On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:39:14 -0400, Eisboch
wrote:

His remarks regarding
Cheney's daughter (however intended)

Cheney's daughter is working in the BushCo campaign. She is open for
discussion. This is a non-issue, so shut the **** up.

--
Q

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:02:36 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


Cheney himself discussed his daughter's sexuality in the VP debate.
Does he now feel "outed" by Kerry in the final Presidential debate, or
is it that the polls are running neck and neck?

He discussed it because John Edwards specifically brought up the subject
of his daughter. In contemporary America, this subject is still
regarded as a private matter. If Cheney and/or his daughter want to
discuss it, that is their right. Edwards and Kerry discussed it only to
try to gain a political advantage, period, no matter how "nicely" they
did it and the majority of the voters recognize it, IMHO.

In point of fact, Ifill brought Cheney's daughter into the debate.

Ifill: "The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President.

I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting:
"Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when you
were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used *your family's
experience* as a context for your remarks.

Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional
ban on same-sex unions?"

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...pt2/index.html

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:02:36 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


Cheney himself discussed his daughter's sexuality in the VP debate.
Does he now feel "outed" by Kerry in the final Presidential debate, or
is it that the polls are running neck and neck?

He discussed it because John Edwards specifically brought up the subject
of his daughter. In contemporary America, this subject is still
regarded as a private matter. If Cheney and/or his daughter want to
discuss it, that is their right. Edwards and Kerry discussed it only to
try to gain a political advantage, period, no matter how "nicely" they
did it and the majority of the voters recognize it, IMHO.

In point of fact, Ifill brought Cheney's daughter into the debate.

Ifill: "The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President.

I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting:
"Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when
you
were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used *your family's
experience* as a context for your remarks.

Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional
ban on same-sex unions?"

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...pt2/index.html



The truth is, the Cheneys do not support equal rights for their own
daughter.

--


How so?

"starwars" wrote in message
elinux.net...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Q wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:39:14 -0400, Eisboch
wrote:

His remarks regarding
Cheney's daughter (however intended)

Cheney's daughter is working in the BushCo campaign. She is open for
discussion. This is a non-issue, so shut the **** up.

--
Q

You don't have any class or ethics.

He emulates Kerry.

Harry Krause wrote:
starwars wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Q wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:39:14 -0400, Eisboch
wrote:


His remarks regarding
Cheney's daughter (however intended)

Cheney's daughter is working in the BushCo campaign. She is open for
discussion. This is a non-issue, so shut the **** up.

--
Q

You don't have any class or ethics.



If Mary Cheney were still in the closet, it would have been
inappropriate. Ms. Cheney, however, is openly gay. In fact, she flaunts
her sexual preference. During the GOP convention, she sat in the VP's
box with her gay partner. Her private sector job was as a liaison to the
gay community as an employee of Coors Brewing.

MAry's parents obviously are upset with their daughter's sexual
preference, and they support Bush's plan to take a right away from gays.

The righties are pandering to their small-minded pseudo-Christian base.
You obviously are a part the small-minded.



Now Harry, I may be small-minded to some, but pseudo-Christian I am not.

Eisboch

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
starwars wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Q wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:39:14 -0400, Eisboch
wrote:


His remarks regarding
Cheney's daughter (however intended)

Cheney's daughter is working in the BushCo campaign. She is open for
discussion. This is a non-issue, so shut the **** up.

--
Q

You don't have any class or ethics.



If Mary Cheney were still in the closet, it would have been
inappropriate. Ms. Cheney, however, is openly gay. In fact, she flaunts
her sexual preference. During the GOP convention, she sat in the VP's
box with her gay partner. Her private sector job was as a liaison to the
gay community as an employee of Coors Brewing.

MAry's parents obviously are upset with their daughter's sexual
preference, and they support Bush's plan to take a right away from gays.

The righties are pandering to their small-minded pseudo-Christian base.
You obviously are a part the small-minded.



Now Harry, I may be small-minded to some, but pseudo-Christian I am not.

Eisboch

I don't believe you to be small-minded or pseudo anything. You sort of
remind me of the old style responsible Republican moderates, the ones
that helped make this country a better place to live.



Funny to see you squirm with someone who you admire and respect yet
continuously proves you wrong.

I the reply to you were made by me, JohnH, Jon Smith and the same it would
be totally different.

Dance Krause....dance....LMAO!

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:18:11 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


Now Harry, I may be small-minded to some, but pseudo-Christian I am not.

I am the Walrus - coo coo ka choooooo...

Later,

Tom

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

starwars wrote:


On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Q wrote:


On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:39:14 -0400, Eisboch
wrote:



His remarks regarding
Cheney's daughter (however intended)

Cheney's daughter is working in the BushCo campaign. She is open for
discussion. This is a non-issue, so shut the **** up.

