Like her father Dick, Liz Cheney supports repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Also like her father Dick, Liz Cheney is a raging zealot whose opinions we aren’t gungho about suddenly respecting.
“It’s time for it to end,” the former vice president’s daughter tells TPMDC during a break at CPAC. “The joint chiefs, certainly the chairman of the joint chiefs, has been clear about that and I think that the country really is at a place now where it’s time for it to end.”
It wasn’t even a week ago that Liz’s dad Dick was saying the same thing, repeating his earlier opposition to bans on gays in the military.
It’s very tempting to take these two Cheney soundbites and parade them around to conservatives saying, “Seeeeee! This is why you should support gay equality too!” In fact, in our earlier post, we are guilty of basically doing just that.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
The problem with using Dick and Liz’s support for repealing DADT to bolster our own argument to kill the law, however, means lending credence to the other words that come out of these two people’s mouths. That’s a mistake. Dick Cheney is still the guy who believes the Bush administration’s torture methods — which he personally approved — were no big deal. Liz Cheney is still the same power-hungry girl who excuses torture based on the grounds that, hey, it’s necessary.
If we are going to champion either Dick or Liz’s arguments on DADT, it means we actually respect and value their viewpoints enough to quote these individuals. Aside from Cheney’s expert political mastery, and Liz’s ability to spin the media, there’s not a whole lot to respect about either of these two. (Maybe they’re dedicated to their families? Okay, great.) To cherry pick things these two support, and trumpet them as evidence why everyone should go along with one of their beliefs, is foolish.
No, we don’t have to agree with someone on everything to agree with someone on something. And you needn’t agree with us on everything to command our respect on another topic. But Liz and, especially, Dick represent some of the worst things human beings do while in power. To go to an extreme example, just because Hitler loved dogs does not mean we’re going to run around telling everyone they shouldn’t abuse their puppies because Hitler wouldn’t have liked it.
The only way to effectively exploit their support of a DADT repeal, then, is to take their viewpoints to other raging conservatives whom also believe that American authorities can violate somebody’s human rights (or expose a CIA operative’s identity as a political maneuver) and say, “Hey, these terrible people think the same thing as you about this thing, why not see where they’re coming from on that thing?”
Otherwise, we do not accept Dick or Liz as people capable of making reasonable arguments about the human condition, and their support of a DADT repeal, while lovely, doesn’t further influence our support. But hey, score one for bipartisanship, or whatever the kids are calling it these days.
Donny
I’m really tired of both liberals and conservatives invoking Hitler to make a point. Whatever you think of the Cheneys, it is completely offensive and inappropriate to analogize who killed 6 million Jews…
Donny
*analogize to a man who killed…
ousslander
please , queerty if they were Dems who had approved the interrogations, you would be jumping up and down celebrating them. I’ll take their support.
To judge their support by their other beliefs or actions, you must do it to everyone one. However I doubt that will happen.
Cam
No, mentioning their support doeesn’t mean you have to agree with everything else they say…that is a ridiculous statement and it’s one of the reasons that politics has gotten so ugly. When right wingers say that DADT shouldn’t be replealed and that people wanting it repealed are all liberal wack jobs, all you do is say “Well you really respect Dick Cheney and would never call him a liberal and yet HE thinks it should be repealed, so what do you have to say to that?”
You don’t have to sit there and agonize whether or not you agree with him on everything else. Sheesh.
schlukitz
So, with this odd line of reasoning, it follows then, that it would be pointless to spend time, energy and money on getting anyone, including members of the religious right, to switch positions and agree with and support LGBT people at the polls the next time Prop 8 comes up for a vote.
Talk about painting ones self into a corner or pulling the rug out from under our own feet?
HiredGoons
@Donny: 2nded
J. Clarence
The problem with using Dick and Liz’s support for repealing DADT to bolster our own argument to kill the law, however, means lending credence to the other words that come out of these two people’s mouths. That’s a mistake.
You can agree with someone on some issues and disagree with them on others. This isn’t an all or nothing world, Queerty. You build a consensus by finding areas where you agree, and not just blacklisting a person because they have beliefs you disagree with.
Andrew
Dick Cheney is the highest ranking republican to support marriage equality. I’ll take it. I may not agree with him on many other things but at least he believes all Americans are equal.
Josh AZ
Dick Cheney doesn’t support marriage equality.
Dick Cheney doesn’t support the repeal of DADT.
He NEVER said either of those things. He said he supported “some type of arrangement or contract” for gays and lesbians. He said the repeal of DADT was probably coming and he would “support the Military’s position” on the issue.
