Tammy Bruce: Elizabeth Edwards Not Uncomfortable with Teh Gheys

Elizabeth Edwards Not Uncomfortable with Teh Gheys

But her husband apparently still is. Otherwise he would have visited the prideful gheys at the San Francisco pride event himself. But he didn't.

Oh yeah, and another tiny point: she's not the one running for president, yet her not being a homophobe is supposed to mitigate that it seems he is?

Edwards's Wife Voices Support for Gay Rites

SAN FRANCISCO — None of the major candidates for the White House in 2008 has embraced legalizing gay marriage, but Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of one hopeful, John Edwards, said yesterday that she's ready.

"I don't know why someone else's marriage has anything to do with me," Mrs. Edwards said after delivering a speech to a gay and lesbian political group here, according to the Associated Press. "I'm completely comfortable with gay marriage." [...]

It was unclear whether Mrs. Edwards's comments were a deliberate effort to court the gay community without her husband having to change his stance on the sensitive issue of gay marriage.

Wow, that's genius. But last time I checked, John Edwards' issue was not just about gay marriage, it was about Teh Gheys in general. I blogged about Edwards 'discomfort' with "those people" when it was revealed by Bob Shrum in his recent book. Yet the coverage I've read of Elizabeth Edwards' genuflect in San Francisco, including the Chronicle's more extensive story, casts this exclusively as an issue about a position as opposed to John Edwards' apparent homophobia.

But the Establishment Media can't have people running around thinking about how Democrat candidates might be homophobes. Nope, that would be just too...politically incorrect.

You see this hypocrisy to this day when it comes to Bill Clinton. Still worshipped by the left and by the gay community, to the point where his wife is their preferred candidate for the white House. yet it was the Clintons who gave us not only the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy for the military, but it was Bill Clinton who signed the "Defense of Marriage Act."

Regardless of where you stand on those two issues, my point is the Clintons (and Bill did not make those sorts of decisions, if many at all, without Hillary's advice), have done more damage to the gay agenda than George W. Bush ever even attempted. Oh sure, Bush talked a lot about gay marriage and wanting to change the constitution, but that's all it was--talk. The Clintons directly changed American policy by creating or signing into law policy that was seriously detrimental to what the gay elite considered (and still do) seriously important issue to the community.

Instead, Bush is demonized because he talked up a storm about being against gay marriage, but did nothing, while the Clintons are worshipped, as they pandered to the gay community and then stabbed it in its collective back.

Whatever your issue is, this is a good reminder that what matters is less what people say than what they do. Very often with politicians the two are not the same.

Posted by Tammy · June 24, 2007 11:46 PM · Permalink
Gay Issues | Politics

Comments

"Those people"

Unbelievable.

Every once in a while a lefty will let down their guard and say what they are really thinking.
It gets squashed by the machine pretty quickly and when reported we usually hear "what they meant was" followed by some inane explanation.

You can usually see their true colors if you can stand to look and listen to them long enough, the facade is a difficult one to maintain in the age of 24 hour news.

I can only imagine that this Edwards business won't go away because of pressure from the H-bomb.
The need to keep her at the top of the presidential heap will leave many battered bodies of former comrades along the way.

Wow, I sound bitter, and maybe I am, moreso at the legions of suckers that keep running back to the trough to defend such despicable characters.

One quick anecdote and I'll go away and fume quietly: Not long ago there was a flap in the small town of Brooklet GA over the police department and why there needed to be more full time officers.
Brooklet is growing exponentially and the small but very competent PD was doing their best to grow with the demand.
And it was time for more officers, more equipment, and more paid hours.
Somehow this didn't sit well with some members of the city council, in fact there was a motion to quietly abolish the department altogether.

I wouldn't have believed that there were so many people in Brooklet to attend the city council meeting to raise hell about it but there they were.

A motion to move the discussion to a private session was quashed because it would be illegal to discuss public services outside a public forum. Zap!

Many new residents from larger communities around the country related stories of the same sort of power struggle that did indeed end with the police departments being abolished and the public safety put into the hands of an already overtaxed county or sheriff's department. And it usually didn't end well.

Anyhow, the Brooklet PD is growing and even more respected now, and there's an election coming up, with luck people's memories will be long enough to clear the slate on the council.

Oh yeah, the point of this. During that council meeting one of the members referred to the police dismissively as "you people".

I won't soon forget that one, and only mention it occasionally, as in to anyone who will listen.

Like I said at the top of this, it's unbelievable.

It really comes down to self importance, and in politicians it's a bad trait personally, but for the rest of us it can be disastrous.

Posted by: Neil A Russell at June 25, 2007 10:38 AM

John Edwards has himself in a pickle. If he attends the pride event, it's fuel for the "silky pony" fire, and if he stays away, it's "teh gheys" fire. Couldn't happen to a nicer weasel.

Posted by: helpunderdog at June 25, 2007 10:55 AM

Wow, now that I know that Mrs. Edwards is comfortable with gay marriage, I'm going to rush right out there and support her husband!!!
Come on now. Again, dear politicians, don't tell me what you think I want to hear, or send your wives out to tell me what you think I want to hear!!!! Tell me exactly what you crooks are going to do to this country in the next four years. The one who plans to screw this nation up the least gets my vote.

Posted by: ltlme at June 25, 2007 03:14 PM

I love how the left demonizes the military for "don't ask, don't tell," while continually failing to mention who actually adopted the policy.

Posted by: Dave J at June 25, 2007 04:55 PM

By Category

By Month

Elizabeth Edwards Not Uncomfortable with Teh Gheys

Comments

Post a comment