"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch


You may be right.

I hadn't considered the effect such a remark would have on people who
consider
homosexuality a vile, deviant, "sin" rather than a biological anomaly.

A liberal hears, "So and so has a lesbian daughter," and to us it sounds
like,
"The
Jones family has a kid who is left handed."

Conservatives hear the same remark and perhaps some of them conclude,
"The
Jones family must have done a crappy job of raising their kids if one of
them
turned out queer. They should have taken them to church more often. How
sad to
think that nice young woman is condemned to burn in hell for all
eternity."

If Edwards had a malicious intent when he commented on Cheney's daughter
and
the support the Cheney family has extended to her, then the comments
that
it
was a "shot" have some legs.

If a conservative had made that comment, it is more likely that it would
have
been malicious than when the same comment is made by a moderate or a
liberal.
Goes to frame of reference.




LOL! You are about as non partisan as Dennis Kucinich.

Typical of a liebral.....they are ashamed of themselves.

Eisboch wrote in message ...
Harry Krause wrote:
WaIIy wrote:

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 00:37:49 -0400, "Gary Warner"
wrote:


Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.


You mean, when Edwards complimented the Cheney family for supporting
each other as a family, and for sticking up for the rights of their gay
daughter instead of disowning her or not talking about it, or when
Cheney thanked Edwards for his kind words?


Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

No, it wasn't a "cheap shot". It was meant to show the contradictions
between how Cheney actually feels, as opposed to what BushCo makes him
say.

In article ,
says...


Typical of a liebral.....they are ashamed of themselves.

If you had a brain in your head, you might understand why Americans
should be ashamed of themselves. We hired the village idiot to run the
country.

jps

jps wrote:
In article ,
says...


Typical of a liebral.....they are ashamed of themselves.

If you had a brain in your head, you might understand why Americans
should be ashamed of themselves. We hired the village idiot to run the
country.

jps


There's the rub...he has no brain in his head. The twerp is barely
literate...he probably thinks Dubya speaks English "good."

--
"...vice president (Cheney), I'm surprised to hear him talk about
records. When he was one of 435 members of the United States House, he
was one of 10 to vote against Head Start, one of four to vote against
banning plastic weapons that can pass through metal detectors. He voted
against the Department of Education. He voted against funding for
Meals on Wheels for seniors. He voted against a holiday for Martin
Luther King. He voted against a resolution calling for the release of
Nelson Mandela in South Africa. It's amazing to hear him criticize
either my record or John Kerry's."

- Senator John Edwards, 10/05/04

WaIIy wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 06:18:03 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

WaIIy wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 00:37:49 -0400, "Gary Warner"
wrote:


Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.

You mean, when Edwards complimented the Cheney family for supporting
each other as a family, and for sticking up for the rights of their gay
daughter instead of disowning her or not talking about it, or when
Cheney thanked Edwards for his kind words?

C'mon Mr. Spin, that was no "thank you".



What? Cheney lied? Cheney?

--
"...vice president (Cheney), I'm surprised to hear him talk about
records. When he was one of 435 members of the United States House, he
was one of 10 to vote against Head Start, one of four to vote against
banning plastic weapons that can pass through metal detectors. He voted
against the Department of Education. He voted against funding for
Meals on Wheels for seniors. He voted against a holiday for Martin
Luther King. He voted against a resolution calling for the release of
Nelson Mandela in South Africa. It's amazing to hear him criticize
either my record or John Kerry's."

- Senator John Edwards, 10/05/04

Remind me not to go to Florida if I have a cavity.
Edwards too a shot regarding Cheney's daughter and if you didn't
see it, you may or may not be partisan, but you would be lacking
in observational subtleties.


Edwards was the Caucasian male sitting to the right hand side of my TV screen.

The African American female, the moderator, was the person who introduced the
subject of Cheney's daughter- not Edwards.

you may or may not be partisan, but you would be lacking
in observational subtleties.

"P.Fritz" wrote in message ...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch


You may be right.

I hadn't considered the effect such a remark would have on people who
consider
homosexuality a vile, deviant, "sin" rather than a biological anomaly.

A liberal hears, "So and so has a lesbian daughter," and to us it sounds
like,
"The
Jones family has a kid who is left handed."