--
Q

You don't have any class or ethics.



If Mary Cheney were still in the closet, it would have been
inappropriate. Ms. Cheney, however, is openly gay. In fact, she flaunts
her sexual preference. During the GOP convention, she sat in the VP's
box with her gay partner. Her private sector job was as a liaison to the
gay community as an employee of Coors Brewing.

MAry's parents obviously are upset with their daughter's sexual
preference, and they support Bush's plan to take a right away from gays.

The righties are pandering to their small-minded pseudo-Christian base.
You obviously are a part the small-minded.



Now Harry, I may be small-minded to some, but pseudo-Christian I am not.

Eisboch

I don't believe you to be small-minded or pseudo anything. You sort of
remind me of the old style responsible Republican moderates, the ones
that helped make this country a better place to live.




Funny to see you squirm with someone who you admire and respect yet
continuously proves you wrong.

I the reply to you were made by me, JohnH, Jon Smith and the same it would
be totally different.

Dance Krause....dance....LMAO!



My fault. I got the names and replys messed up.

Harry's ok. I don't agree with his politics much, nor does he with mine,
but it's always an agreeable disagreement. Same with Gould.

It's when the focus shifts from healthy debate to frustrated name
calling that the threads in the NG spiral out of control.

It's good to mulch other ideas or philosophys once in a while.
Sometimes you learn something and modify your own positions. Sometimes
your position simply becomes stronger in your mind.

Eisboch (going to watch the Sox/Yankees now)

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

starwars wrote:


On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Q wrote:


On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:39:14 -0400, Eisboch
wrote:



His remarks regarding
Cheney's daughter (however intended)

Cheney's daughter is working in the BushCo campaign. She is open for
discussion. This is a non-issue, so shut the **** up.

--
Q

You don't have any class or ethics.



If Mary Cheney were still in the closet, it would have been
inappropriate. Ms. Cheney, however, is openly gay. In fact, she flaunts
her sexual preference. During the GOP convention, she sat in the VP's
box with her gay partner. Her private sector job was as a liaison to
the
gay community as an employee of Coors Brewing.

MAry's parents obviously are upset with their daughter's sexual
preference, and they support Bush's plan to take a right away from
gays.

The righties are pandering to their small-minded pseudo-Christian base.
You obviously are a part the small-minded.



Now Harry, I may be small-minded to some, but pseudo-Christian I am not.

Eisboch

I don't believe you to be small-minded or pseudo anything. You sort of
remind me of the old style responsible Republican moderates, the ones
that helped make this country a better place to live.




Funny to see you squirm with someone who you admire and respect yet
continuously proves you wrong.

I the reply to you were made by me, JohnH, Jon Smith and the same it
would be totally different.

Dance Krause....dance....LMAO!

My fault. I got the names and replys messed up.

Harry's ok. I don't agree with his politics much, nor does he with mine,
but it's always an agreeable disagreement. Same with Gould.

It's when the focus shifts from healthy debate to frustrated name calling
that the threads in the NG spiral out of control.

It's good to mulch other ideas or philosophys once in a while. Sometimes
you learn something and modify your own positions. Sometimes your
position simply becomes stronger in your mind.

Eisboch (going to watch the Sox/Yankees now)


Despite our recent differences on the undecided vote I have always thought
you to be among the more restrained and intelligent posters to this NG. My
opinion has not changed despite our recent differences.

Regarding Harry Krause though, I do disagree with you. The man is a nut
case, a stalker and a frustrated wanna-be. I think most of the NG shares my
feelings, especially since he recently wished death and catastrophe to the
republican member family's. ;-)

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:29:11 -0400, Harry Krause wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:02:36 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


Cheney himself discussed his daughter's sexuality in the VP debate.
Does he now feel "outed" by Kerry in the final Presidential debate, or
is it that the polls are running neck and neck?

He discussed it because John Edwards specifically brought up the
subject of his daughter. In contemporary America, this subject is
still regarded as a private matter. If Cheney and/or his daughter want
to discuss it, that is their right. Edwards and Kerry discussed it only
to try to gain a political advantage, period, no matter how "nicely"
they did it and the majority of the voters recognize it, IMHO.

In point of fact, Ifill brought Cheney's daughter into the debate.

Ifill: "The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President.

I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting:
"Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when
you were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used *your
family's experience* as a context for your remarks.

Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional
ban on same-sex unions?"

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...pt2/index.html



The truth is, the Cheneys do not support equal rights for their own
daughter.

I'm not so sure. Having a gay child can be an eye opening experience. I
have no reason to doubt Cheney loves his daughter and his "freedom means
freedom for everyone" was a heart-felt statement. That being said, he is
also not above making political hay. He claims indignation at Kerry's
comments, but I haven't heard his response to Alan Keyes calling his
daughter a "sinner" and "a selfish hedonist".

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5897569/