhorrent but recognize that the First Amendment allows for the free expression of the full range of political expression.

Well, most of us other than the senior leadership of the Ashcroft Justice Department, that is.

[soup sandwich]

I haven't been keeping up with this board as much as I'd like to.

Can someone please direct me to the posts condemning Bush's mentioning of Missy Johnson whose husband had fought in Iraq/Afghanistan and was killed, and with whom Bush cried and prayed? This was during the first debate.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Let's see:

She chose to hide from view in a private box
She did not and does not give interviews
She chose not go on stage

As a hair-splitter myself, I will admit "appear" was not a good choice of words - since she was physically present.

Would you prefer "participate"?

I would question, given her activism outside of the campaign, whether she "chose" any of the above, or if that choice was made by the Bush people who made it clear that her viewpoint was not wanted at the convention.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
No need for his Fu.

Atticus linked to when I referred to the campaign - by the left-wing ragsheets that I'm sure you and your NYC societal friends all subscribe to - to get people to refer to the "fecal matter and lubrication that drips out of someone's anus during and after anal sex" as Santorum, as disgusting and representive of the "politics of personal destruction" [so often claimed by the Dems]

Yes, crocodile tears. Right.

That's a one-person campaign. He just happens to have fairly large readership. Admit it, Dan Savage is funny.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
She's out and she works for the B-C campaign. So what's the issue?

"on the file" is your only test?
you're a student of history. remember allegations against a lawyer (I think named Fred Fisher)? took down a guy named Joe McCarthy?


“Until this moment… I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness.… At long last, have you left no sense of decency?” (Jos. Welch to Jos. McCarthy, 1954)

[dtb]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Yep. Bring up Santorum in a conversation on the Left's hostility to gays. That's a bright move, Sparky.

2.

Originally posted by Slave
Atticus linked to when I referred to the campaign - by the left-wing ragsheets that I'm sure you and your NYC societal friends all subscribe to...

Holy crap -- I missed this the first time. WTF? My societal friends? Huh? Uh -- haven't we met? I guess not... allow me to introduce myself...

Why does it always seem to descend to personal [what I think you perceive as] attacks? I haven't made one comment about you personally -- what's up with that?

I subscribe to the NYT and the WSJ -- but I'm not exactly sure of the periodical subscription habits of my non-existent societal friends -- but I'm confident the easily obtained right-wing ragsheets (Post? Daily News?) are balancing out those commie rags I subscribe to.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by bilmore
This is sorta starting to sound like:

She's fair game - she campaigns!

This whole topic is beyond ridiculous, but I'll slow down to peer at the wreckage.

I would not use the words "fair game" because I still don't think the comment was (or was intended as) either a criticism of her or some kind of devious effort to suppress the turnout of the "God Hates Fags" element of the GOP. {I think it was, at most, an effort to paint Bush as a bastard who's hurting real people, including some he knows, for political gain.}

However, for whatever this is worth -- the "she campaigns" issue misses the point. While she probably doesn't "campaign", it is worth nothing that Mary Cheney is the _top_ _aide_ to the VP in the B/C 2004 campaign.

Originally posted by bilmore
No, she doesn't.

Well, that's because they won't let her!

Actually, my bet would be that Mary would have been welcome on stage at the convention, but not her life partner. It is not surprising that she "chose" to stay in the private box, knowing what issues it would have raised and unwilling to leave her partner up there alone. Do you think any of the organizers urged her to change her mind and join her family?

S_A_M

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Which is a hell of a lot more accurate, considering he dumped the first one for the richer one, then tried to annul 18 years of history.

Lots of people try to do that, unfortunately. I have a close relative who annulled 25+ years of history so he could re-marry and still call himself a Catholic. Even more unfortunately, many dioceses are handing out annullments like candy to keep asses in the pews. The practice strinks of hypocrisy.

S_A_M

[dtb]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Actually, my bet would be that Mary would have been welcome on stage at the convention, but not her life partner. It is not surprising that she "chose" to stay in the private box, knowing what issues it would have raised and unwilling to leave her partner up there alone. Do you think any of the organizers urged her to change her mind and join her family?

This is my bet too. I was trying to come up with a trenchant way to put it, but it wasn't working.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
"on the file" is your only test?
you're a student of history. remember allegations against a lawyer (I think named Fred Fisher)? took down a guy named Joe McCarthy?

“Until this moment… I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness.… At long last, have you left no sense of decency?” (Jos. Welch to Jos. McCarthy, 1954)

Mary Cheney and Fred Fischer were not similarly situated. If you think that they were, you are either deeply homophobic (which I doubt), deeply ignorant (which I likewise doubt), or lazily equating them to score cheap points.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Lots of people try to do that, unfortunately. I have a close relative who annulled 25+ years of history so he could re-marry and still call himself a Catholic. Even more unfortunately, many dioceses are handing out annullments like candy to keep asses in the pews. The practice strinks of hypocrisy.

S_A_M

You know, when I was in the first grade, a nun told me that I was a bastard and had to work extra hard to get to heaven, because my dad was divorced before he (secularly) married my mom. She also mentioned that my parents were doomed to burn in hell forever, but that didn't matter because I had to love God more than I loved my parents. I was one that the Church got young, but they didn't get to keep.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Mary Cheney and Fred Fischer were not similarly situated. If you think that they were, you are either deeply homophobic (which I doubt), deeply ignorant (which I likewise doubt), or lazily equating them to score cheap points.

Fred was alleged to be in a "leftist" group, and attacking him was okay because he was on the file. in fact, he was in the group McCarthy alleged. Walsh said "Senator stop" McCarthy said "you offered him buddy fair game."

Last night Kerry drags Mary into an answer where putting a face on it served no purpose to the answer. People here say it was okay because she was on the file. I am not equating being a leftist and being queer. One is really stupid and controllable, the other is just the way some people are.

What I'm saying is Kerry dragged someone in to make some point, where he had no business doing so, and where the point was really to try and harn someone else entirely. Seems similar to Joe's move to me.

edit: and if being stupid and lazy is a crime here, I'm fixin to make some citizen's arrests.