« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


3K: Mary's 2K and 2K4 penance?

by Jeremy Hooper

The kids at Equality Cailfornia's Rippe Effect blog have just revealed the wonderful news that Mary Cheney and her partner Heather Poe have donated $3,000 to fight Proposition 8:

Mary Cheney donates $3000 to fight Proposition 8! [Ripple Effect]

Good move, Mare. So let's see here:

Supporting the Bush administration in '00
Supporting the Bush administration in '04
Not being as as effective voice for marriage equality as she could've been in the earliest days of the fight
Giving $3000 towards the CA marriage fight
Speaking out against those social conservatives who gave her shit for have a baby
Being public with her partner at Bush-ian functions

Outstanding balance to the gay community: Must personally bartend at each of our weddings; must guest on the series finale of "The L Word," where she'll formally apologize for her role in the Bush campaigns; must get Rosie & Kelli O'Donnell a weekend stay in the Lincoln bedroom; and must sing Pink's "Dear Mr. President" at the Bush farewell party draped only in pride flags

But hey, the 3k is a good start. Thank, M.C!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

Let's see why isn't she working for the McCain campaign??? Oh thats right because she can't be a valid parent since she isn't HET. .... a good good HET parent ;just like McCain is! HA!

Posted by: LOrion | Aug 1, 2008 4:41:44 PM

Myopic and very uncalled for, Jeremy. MC owes us nothing and neither you nor I have any idea what she has done privately.

Posted by: John | Aug 1, 2008 4:48:34 PM

Wow, making silly suggestions like guesting on "The L Word" and singing "Dear Mr. President" at a Bush farewell, all while still applauding Mary for the donation -- yea, that really was uncalled for. I'm a liberal tyrant, really.

Or at least I'm sure that's how you'll again try and represent me over in the comments of GayPatriot, huh John?

Posted by: G-A-Y | Aug 1, 2008 4:53:52 PM

Jeremy: I was puzzled by your remarks here, given that I never posted anything negative about you at GayPatriot and twice gave credit to G-A-Y as was due, until I saw this from June 21st:

"For the record, I would give a positive mention to anyone of any political stripe who was working towards the common cause of LGBT equality. My cause on G-A-Y is LGBT rights, not Democratic politics. It’s funny how people always want to define my politics, when I am HARDLY a liberal flamethrower. What does 'Regardless of how others choose to behave, I see no reason to follow suit' mean? And why do you have to qualify that you 'hold no personal animus for [me]'? Personally, I would’ve thought that went without saying."

First of all, my apologies for missing your comments to my post at GP. Secondly, while from what I can tell your views are liberal I do not believe you are a "flamethrower". Thirdly, my statement about "regardless of how other choose to behave..." was general in nature in response to David and not directed at you. This should have been clear since right before this I said that "he [Jeremy] wasn’t the focus of my post nor were his political views". If it wasn't clear enough, mea culpa.

Just as with liberals, it would be a mistake to think all conservatives think alike as well. I guess you could say there are varying degrees or something like that. The same David I took heat from and responded to is someone I believe you have dealt with before in the past:


As for the rest of your remarks here, you know very well that "The L Word" and "singing 'Dear Mr. President'" had nothing to do with my earlier post.

Posted by: John | Aug 1, 2008 6:57:11 PM

Yes, I've had MANY issues with David, and have had to adopt a sort of "no respond" policy with him b/c our comment back-and-forths have always been so time-consuming and fruitless. That's why I was hurt when I thought you were trying to explain away your linking to me. If it was a misunderstanding, then that makes me feel better. It sure sounded like you were trying to justify the link.

BNow back to this post -- you say: "As for the rest of your remarks here, you know very well that "The L Word" and "singing 'Dear Mr. President'" had nothing to do with my earlier post"

I honestly don't know what you mean by this, John. Giving Mary a silly "penance" to pay (all while acknowledging positives she has done) is pretty much the whole post! So I think it's a little ridiculous to call it "myopic and very uncalled for," regardless of your conservative bent. If anything it's a benign ribbing of a HIGHLY polarizing public figure.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Aug 1, 2008 7:12:41 PM

Yeah, I'm sorry Jeremy. Someone's political choices are more than being about their sexuality, and are personal.

This article should just be a well done for giving money, and being a openly and unapologetically gay voice in a generally anti-gay party.

Posted by: Corvidae | Aug 2, 2008 4:56:05 AM

"This article should just be a well done for giving money, and being a openly and unapologetically gay voice in a generally anti-gay party."

Or, some people could lighten up a bit and realize that (a) putting a silly spin on these so-called "culture wars" is what I oftentimes do, and (b) that regardless of what you or I think of her personally, Mary Cheney is a polarizing figure in the LGBT community, and (c) that the post is quite gentle.

I'm sorry, but this "scolding" is both unfair and unwarranted. I was hardly tough on M.C (A person with whom I've NEVER been "off with her head"-like).

Posted by: G-A-Y | Aug 2, 2008 9:19:32 AM

Well, I found found the article funny. I like the joshing you add to these happenings. It's why I read this blog regularly.

Posted by: Zack | Aug 2, 2008 11:43:25 PM

Ok, I'll buy that Jeremy. Eh, at least you didn't throw in religion with politics and REALLY break social taboos... ;-)

As for linking to you or other liberal blogs, I've done so in the past on my blog and at GP and will continue to do so in the future when something catches my eye. I consider that common courtesy as you seem to as well with political differences not being an impediment. Besides, as sharp as the divide may be between liberal and conservative it is not monolithic nor insurmountable where areas of common cause are not found. I'm thinking of the repeal of DADT, for example.

Posted by: John | Aug 4, 2008 11:00:11 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails