Now that's funny. There might be smart conservatives, but O'Reilly certainly is not one of them.
That's the second good joke in two days you gave us.
Cheneys unraveling...
- Thread starter ZZZzzzzzzz
- Start date
Now that's funny. There might be smart conservatives, but O'Reilly certainly is not one of them.
That's the second good joke in two days you gave us.
The "people" have no right to hear about the daughter of the V.P. in anyway, shape or form. They, the people, have every right to hear about the fiasco in Iraq. If Wolf doesn't have the balls, or the brains to pin Cheney to the floor with Iraq related questions, then he has no business in network journalism, or what passes for journalism in this day and age. His cheap shot regarding Cheneys daughter only goes to show his inability to engage in substantive debate. Like all radical elements of network news, both left and right, they simply pander to the whack jobs of their respective affiliations.
The question was not at all out of line.
Bush and Cheney were twice elected because of their appeal to a conservative midddleclass religious coalition. That is a fact, clearly in the record books, and clearly stated in their election planning.
The fact that the VP has a daughter who is not only lesbian, but who is giving birth to child who will grow up without a father, is indeed news, and clearly worthy of exploration in a discussion with him.
When Cheney told Blitzer that his question was out of line, Blitzer should have pushed back hard on him, explaining that it was not all out of line considering how he and Bush pandered to the conservative right.
Mary Cheney is neither a politician nor a public figure.
Al Gore was a daily pot smoker for nearly a decade. (I bet few of you even know that). Gore's son has been arrested several times for DUI's and drug possession. Would it be proper for a "newsman" to ask Gore, "do you feel your own drug use was complicit to your son's addiction"? It would be a great question. It would also be rude, not germane to a political discussion and invasive.
Funny how those who so greedily guard their identities on anonymous message boards are the first to demand transparency from everyone else........
Al Gore was a daily pot smoker for nearly a decade. (I bet few of you even know that). Gore's son has been arrested several times for DUI's and drug possession. Would it be proper for a "newsman" to ask Gore, "do you feel your own drug use was complicit to your son's addiction"? It would be a great question. It would also be rude, not germane to a political discussion and invasive.
Funny how those who so greedily guard their identities on anonymous message boards are the first to demand transparency from everyone else........
I look forward to Hillary Clinton being grilled about her views on sexual harrassment, rape, selling pardons to donors,etc. Somehow I odn't think it will happen, at least not on CNN.
Actually, I don't think the question was that far out of line. Cheney's daughter put herself in the public eye, so questions about her are foreseeable. She worked on Cheney's campaigns and then wrote a book. She is not a private figure thrust unwillingly by the media into the limelight. In contrast, she has used her celebrity to advance in a low key manner her gay rights agenda.
As for Cheney, he clearly didn't want to get out on thin ice with the party's family values base, which is already upset at the administration. But he couldn't very well say he didn't support his pregnant daughter either. So he had an understandable objection to Blitzer putting him in what Blitzer clearly knew was an untenable position.
I think the question was hardball, but fair. The Foley scandal should have taught republicans that you can't say one thing to supporters, then do something entirely different in Washington. Ccheney's objection really wasn't to a personal question. If his daughter had announced her engagement to Tom Brady, do you think he would have been offended by a question about it? No, his objection was to being put on the spot and asked to explain why one thing was acceptable for his daughter but not for ordinary people.
Certainly the question was far more aggressive than anything Chris Wallace asked Bill Clinton in their interview. The difference in how the two men handled the situation speaks volumes about them. Clinton abused, bullied and made personal remarks about a person who was not in a position to respond in kind. Cheney handled it with dignity and class.
Actually, I don't think the question was that far out of line. Cheney's daughter put herself in the public eye, so questions about her are foreseeable. She worked on Cheney's campaigns and then wrote a book. She is not a private figure thrust unwillingly by the media into the limelight. In contrast, she has used her celebrity to advance in a low key manner her gay rights agenda.
As for Cheney, he clearly didn't want to get out on thin ice with the party's family values base, which is already upset at the administration. But he couldn't very well say he didn't support his pregnant daughter either. So he had an understandable objection to Blitzer putting him in what Blitzer clearly knew was an untenable position.
I think the question was hardball, but fair. The Foley scandal should have taught republicans that you can't say one thing to supporters, then do something entirely different in Washington. Ccheney's objection really wasn't to a personal question. If his daughter had announced her engagement to Tom Brady, do you think he would have been offended by a question about it? No, his objection was to being put on the spot and asked to explain why one thing was acceptable for his daughter but not for ordinary people.
Certainly the question was far more aggressive than anything Chris Wallace asked Bill Clinton in their interview. The difference in how the two men handled the situation speaks volumes about them. Clinton abused, bullied and made personal remarks about a person who was not in a position to respond in kind. Cheney handled it with dignity and class.
Yes, they should ask Gore that question, why not?
Yes, it would be proper if Gore ran on a very strong anti drug policy, claiming that drug use was "immoral."
Oh, and to the best of my knowledge, only you has run for public office...
This is an anonymous board for the most part, not public office, where the people place their trust in leaders to represent them and their votes.
Sheesh...
Stop the insanity of defending that slug Cheney...
Yes, it would be proper if Gore ran on a very strong anti drug policy, claiming that drug use was "immoral."
Oh, and to the best of my knowledge, only you has run for public office...
This is an anonymous board for the most part, not public office, where the people place their trust in leaders to represent them and their votes.
Sheesh...
Stop the insanity of defending that slug Cheney...
To the best of my knowledge Cheney didn't campaign on the issue of morality and gender orientation.
The left loves to assume those who oppose same sex marriage are homophobic. I suppose those who oppose marriage between father-daughter are anti-family also.
And no Z, Cheney's not the type of guy I'd either want to have a beer with or join in a hunting party although I reckon I'd enjoy his company a hell of a lot more than say Gore, Edwards or Kerry.
The left loves to assume those who oppose same sex marriage are homophobic. I suppose those who oppose marriage between father-daughter are anti-family also.
And no Z, Cheney's not the type of guy I'd either want to have a beer with or join in a hunting party
although I reckon I'd enjoy his company a hell of a lot more than say Gore, Edwards or Kerry.
So what??? The question was not about her, it was about Cheney's response to the reports of the conservative press.
The question would have been equally appropriate if it had been about "Jane Doe", a lesbian who is giving birth to a child.
"Mr. Vice President, what do you think about that given your administration's views on family values"?
It is even MORE appropriate that it is the VPs own family.
It goes directly to the issue of politicians of Cheney's ilk being quick to provide advice to others, but not being open to discussing their own situation.
Bush and Cheney put family values at the forefront of their public values. It is a valid point in any conversation with him.
So, you are saying that Cheney didn't align himself with the moralist Christian right in 2000 and 2004?
Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
To the best of my knowledge Cheney didn't campaign on the issue of morality and gender orientation.
The left loves to assume those who oppose same sex marriage are homophobic. I suppose those who oppose marriage between father-daughter are anti-family also.
And no Z, Cheney's not the type of guy I'd either want to have a beer with or join in a hunting party