Shepard Smith Calls Cheney's Gay Marriage Stance A "Cop Out"

As I've said, it is a simple fact that former Vice President Dick Cheney has long been willing to provide nominal support for gay marriage. Yet, as many readers have reminded me -- quite reasonably and fairly -- for the most part, Cheney has provided lip service in lieu of actually doing much of anything to secure marriage equality for all Americans. With that in mind, credit Fox News' Shepard Smith for giving this critique some voice. In this clip, Smith characterizes Cheney's support as "trying to have it both ways" and as "a cop out."

[WATCH]

As you can see, Smith's contention is greeted by Rick Klein, of ABC News' "The Note" with this countering statement: "Oh, well, that's really the traditional position taken by people if they support gay marriage," the implication being that Cheney is doing precisely what the Beltway elites who support gay marriage in the "traditional" (a better term would be "risk averse") way do. As you might expect, what Klein finds "interesting" is the fact that Cheney is to the "left flank" of Obama on this issue, which is SHINY SHINY.

Hey, Rick! You know, I understand that since its inception, ABC News' The Note has never stood for anything beyond a long, lingering stare down into the depths of its unfathomable navel -- and really, I hope that never, ever changes -- but for the sake of demystifying some stuff for you, I think you should know that it's absolutely possible for there to be a way of "traditionally" supporting something that is, simultaneously, a "cop out."

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[superstition]

Speaking of cop-outs:

Obama deputy campaign manager abandons DOMA & DADT as priorities
http://www.americablog.com/2009/07/obama-deputy-campaign-manager-abandons.html

"After two weeks of the Obama White House reeling over the gay backlash caused by the anti-gay DOMA brief, which compared gay marriage to incest and pedophilia, we now have...

First, that the burden for doing anything pro-gay in the remaining three and a half years of the Obama administration is now shifted to Congress. Obama has no role whatsoever, and no power to influence anything, even though he's still the leader of the free world.

Second, the three big gay rights priorities that Congress should be focusing on do not even include what have organically become the community's top two priorities: repealing DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell. They're not even mentioned in the Obama deputy's essay."

[PC Contrarian]

First, not everyone who opposes same sex marriage is a homophobe nor bases their objection on the Bible.
Second, I've read a lot of reasons for legalizing same sex marriages; most sound good. But there's been little consideration to the consequences; there are always unintended consequences.

Even if your reasoning is air tight; maintaining the traditional definition of marriage trumps your claims. For this reason:
When you destroy the traditional definition; there are no longer any boundaries to prevent others from demanding the same right. The first will be, and already claims are being made, by polygamists. They will want "marriage equality" for their second and third wives. It will be "unfair" for #2 & #3 to be "inferior" to the first wife. With the increasing number of Muslims, it's just a matter of time before their claim takes on a religious freedom, and the separation of church and state, argument to press their claims as well.

Before you discount this concern as absurd fear mongering or "mudding the waters", underground Mormons are already bringing up their claim to have the same re-definition of marriage, to give them the same civil rights to their minority, as gays.

[PC Contrarian]

True "marriage equality" has to have something for everybody; or it's not equal.

Gays and lesbians.

Polygamists.

Incest for those relatives that are distant enough not to produce weird off spring

Incest for parents and children, brothers and sisters; as long as one is sterilized or otherwise they can't make babies.

Marrying children with a doctors approval.

Bestiality.

Two couples marrying two other couples.

Self-marriage for hermits

Etc.......­. Did I miss anyone?
I want to make sure I'm being inclusive and not discriminate against any group.

[Disuberence]

Glad to see the stupid is out in full force in this thread.

[backinstolaf]

I can't believe the media hasn't picked up on Cheney's motives yet. Cheney is a lot of things (almost all bad), but one thing the guy is is very calculating. He sees Republicans losing younger voters by the droves - a big reason for that is most youth are supportive of Gay Marriage. Cheney wants this issue out of the way and going left of Obama (and coincidentally BOTH attorneys in Bush v. Gore are going through the federal appeals process claiming denying same sex marriage violates the 14th amendment). I think this gets to the Supreme Court in two years or so and we will all be shocked when the vote is 6-3 that it violates the 14th amendment, when Cheney's good old hunting buddy Antonin Scalia and John-Paul Steven's good buddy Anthony Kennedy vote with the other 4 more liberal justices, so conservative and liberal justices are with the majority. Cheney will do this to take this issue off the table so Republicans can go after the youth vote again. The more old white men push against this issue, the more Cheney realizes the Republican brand is toast.

[PC Contrarian]

Are you off your meds?

[monkeysuit]

He has said this as far back as 2000 so I doubt its a political move to go left of Obama. The bottom line is that there is and should be a separation of church and state. So the definition of marriage for a church and the state should be different. Because this is a civil rights issue not a religious issue. If you are going to give benefits and tax breaks and different rights then they should be granted for homosexual partners as well.


Monkeysuit
http://randompoliticalthoughtsandnews.blogspot.com/

[theubermensch]

He can't say he's against it because his daughter is and that would make him a bad parent. Remember folks right wing media nuts, cheney and the boys included, don't believe half of what they say. They curtail to an audience, while the dumbasses buy it, as do the dumbasses on the left with the other rhetoric. It only keeps us divided further, while thinking for ourselves becomes obsolete.