Conservatives hear the same remark and perhaps some of them conclude,
"The
Jones family must have done a crappy job of raising their kids if one of
them
turned out queer. They should have taken them to church more often. How
sad to
think that nice young woman is condemned to burn in hell for all
eternity."

If Edwards had a malicious intent when he commented on Cheney's daughter
and
the support the Cheney family has extended to her, then the comments
that
it
was a "shot" have some legs.

If a conservative had made that comment, it is more likely that it would
have
been malicious than when the same comment is made by a moderate or a
liberal.
Goes to frame of reference.




LOL! You are about as non partisan as Dennis Kucinich.

Typical of a liebral.....they are ashamed of themselves.

Typical of a right winger, they feel the need to start that
third-grade-like name calling.

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"P.Fritz" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch


You may be right.

I hadn't considered the effect such a remark would have on people who
consider
homosexuality a vile, deviant, "sin" rather than a biological
anomaly.

A liberal hears, "So and so has a lesbian daughter," and to us it
sounds
like,
"The
Jones family has a kid who is left handed."

Conservatives hear the same remark and perhaps some of them conclude,
"The
Jones family must have done a crappy job of raising their kids if one
of
them
turned out queer. They should have taken them to church more often.
How
sad to
think that nice young woman is condemned to burn in hell for all
eternity."

If Edwards had a malicious intent when he commented on Cheney's
daughter
and
the support the Cheney family has extended to her, then the comments
that
it
was a "shot" have some legs.

If a conservative had made that comment, it is more likely that it
would
have
been malicious than when the same comment is made by a moderate or a
liberal.
Goes to frame of reference.




LOL! You are about as non partisan as Dennis Kucinich.

Typical of a liebral.....they are ashamed of themselves.

Typical of a right winger, they feel the need to start that
third-grade-like name calling.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"P.Fritz" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject
of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch


You may be right.

I hadn't considered the effect such a remark would have on people
who
consider
homosexuality a vile, deviant, "sin" rather than a biological
anomaly.

A liberal hears, "So and so has a lesbian daughter," and to us it
sounds
like,
"The
Jones family has a kid who is left handed."

Conservatives hear the same remark and perhaps some of them
conclude,
"The
Jones family must have done a crappy job of raising their kids if
one
of
them
turned out queer. They should have taken them to church more often.
How
sad to
think that nice young woman is condemned to burn in hell for all
eternity."

If Edwards had a malicious intent when he commented on Cheney's
daughter
and
the support the Cheney family has extended to her, then the
comments
that
it
was a "shot" have some legs.

If a conservative had made that comment, it is more likely that it
would
have
been malicious than when the same comment is made by a moderate or
a
liberal.
Goes to frame of reference.




LOL! You are about as non partisan as Dennis Kucinich.

Typical of a liebral.....they are ashamed of themselves.

Typical of a right winger, they feel the need to start that
third-grade-like name calling.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Cripes, that asslicker is dumber than a tree stump

LMAO

Gould 0738 wrote:
Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch



You may be right.

I hadn't considered the effect such a remark would have on people who consider
homosexuality a vile, deviant, "sin" rather than a biological anomaly.

A liberal hears, "So and so has a lesbian daughter," and to us it sounds like,
"The
Jones family has a kid who is left handed."

Conservatives hear the same remark and perhaps some of them conclude, "The
Jones family must have done a crappy job of raising their kids if one of them
turned out queer. They should have taken them to church more often. How sad to
think that nice young woman is condemned to burn in hell for all eternity."

If Edwards had a malicious intent when he commented on Cheney's daughter and
the support the Cheney family has extended to her, then the comments that it
was a "shot" have some legs.

If a conservative had made that comment, it is more likely that it would have
been malicious than when the same comment is made by a moderate or a liberal.
Goes to frame of reference.



Gould,

Nice of you to practice amateur human psychology, but sometimes you
think too much. My comment had nothing to do with being a liberal,
moderate or conservative. It had to do with my belief that in a
political debate, your opponent's family issues should be off limits.
Period.

If the moderator brought up the subject of Cheney's daughter and the
fact that she is gay - then she screwed up. I don't recall that, but it
may have been. I recall the moderator posing a question related to gay
marriages, but don't recall her specifically mentioning Cheney's
daughter. I could be wrong.

Eisboch