Bulletin: The Military is going to begin a “study of DADT,” that will never be finished. Soon, the Dems will have no power in the Congress.
Andrew
@Josh AZ: Incorrect. As early as 2004 he stated he was in support of gay marriage, but that the states should decide for themselves.
In 2009 he reiterated this stance and said “freedom means freedom for everyone” amongst a strong stance on the states choice to choose, of course.
I don’t like the man, but give credit where credit is due.
His daughter is a Lesbian, has had a partner for 17 years and they now have a child. Whether or not that has something to do with it, as it may, is up for debate — but everything he’s said in regards to her is that he accepts her at least.
terrwill
Any port in a storm…….If a curmudgon like Dick the patron saint of the lunatic rightwings says anything favorable about the Gays, we need to latch on to it banter it all over like the lunatic rightwingers do with say an “Ex-Gay”.
I am making a prediction right here and now……The reason why Cheney is suddenly reappearing is that he is testing the waters for a Cheney/Pallin ticket in 2012. Cheney will pledge to only serve one term to give Scarah “expericnce” greasing the rails for her in 2016…….You saw it here first!!
Timothy
“The problem with using Dick and Liz’s support for repealing DADT to bolster our own argument to kill the law, however, means lending credence to the other words that come out of these two people’s mouths.”
That’s just downright stupid.
We don’t say, “Dick and Liz agree with us so therefore everything they say is true”. We don’t do that with anyone on any issue.
What we say is, “Look, I know you respect the opinion of Dick Cheney. So when we talk about the reasons why you should lift the ban, consider that it isn’t just liberal leftist propaganda. Cheney shares this belief, as do most Republicans. So don’t immediately dismiss us.”
Unless, of course, you live in an echo chamber where everyone likes you and hates Dick Cheney, in which case you can rant on about the evils of all Republicans while you stand in a circle patting each others’ backs.
Josh AZ
@Andrew: Saying “good luck” with a Sate-by-State strategy is hardly an endorsement. He never said he agreed with it. THAT would be an endorsement.
Josh AZ
@Timothy: The problem is Cheney doesn’t share the “belief.” He reluctantly suggests it may be inevitable, but sends us down the state-by-state path knowing we will fail.
If you want to kiss someone’s ass i would suggest Johnny Weir, not Dick Cheney.
Andrew
@Josh AZ: No, indeed, he isn’t an activist. But he said that HE PERSONALLY agrees with it, which was my point.
Brown Gay Al
I guess the lefty queens agree with Barack Obama when he says a marriage is between a man and a woman and does nothing on gay rights because they vote Democrat then.
Marc
“That’s a mistake. Dick Cheney is still the guy who believes the Bush administration’s torture methods”
water board those sons-of-bitches, dammit. there is an assumption here that a gay person has to also be opposed to the enhanced interrogation of terrorists.
“To go to an extreme example, just because Hitler loved dogs does not mean we’re going to run around telling everyone they shouldn’t abuse their puppies because Hitler wouldn’t have liked it.”
cheney definitely has more credibility than the person who wrote that.
here is one reason why dick’s and liz’s support really matters. it shows what happens when a gay daughter and sister comes out and that honesty brings the family closer together.
reason
In this scenario Queerty is correct Dick Cheney is grossly wrong on so many issues and usually takes positions out of sheer self interest, Liz Cheney an out lesbian making statements against DADT is nothing to write home about (see post below that I copied from one of my past postings). Trying to convince a conservative using Cheney is absurd granted that people have their own brains and don’t agree with everything someone supports even if they support that person. For example I like some of Obama’s ideas but I certainly don’t agree with all of them, so if someone tried to make an argument by saying well Obama agrees with this, I would write them off as a feeble minded idiot. The quote about the religious right just doesn’t fly, if we could shift them towards touting the true tenants of Christianity we would all be better of. The evangelicals may have some things wrong, but it would be extremely dishonest not to note that they have some things right, so I disagree Queerty did not box’s itself in.
People must forget that Cheney daughter Liz is a lesbian with a partner and kids, the reason he didn’t say anything while he was in the White House, about DADT, is because the administration was vehemently against homosexuality and he had better self serving agendas to push. Cheney, unfortunately, like a lot of republicans these days care about one thing which is empowering themselves. He has already grossly enriched himself via Halliburton, started up an ill intentioned war in Iraq to guaranty Halliburton’s solvency thus guarantying that he would get paid his multimillion dollar pension loaded with stock options to boot when he sauntered out of the White House. Now he wants to soften up America on gay issues to insure a good life for his daughter, after decreasing estate, capital gains, and dividend taxes so he can pass on all the wealth to his daughter Liz that he stole from the American tax’s payers and the families of the soldiers that died in Iraq. Cheney could care less about homosexuals, it his daughter throne that he is worried about; it’s me and mine first at its greatest.
