There's a Gay in My Closet!

In the NY Daily News, in a story headlined "Kerry's gay ploy backfires ," Zev Chafets says "Since the debate, the Christian right has been rallying to the side of Mary Cheney. Well-known political preachers like Jerry Falwell and James Dobson have gone out of their way to defend her right to privacy."

Yeah: They're defending her right to stay in hidden away in a closet, somewhere completely out of site, like any respectable homo should if she has any respect for her God-fearing parents.

Personally, I clapped when Kerry brought up Cheney's daughter. I was like, "Score!" And she's completely fair game, mind you, because she's actively working on the Bush/Cheney campaign -- i.e., as the chief campaign manager for her father, she's a public figure and a member of the camp trying to defeat Kerry. So why can't her mention her sexuality?

She's already out of the closet, and he wasn't smearing her good name.... He was just suggesting that maybe Bush and the Far Right should consider allowing gays to have Equal Rights, just as it would be logical to assume that the Vice President might want his own daughter (and campaign manager!) to have equal rights.

So I'm surprised that the polls have turned on ol' sour-pussed JFK II on this issue. According to numerous reports, supposedly even Democrats and gays are offended that he "stooped that low."

But I'm thinkin': "this guy didn't STOOP. He told it LIKE IT IS." Geez.

But no, the public supposedly doesn't see it that way. And now Kerry is reeling back in the dogs:

"JOHN BACKS OFF AIDE'S CHENEY-KID JAB"

Dick's darling daughter, Mary Cheney, has been openly gay for at least a few years now, but it wasn't until recently that her parents finally began admitting it publicly.

In a New York Times piece, entitled "Cheney Daughter's Political Role Disappoints Some Gay Activists," we're reminded that in a "2000 television interview" where Cheney-the-Wife is asked about having having a daughter " 'who has now declared that she is openly gay,' Ms. Cheney quickly responded, 'Mary has never declared such a thing'."

However, the Cheney's have now jumped to Mary's defense, and Dick C is even said to be against the Prez on the Anti-Gay-Marriage-Constitutional-Amendment bit. Who woulda thought that Richard "Halliburton" Cheney would actually turn out to be less evil than good ol' buddy-boy Bush on ANY issue? I guess when it's a family affair it's a different story..... Now if only one of the Bush Twits (er, Twins... I mean, Presidential Daughters) would come out of the closet. Or, better yet, it's high time GWB's mother came out. You can't tell me you never got the vibe.....

And finally, Instapundit Glenn Reynolds has collected more views on how Kerry stepped over the line (I just don't get it - he called the kettle black, stood up for her rights, and then moved on, what was so bad? But then, maybe I'm not the most sensitive guy):

"I think it was a major blunder by Kerry -- especially as his position on gay marriage is the same as the President's."

Why Catholics Should Vote for Baby Killers (just so long as they confess later, natch)

Well, the editorial page of the WSJ is always clicking away:

In "A Voter's Guide: Pro-choice candidates and church teaching," Archbishop John J. Myers gives us a fair and balanced view of the candidates.

It's actually a very interesting article. Full of insights and wisdom. Perhaps just a tad one-sided.

Oh, you know, like when it implies that John Kerry and the left in general supports "the legalized killing of human beings in the embryonic and fetal stages of development by abortion or in biomedical research."

Now wait a damn second:

No one on the left is actually advocating producing "tens of thousands of human lives ... each year for the purpose of being 'sacrificed' " to the cause of embryonic research, are they? Maybe I didn't get the memo.

But as far as I remember, that's not what's being asked for at all. The "conservatives" (what are they conserving? not nature or gas, I assume...) are so good at making this kinda stuff up it makes me giddy with delight. Life must be a constant episode of "The Twilight Zone" for the republican marketing guys. This WSJ archbishop perhaps stayed up too late eating Cheetos and watching "Soylent Green," before writing his op-ed piece.

It's exactly this sort of twisting around of the facts that has convinced the likes of Ron Reagan Jr. to speak up in favor of increased stem-cell research; because the right is trying to demonize the issue by pretending that babies are going to be purposefully produced and slaughtered.... I can't believe the Wall Street Journal is getting away with perpetrating this myth.)

But alright, let's say that abortion is the key issue here. What if you take into account the idea that neither Bush nor Kerry will be able to actually reverse or protect Roe vs. Wade -- and that everything either of them says to the contrary is just grandstanding? If this were the case, then it might partially negate the issue and allow a Catholic to vote for Kerry for other reasons, instead of "Precisely because of a candidate's permissive stand on abortion," as the church suggests.

The war, as this article mentions, was not condoned by the Pope. Nor is capital punishment.

There's a very good editorial in the National Catholic Reporter on this very issue: "Partisans try to narrow Catholics’ choices".

ALSO, When it comes to ranking up the overall Catholic qualities of all U.S. Senators, Kerry ranks higher than any Democrat or Republican (admittedly, this is from a Democrat’s study, so bias could be found, I'm sure). Kerry beats everyone on most issues except for the abortion issue, where he scores a dismal (but not zero) rating.

" [WASHINGTON, DC] – Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and other Catholic senators today released an analysis of votes and actions of Catholic Senators based on the official positions taken on legislation by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).... 'Unfortunately, recent media attention has focused on one or two priorities of the Catholic Church, while obscuring others. This has made it more difficult for Catholic voters to understand the full range of issues that have been identified by the USCCB as priorities for public life,' said Senator Durbin. 'What we have done today is to use the criteria established by the U.S. Catholic Bishops to give voters an insight into the voting records of Catholic senators.' "

I'd reccomend glancing over the analysis in it's summary form, but the full report is also available as as a PDF.

"But wait!," you say. Despite all of the above evidence, you still can't bring yourself to vote for a dirty Dem. That's fine. Vote Nader. He's fiscally responsible. He won't bite. He likes seatbelts. He's a good guy. Heck, if you were going to vote for Bush anyway, then why not go all the way and put a write-in vote for Buchanan on the ballot. Buchanan or Nader. Those are your choices. Bush will eat your children. There. I said it. It must be true. Maybe the Wall Street Journal will publish it -- it seems right up their op-ed alley.

Here's the best news of all, though, straight from the Catholic Church itself:

If you've voted for a pro-abortion politician, you'll be okay -- just so long as you go to confession before your next communion.

"Forgive me Father, for I voted for Kerry today... Five Hail Mary's? Ahhh ... shucks...."

Now, isn't going through that after every election a heck of a lot easier than having to get Born Again again (and again and again and ...) ? That's why Catholics are the hardest rockin' Christians ever, dude man.