Talk about “interesting times,” it’s hard to tell these days who’s a liberal, who’s a conservative or what they are. [Maybe those words are just outmoded terminology for reified nincompoops.-ed. You've been reading my blog. Only because you pay me.] Just the other day one-time sports writer Keith Olbermann took off after conservatives for overlooking the obvious business bonanza in gay marriage to the tune of billions. Though I find most of what Olbermann says, on those rare occasions I watch it, nothing more than reactionary bloviation, he had a point on that one. But then along comes the nefarious Dick Cheney, of all people, to become – to my knowledge – the first major elected federal office holder to come out publicly for gay marriage:
“I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone,” Cheney said in a speech at the National Press Club. “I think people ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish.”
Now what do you suppose the likes of Andrew Sullivan and Olbermann would make of that, especially since their sainted President has been mum on the issue? I wonder if they would now reconsider what Cheney said about water boarding. After all, ironically, there might conceivably be a connection between his views on the two subjects, at least to an idiot like me. There might be some rights, some aspects of civilization, Enlightenment values or some such, that Cheney was seeking to protect in three times authorizing the extreme, but hardly fatal, technique. But I doubt Sullivan or Olbermann and their ilk could possibly see that. They would suffer personality disintegration. Meanwhile, congratulations to Dick Cheney for his progressive views. [What word did you use?-ed. It's a brand of spaghetti.]
Roger, do you seriously believe you can REASON with the likes of Sully and Olby??!!
I think Las Vegas should be gay marriage capital of the world. Obama snubbed that city anyway – it needs the business.
The only time I watch Olbermann is when I’m forced to on other people’s blogs. But Ben Affleck did do an excellent impression of him on Saturday Night Live.
Cheney provides political cover for Obama on gay marriage (now there’s a NY Times headline for bizarro world).
“But Ben Affleck did do an excellent impression of him on Saturday Night Live.”
Wait until you see Steve Crowder on PJTV. Coming soon.
Thanks for the hat tip …
Roger, calling someone like Dick Cheney progressive could put you in the soup.
Cheney’s words will be denigrated or ignored outright. Just as Clarence Thomas’ and Condoleeza Rice’s conservative views negate their “african-american-ness” to the liberal mind, so too does Cheney’s politics as a whole require the leftist repudiation of his beliefs about gay-marriage. His views will be dismissed as entirely the product of his personal situation (who’s aren’t) – a random mutation, an oddity if you will, but nevertheless still in conflict with conservatism.
Roger as Nostradamus!: Sully and Olby were together last night on Countdown, lamenting Bill-O saying harsh things about Tiller. Uh, fellas, how have you two been treating Palin? Time didn’t permit the two to discuss Cheney. Sully concerned about his TV gigs?
This isn’t as out of character as it might appear at first glance.
If you read further, Mr. Cheney also says:
“…that’s the way it ought to be handled today, that is, on a state-by-state basis. Different states will make different decisions.”
in other words, he supports federalism, traditionally considered a conservative position.
Which is also why liberals can still disagree with/attack him, since many liberals claim that “federalism” is just a code word for racism.
People should be able to marry who they want, no matter their gender.