Andrew
@Marc: Yes. But I wouldn’t say it’s gays, I would say it’s more any decent human being would be opposed to torture.
Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"
Pacts with the devil are always pacts with the devil.
Let the Cheneys have at it with the GOP and wingnuts, that is their business. There is no need nor reason for the LGBT community to endorse anything they do. Should the Cheneys change some minds, great; if not, nothing lost.
There is an ancient Hindu proverb about a little girl, on a path by a river, who comes across an injured snake caught in a trap. “Please, little girl, can you help me? I’m injured and I cannot get free,” asks the snake.
“But you are a snake and you will bite me and kill me,” the girl responds.
“No, I need your help. There is no worry, I wouldn’t hurt my savior,” the snake explains.
“I’m still scared. What if you bite me?” the girl worries.
“Nothing to be scared about. Simply release me, I’ll give you my thanks, and go on my way. Trust me,” the snake implores.
The girl cautiously opens the trap and frees the snake. “Thank you little girl, you have save me!” exclaims the snake. Suddenly the snake snaps its bite into the girl’s arm.
“You bit me?! Why?! I helped you!” cries the girl as the poison begins its work.
“But you knew I am a snake, and that is my nature,” explains the snake. “Besides, I have been trapped for days and I am very hungry. You look very tasty!”
******************
@No. 18 Reason
It is Mary Cheney, the younger daughter, who is the lesbian. She and her partner have been together for a number of years and there are children involved.
Ireallywanttoknow
I really don’t understand this entry. I though the lgbt community was in favor of gay equality. Liz & Dick are conservative. There is nothing wrong with that. If you are a liberal you will naturally disagree with their basic principles. However, you can’t say that Liz & Dick aren’t people we should point to when making the argument for gay equality. So what if you don’t agree with them on other issues! Don’t vote for a conservative Republican or a conservative Democrat for that matter! But if they are putting themselves out there in the media telling everyone in the people in their own party that they support a repeal of DADT then they should at least get credit for that. Fyi, the Democrats haven’t done much since coming into power for the lgbt community. It is going to take a general consensus to get action in our favor. So if Dick & Liz are out there supporting a repeal of DADT then kudos for them.
delurker
@Marc: “water board those sons-of-bitches, dammit. there is an assumption here that a gay person has to also be opposed to the enhanced interrogation of terrorists.”
I thought there was an assumption that all Americans who believed in the ruled of law had to be against torture. But then again, I have silly ideas and am not a conservative.
NoDoubleStandards
I agree with Queerty’s assessment.
Sadly, there is a lunatic fringe building in the gay movement that just does not care.
I tried to have this very interaction with posters at Americablog. Like there, many of the posters were plain nuts or making shit up.
On some level, since gays are a part of a larger delusional society, it is not a surprise that the way we go for our rights is to think we can get in bed with a torturer and not come off with some of the blood on us.
BUT, you are not going to convince them because like most Americans it is easier to believe in a bubble fantasy than horrible reality that our society is becoming. I discussed this with an older gay man, who happens to be my mentor.
He was discussing our society is mostly reactive and regressive. He was an gay activist way back in the 70s. Before that, he was into politics in the 60s.
Here, we have people who think they can ask for their equal rights while ignoring the evil of the people we would have as allies. You don’t get any more blind, desperate and short sighted.
But, then, much of what passes for the gay rights movement is wealthier gay white men and lesbians who want to be re-admitted into the halls of privilege rather than improve the human condition for everyone including gays.
For them, the battle is not about equality or human rights at all. it is about them. Thus, the posters along this thread who only care about themselves, and can not fathom how offensive and hypocritical they sound.
You are not going to get equality by having the blood of other groups of people on your hands.
NoDoubleStandards
Follow up: For those who do not get the amoral behavior you are exhibiting, let me put it to you this way.
The reason why your views are a problem is that people (normal humans) take other humans as a whole rather than just look at them on gay rights. If they see you supporting an evil person like Chenney by saying he’s for gay rights, then they will assume you think he is acceptable.
IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT YOU FEEL YOU ARE DOING. IT ONLY MATTERS HOW YOUR ACTIONS ARE INTERPRETED BY OTHERS.
It is self absorption to not realize this simple element- that endorsing others have far ranging consequences than just the thing you are trying to achieve.
