Friday, October 15, 2004
The Cheney Daughter Controversy: what really bothered us
When John Kerry was in the process of explaining his belief that homosexuality is a genetic condition, one you are born with, most of us had our eyes bulge out at the mention of Dick and Lynne Cheney's daughter.
What really hit us in the gut was this: Here is a candidate for the office of the President of the United States and he dares to demonstrate such poor judgement and insensitivity in such a nationally televised forum, a forum where such behavior crosses all formerly recognized lines of decorum and decency. It was not the uttering of the word 'Lesbian' that caused this gasp of disbelief, it was Senator Kerry's display of a heretofore unparalleled hubris that stunned us. You could see that he felt, knew, or calculated that he could get away with this violation of protocol because he was John Kerry and normal rules of society do not apply to him. Amazingly, he would mention the daughter of one of the candidates to use as an example for making his political and social points -- against his adversary's (her father's) political party. It is his hubris that stunned us. People who were not completly Democratic-blinded partisans or apologists got this immediately ... in their "gut", as Kerry often likes to say. And this is why, I believe, there has been such an tumult of outrage. "Who does this guy think he is?" is a question many of us asked out loud or silently.
And then today we received Senator Kerry's explanation for his actions at the debate. He now wants us to believe he did it out of a Christ-like intent to display -- and share with the audience -- the Cheneys' love for their daughter --and most of us reacted with a 'Give me a break; you did it for political opportunism on multiple levels.' But he obviously miscalculated again how this explanation would be received -- as people with such hubris often do. Again, this elevated pride was on display for us to see if we were not fooled by his smooth and seductive words.
From my experience and observation, I have come to think of John Kerry as a pathological liar/opportunist, someone who gets a thrill from his power to affect people with his words and actions and see them jump around in reaction like puppets -- such as warning people about Bush's secret plan to reinstate the draft. I once knew an admitted recovering pathological liar and he told me that when he came to realize how naturally gullible people are, it became such a thrill for him to watch them react and respond to stories (lies) he made up out of his imagination and cunning. I think John Kerry seeks this same thrill; for example his oratorical skills have led many to believe that his mother said "Remember, integrity, integrity, integrity" on her sick bed, especially considering that there is no way to check out the truth of this confession. Yet this power intoxicates and sometimes he stretches it too far: his 1971 Senate testimony about atrocities, for example. He sometimes believes his own lies. This is why I consider John Kerry so dangerous. He can make any lie sound so reasonable and consistent with other lies that all appear as one truth to the gullible. He is a very scary politician and we need to work to get President Bush re-elected so that such a one as Senator Kerry never controls the power of the White House. For me, one Richard Nixon was enough.
I believe that the gut check that many people across the nation have performed in response to Kerry's protocol gaffe and then to his explanation/excuse has probably pushed a significant number of Undecideds to finally make a decision in this election. They witnessed a candidate make a sizeable miscalculation, show poor judgement, and display a deep insensitivity during a national public event (in a setting with a clearly defined tradition), but most of all, I think they saw a hubris that crossed their inner line of safety and trust, forcing them to reject him as a viable candidate for the presidency of the United States.
What really hit us in the gut was this: Here is a candidate for the office of the President of the United States and he dares to demonstrate such poor judgement and insensitivity in such a nationally televised forum, a forum where such behavior crosses all formerly recognized lines of decorum and decency. It was not the uttering of the word 'Lesbian' that caused this gasp of disbelief, it was Senator Kerry's display of a heretofore unparalleled hubris that stunned us. You could see that he felt, knew, or calculated that he could get away with this violation of protocol because he was John Kerry and normal rules of society do not apply to him. Amazingly, he would mention the daughter of one of the candidates to use as an example for making his political and social points -- against his adversary's (her father's) political party. It is his hubris that stunned us. People who were not completly Democratic-blinded partisans or apologists got this immediately ... in their "gut", as Kerry often likes to say. And this is why, I believe, there has been such an tumult of outrage. "Who does this guy think he is?" is a question many of us asked out loud or silently.
And then today we received Senator Kerry's explanation for his actions at the debate. He now wants us to believe he did it out of a Christ-like intent to display -- and share with the audience -- the Cheneys' love for their daughter --and most of us reacted with a 'Give me a break; you did it for political opportunism on multiple levels.' But he obviously miscalculated again how this explanation would be received -- as people with such hubris often do. Again, this elevated pride was on display for us to see if we were not fooled by his smooth and seductive words.
From my experience and observation, I have come to think of John Kerry as a pathological liar/opportunist, someone who gets a thrill from his power to affect people with his words and actions and see them jump around in reaction like puppets -- such as warning people about Bush's secret plan to reinstate the draft. I once knew an admitted recovering pathological liar and he told me that when he came to realize how naturally gullible people are, it became such a thrill for him to watch them react and respond to stories (lies) he made up out of his imagination and cunning. I think John Kerry seeks this same thrill; for example his oratorical skills have led many to believe that his mother said "Remember, integrity, integrity, integrity" on her sick bed, especially considering that there is no way to check out the truth of this confession. Yet this power intoxicates and sometimes he stretches it too far: his 1971 Senate testimony about atrocities, for example. He sometimes believes his own lies. This is why I consider John Kerry so dangerous. He can make any lie sound so reasonable and consistent with other lies that all appear as one truth to the gullible. He is a very scary politician and we need to work to get President Bush re-elected so that such a one as Senator Kerry never controls the power of the White House. For me, one Richard Nixon was enough.
I believe that the gut check that many people across the nation have performed in response to Kerry's protocol gaffe and then to his explanation/excuse has probably pushed a significant number of Undecideds to finally make a decision in this election. They witnessed a candidate make a sizeable miscalculation, show poor judgement, and display a deep insensitivity during a national public event (in a setting with a clearly defined tradition), but most of all, I think they saw a hubris that crossed their inner line of safety and trust, forcing them to reject him as a viable candidate for the presidency of the United States.
