Something About Mary…
By Vincent Fiore (10/26/04)
Wednesday's third and final presidential debate was in most aspects reminiscent of the first two. Aside from President Bush managing to keep his Texas poker face, and with smiles aplenty from both candidates, it depended on whom you liked going in as to which man won the contest.
John Kerry was determined, and definitely on message, and should be given credit for standing toe to toe against a popular wartime president for ninety tense-filled minutes. Bush was much more specific and factual, and played the part of the aggressor throughout the debate. It was his best effort to date.
But the mainstream belief was that these debates would do little in the way of changing minds this year, as backers of both Bush and Kerry are firm. As we have been reminded all too frequently, the polarization that grips the nation is near-absolute. These debates then, were for the undecided voter.
Not surprisingly though, there were few undecideds left to decide. So going into the third and final presidential debate, we had: a divided and polarized electorate; polls that said that the race was deadlocked; and an ever-dwindling crop of undecideds for the candidates to harvest.
But something did happen in Tempe, Arizona Wednesday night that just may wind up tipping the presidential vote-meter to the right. To understand it, you have to go back to the October 5 debate between Vice-President Dick Cheney and the Democratic candidate for the office, John Edwards.
During that debate in Ohio, Edwards was asked a question about same-sex unions, to which he responded: “You can’t have anything but respect for the fact that they (the Cheneys) are willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter, the fact that they embrace her.” Notice the heavy usage of the word “fact” here.
Cheney, who in my opinion was somewhat disturbed by Mr. Edwards’ courteous yet direct mention of Mary Cheney’s sexual preferences, responded as a man who wanted to change the subject fast: “Let me simply thank the senator for the kind words he said about my family, and our daughter.” And that was that.
This question of homosexuality came up again in last Wednesday’s debate, this time in the form of whether homosexuality is a choice in life, or is a life one is born to; to which Mr. Kerry replied: “If you were to talk to Dick Cheney’s daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she is being who she was, she’s being who she was born as.”
The difference between those two statements, though both cordial and seemingly sincere, is now clearly one of consequence. While no one at the time had anything bad to say regarding Edwards’ use of Mary Cheney as a debate prop, they are not saying that now about John Kerry.
By design, Kerry clearly believes that he can use Mary Cheney as a wedge to come between Bush and his religious base. Nor is it lost to the public that surely, John Kerry, this man of the people, this giant of an elite, could have mentioned a homosexual he actually knew? New Jersey Governor James McGreevy comes to mind; Missouri Congressman Dick Gephardt’s daughter, Chrissy, or someone just down the street who Kerry has served with for his entire twenty years in the Senate, Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank.
The campaign’s answer, just as revealing as Kerry’s answer itself, was sheepishly announced by Kerry campaign guru Mary Beth Cahill: Mary Cheney is “fair game.”
Since hindsight is indeed always 20/20, it is easy now to say that John Edwards’s gratuitous comments on October 5 were really just part of a campaign ploy hatched by the Democratic brain trust that run the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
Though Mary Cheney is director of vice-presidential operations for her father, she has kept her appearances extremely scarce. As much as Democrats and some gay activists groups like to claim otherwise, this is by choice--namely hers. She was not dismissed in New York City during the on-stage get together at the climax of the RNC, she simply choose to shun the stage.
The Cheneys are rightly outraged over this last attempt by John Kerry to win votes by any means possible. Cheney had this to say regarding John Kerry’s new political low: “You saw a man who will do and say anything to get elected. And I am not just speaking as a father here, although I am a pretty angry father.”
To understand just what a political campaign can do to otherwise sincere and affable people, look no further than the once-cerebral wife of John Edwards, Elizabeth, who managed to one-up her husband and John Kerry in baseless and tasteless campaign message: “I think that it indicates a certain degree of shame with respect to her (Lynn Cheney’s) daughter's sexual preferences.”
If there is any validity at all to these debate-night focus groups of undecideds that pollsters like to run, then John Kerry is in trouble here. GOP pollster Ed Goeas reported that the undecided focus groups he surveyed during the debate on Wednesday night had a very negative reaction to Kerry after he brought up the vice president's daughter, even though they thought he had been doing well up until that point. ABC News reports the same, as do numerous other focus groups that witnessed the debate.
Should George W. Bush win this election, one of the things that will be talked about is that John Kerry won the debate war, but lost the battle for heart and minds. Though Kerry was ahead on most voters debate score cards, all he proved was that he was a good debater, but not someone who could lead the country as president.
But here is one more distinction. Besides John Kerry’s numerous positions on issues and raw political verve, what will also be remembered are his shameless and opportunistic remarks at a presidential debate when he might have made the sale to the American people, but choose instead to say something about Mary.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Vincent Fiore
