In (limited) defense of Dick Cheney
Steve Gigl is on a roll today, but in this post he gives a pretty good theory for John Kerry’s weird remarks about Mary Cheney in the debate last night. In a nutshell, Steve thinks that Kerry was trying to obliquely accuse the Bush/Cheney campaign of hypocrisy, since they’re taking a strong stance against gay marriage, yet Cheney’s own daughter is a lesbian.
I agree that’s probably what Kerry was up to. But whether he was or he wasn’t, I don’t think the charge of hypocrisy is valid. I think Cheney’s just stuck between a rock and a hard place. When he agreed to be the V.P. in 2000, gay marriage wasn’t a big issue. I don’t remember gay marriage ever being mentioned during the 2000 election, maybe it came up here or there, but it certainly wasn’t on the MSM’s radar screen.
But in the past few years, some judicial opinions have fired up the conservative base. Marriage Is Under Attack (or so I’m told on a nearly daily basis.) Suddenly, gay marriage is an Issue.
But what can Cheney do? He’s already the vice president; he can’t back down now. I think that if gay marriage was this big of a deal in 2000, Cheney wouldn’t have offered himself up to be V.P., but now that he’s in, he’s in. It’s obvious that he and Lynne love their daughter, and he can’t very well go around gay-bashing just for votes.
But Bush can’t ignore the groundswell of popular opinion against gay marriage either, not if he wants the support of the over 40 age group. (Opposition to gay marriage is a generational thing, in 20, maybe even 10 years it’ll all be over and gays will be able to be married (or at least get civil unions) in all 50 states.) So Bush pretty much has to be against it, but not so much that he alienates the younger voters. So does Kerry; Kerry has, as far as I can tell, nearly exactly the same position on gay marriage as GWB has. The only difference is that Kerry is against the constitutional amendment and is more in favor of states rights, but both sides say that marriage is only between a man and a woman.
Cheney’s just stuck in the middle, and is trying to be as gracious about it as he can. Personally, I think that behind the scenes Cheney has made it very clear to Bush and to the Bush campaign how far they can go and still have him be on the ticket. I don’t see the hypocrisy, really, because it’s not like Cheney’s the attack dog on gay marriage here.
P.S. Don’t miss Hindrocket’s Power Line post about seeing Mary Cheney during the 2000 elections:
Mary Cheney does not, I think, do campaign speeches and interviews. Perhaps she is not comfortable in that role. But we all serve where we can. That day four years ago, it was very clear that if anyone sought to harm Dick Cheney, he would have to do it over his daughter’s dead body.
UPDATE: New don’t miss: Lileks:
What really sticks out is the idea that the Cheneys speak from shame. Because, you know, if you’re a Republican and your child is gay you are ASHAMED, just as Democrats are ASHAMED when their children join the Army. Right? Can’t possibly be proud of them, because all Dems are commie-lib traitors, just as all Republicans are homophobes who throw a blanket over the TV every time a rerun of “Ellen” pops up on Oxygen.
What nuance. What elegant understanding of the human heart.