Marc
@Andrew:
decency? some people do not think being homosexual is decent. indecent is to allow innocent people to be killed to protect the rights of predators. democracy is not a suicide pact. to paraphrase the people in israel, i don’t think we should allow Americans to lay dead in the streets so that world will admire us. the interrogations of these people kept the nation safe. the harm these people endured is the harm they invited on themselves.
BTW @Reason liz cheney is NOT a lesbian. reason would dictate you should do your research.
Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"
@No.25 Marc
Really?
You are prepared to unleash whatever “means” to the guys who, in boldface, outright lied to the American people about: WMDs; about Iraq/Huissan involvement in 9/11; the accuracy of foreign intelligence reports; fabricated American intelligence reports; rounded up 12 year olds held in Gitmo: let those very same cheating profiteering war mongering liars use their unabashed means of torture and kidnapping against perceived enemies (real and made-up, and political)?
Indeed “democracy is not a suicide pact” and that is why we have laws and a military. Remember also, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Fortunately the efforts of John Adams to jail his political opponents under recidivism laws were ruled unconstitutional just as Abraham Lincoln’s misguided dismissal of habeas corpus to deny his political enemies their right to disagree.
Dick Cheney has show time and again that he has no interest in democracy and open government; he has interest in protecting the privileged, Haliburton, oil/big business concerns.
NoDoubleStandards
@Marc: You are not amoral. You immoral.
But thank you for posting.
You provide the evidence that we need of why associating with Chenney is a mistake.
Finally, for everyone, there is a concept in justice, you can not ask for justice if you don’t give it. If you are running around saying “treat me equal” while being okay with torture, then you are not going to get justice in return.
These concepts, whether you know it or not, your equality and torture are interrelated because they are both predicated on human rights.
But, then, for some of you, it is not about equality, but your ability to be a part of the majority power structure so you probably don’t care.
NoDoubleStandards
@Ireallywanttoknow: You can’t be for equality and okay with torture. That’s a contradiction in ideas.
tjr101
@Marc:”the interrogations of these people kept the nation safe. the harm these people endured is the harm they invited on themselves.”
If you long for the loving acceptance of a profiteering warmonger then so be it, but stop making up right-wing fantasies to suit your whim.
Torture is not interrogation and it’s completely false to say that it keeps us safe. It only emboldens our enemies and when you’re in pain you’ll do and say whatever as “truth.” Many rounded up and held at Gitmo were innocent individuals and did not invite this on themselves. It’s neither a liberal, or conservative principle to denounce waterboarding (toruture). It’s a human principle.
Some of the posters on here are just closeted Republicans longing for many gay rights to pass by Democrats so they can bolt the party for their tax cut and “national security.”
reason
@Ireallywanttoknow:
Thanks for the correction on which daughter.
@Marc:
I don’t find Cheney’s daughter fascinating enough to do an in-depth analysis, but due to Mark I now know which daughter it is: it doesn’t change the fact of the matter one bit, both Dick and Liz are still acting out of pure self interest for one of their own.
@Ireallywanttoknow:
We should not point to them because they lack credibility; they always have an ulterior motive. Sure they may be correct on something, but by using them as a reference will only lead a number of people to discount what you’re saying by tying your statement to Dick Cheney’s general lack of credibility, it is deductive reasoning.
These harsh interrogations have nothing to do with conservatism, some people are trying to re-write conservatism and discount precedent. Enhanced interrogation techniques, torture, were never part of the past conservative platform because it is not conservative. This new adventurous foreign policy born out of W, Rummy, Yoo, Cheney, & Co. that is being touted as conservatism is most definitely not; it runs counter to true conservatism, and the tenets of H.W., Powell, Gates et al. I will say it again Cheney acts out of pure self interest not in the interest of conservatism, after all it was him that stated that “deficits do not matter” so he could bust the budget enabling him to run an adventurous war with reckless abandon.
reason
@Mike in Asheville, nee “in Brooklyn”
It is you who I was thanking for the correction, got your alias wrong twice in previous post.
Josh AZ
@Andrew: He NEVER said he “personally agrees with it,” he deferred to the Military.
NoDoubleStandards
@reason: You remind me of Christians who claim other Christians are not real Christians because they don’t like the branding that results from the action of the Christians behaving badly. This is not “real conservatism” in the way that the Soviet Union according to communist wasn’t “real communism.” In both ideologue’s cases, the ideology can never fail you.
reason
@NoDoubleStandards:
If you claim to be Christian and your not following the tenants or preaching about things that are not Christian your not representing Christianity. You can claim to be a mathematician, but if your out their preaching that 2 + 2 = 12 are you properly representing mathematics? There are correct solutions and incorrect solutions, as their are true representatives and false ones.
NoDoubleStandards
@Donny: A Protestant is not a Christian because Catholics are. Evangelicals say Catholics are not real Christians because Evangelicals are. Only Baptists are real Christians. One or another doctrine is tweaked, and it leads down the path to something you claim is not real, but it actually is based on the same root. They all believe in the same fundamental things, but since one is not exactly like the other they are not “real.” You are playing the same game here. The root ideological perspective that you all base your conservatism on comes from the same place. Probably some Burkean crap like Andrew Sullivan or some kind of economic libertarian ideological perspective. But, because they took it to a place that you would not go ethically (rather than because of ideological belief), therefore, it is not real. Except it is conservatism. It is just that you did not forsee the various arguments that could be justified under your ideological beliefs. As I said, the classic, ideological can not fail you. Only you can fail ideology. One of the many reasons I am a moderate is that I see the danger of believing any one true path to figuring out solutions often comes in the form of believing ideological over evidence. The Bush Administration is the proof of why conservatism is a failed ideological perspective. But, because you did not like the results, you and other true believers disavow that Bush is conservative. Typical and expected.
schlukitz
No. 34 · reason
You can claim to be a mathematician, but if your out their preaching that 2 + 2 = 12 are you properly representing mathematics?
Well, I certainly hope that you’re not claiming to be an English major. ;P
reason
@schlukitz:
most definitely not, I am a Chemist
schlukitz
No. 37 · reason
That may well be, but being a Chemist still isn’t doing anything for your spelling. LOL
reason
@NoDoubleStandards:
I assume your post is aimed at me. I actually don’t draw my conclusions through an ideological lens, I consider myself more of a realist. Don’t get me wrong I do have an ideology, but it is tempered in search for the truth or the solution that will get better results. There are several different ways to get to the answer 12; you can find truths in many places including both political parties, in several different sect of Christianity… You can also find falsehoods in many places. Something like torture is not exclusive to a party, it is an outlook that can be held in individuals that classify both as liberals or conservatives. People are multifaceted with a plethora of different views, Bush is not the bastion of conservatism. His actions are not quintessential conservative, nor is he the author of the definition. An example is Bush’s adventure into Iraq which is not conservative, adventurism is the antithesis of conservatism. To state that W. Bush’s failures are proof of the failure of conservatism is being intellectually dishonest, and similar to people saying that liberalism is a failure because Carter failed.
reason
@schlukitz:
Never been the best at grammar, but I will work on it. Probably the underlying reason I only took one English class in college.
reason
@schlukitz:
Though I have meet plenty of people who’s grammar is much worse than mine. I was reading somewhere that younger generations grammar is much worse than older folks, it faulted the word processor as one of the reasons.
NoDoubleStandards
@reason: whatever
Marc
@NoDoubleStandards:
anyone who cannot get their point across without making a personal judgment about someone he doesn’t know has nothing honest acute or valid to say in the first place.
schlukitz
No. 41 · reason
I was reading somewhere that younger generations grammar is much worse than older folks, it faulted the word processor as one of the reasons.
I can certainly relate to that. Another contributing factor is texting on cellphones and the use of acronyms to keep messages short. Chatting on the Internet is another. I suspect that the English of future generations of Americans will be a far cry from what you and I learned in school.
But the, I guess evolution is the nature of language. The English we speak today, is a far cry from what our forefathers spoke at Plymouth Rock. LOL
schlukitz
No. 43 · Marc
anyone who cannot get their point across without making a personal judgment about someone he doesn’t know has nothing honest acute or valid to say in the first place.
By and large, I would agree with that statement.
I do believe that there are exceptions, however. A good case in point would be Rick Santorum. While we may not know him personally, the anti-gay rhetoric he spews (and which is of a very personal nature for gays),certainly gives us ammunition (and good cause) to go after him in kind.
Showing respect for someone who shows us no respect, whatsoever, is very much akin to “turning the other cheek’, which is for losers.
I have long believed and supported the notion that respect is not a gift, but something which must be earned. Just ask any person in the military about their commanding officer as proof of that.
Dirty Ole Man
@NoDoubleStandards:
I agree 100% with your #23 comment!
Lukas P.
Heart Attack:Dick Cheney was admitted to the hospital today and reportedly had a heart attack. That’s his fifth one.
Check the newswires for updates…
I doubt he’d be able to withstand the pressure of public office.
schlukitz
No. 47 · Lukas P.
Yes. I just read about that on Yahoo News.
I fully agree with your last comment.