[phlashba]

The fact that the TV newsreader saying this is himself a gay man kept in the closet by homophobia is not a small detail!

[PuzzledinPeoria]

Shemp was always my favorite Stooge.

[Dan Cubert]

Around this great nation, heads are exploding trying to find some logic in the actions of titular heads of the GOP. The GOP, much like the Whigs before them, will fade in to obscurity, to be replaced by a more centrist group. Of course, if that doesn't happen, I'm moving to Holland.

[Eric8869]

Shep Smith is gay - see the new documentary OUTRAGE - he's outed in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaTsmXaw5NQ&feature=fvst

the 3'Oclock in the morning comment is about Shep Smith.

[conniedogs]

It doesn't matter if he's gay! Shepard is not afraid to speak the truth. He and Megan Kelly are the only "fair and balanced" commentators on Fox.

[WBP]

OH PLEASE!

Faux "news" would not know fair and balanced even if it were inserted..­..

You really need to get out more and watch something else. There is not a fair or balanced second on the travesty that is know as Fox "news".

[CRA1]

If you do watch Fox and post that it does not matter if he is gay, well maybe progress is being made??

[phlashba]

"Not afraid to speak the truth" THAT HE IS GAY? It matters quite a lot my dear.

[Longbaugh]

He's gay! I have a YouTube documentary to prove it!

Haha.

[alwqb]

Cheney was hiding in his bunker when several states put a ban on same sex marriages. Where was he then on gay marriage? These are just empty words. Who really cares what Dick Cheney has to say anyway? All you get out of his mouth are lies, why would it change?

[CRA1]

Dick's gay daughter does not even speak up when it comes to gay rights. What a shame they all are.

[cloudmaker]

Shepard Smith looks like his face was reconstructed after a fire. Was it? And is that what
makes him so tight-skinned, tight-assed bitter?

[phlashba]

Being in the CLOSET

[ej3]

The best discussion of both equal protection and the protection of religious differences can be found in the unanimous decision of the Iowa Supreme Court entered in April of this year.

[ramal]

Rather than "marriage' being the key "hang up" word to uniting Gay couples, why not do away with the term completley for heterosexual marriages to be replaced by the "official term" "CIVIL UNIONS?" "Marriage" would be performed and sanctioned by the church, temple, mosque or whatever fairy tale institution that the happy couple (or their friends and families) happen to believe in. Thus, religion would be taken entirely out of the official, state apparatus.

[JohnJames]

That's a fine idea but good luck getting it past social conservatives. They'd go ballistic. They want even more entanglement of government and religion, not less. Ironic that these are the same people who yack about getting government off our backs, yet when it comes to matters of religion and faith they demand that government advance their agenda.

[HottBrainsJill]

If we give gay people marriage, nobody will lose anything. If we take away marriage and give everyone civil unions... well you get the point.

Marriage isn't just a religious word anymore. Athiests get married. Non-Christians get married. Mail order brides are available.

[melodramy]

Religion doesn't own the word or the concept. Non-religious persons can and do "GET MARRIED" every day and so should gays.

[JohnJames]

And there are religious lesbians and gay men who get married in churches and synagogues whose beliefs reject prejudice against gay people.

[WBP]

Good enough for you? Good enough for me. NOT good enough for YOU? NOT good enough for ME.

THAT, my friend is how AMERICA, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA works.

That is what EQUAL access and EQUAL protection is all about!

I LOVE THIS COUNTRY!

[JohnJames]

That's a distortion of what most gays and lesbians are asking of Obama. We're not demanding that he state "full on support for gay marriage". Why would we be now when we knew his position on it during the campaign, understood it was a political necessity, and strongly supported him anyway? We're demanding he keep his promise to repeal DOMA, DADT and add the category of sexual orientation to federal anti-discrimination and hate crime laws which already includes race and religion among other categories. Leave it to Fox to present an inaccurate picture when discussing teh gays.

[PC Contrarian]

I always loved the idea of "hate crimes"; where you prosecute people in addition to their actions, but also for their thoughts and emotions. I'm sure all we need to prevent hate crimes is thought police.

Until we can hire enough qualified psychics, we'll need to rely on what you say. So, I guess we'll need to adopt Euro-style hate speech laws first. I'm sure some ACLU attorneys can get around that pesky Freedom of Speech thing.

[JohnJames]

It's interesting that conservatives are so dead set against hate crime legislation whenever the inclusion of the category of sexual orientation comes up but do nothing to repeal the existing legislation that includes the categories of race, religion and national origin. Wonder why. Also, aside from hate crime law we already do take motivation into account. For example, a murder committed in the heat of passion is punished less severely than one done for financial gain. Taking motivation into account is no novel idea being proposed by some scary PC thought police and it's perfectly reasonable for a pluralistic and diverse society to find violent crimes meant to terrorize or intimidate an entire group especially reprehensible.

[JohnJames]

PS. Hate crime laws have absolutely nothing to do with speech. You either know that and are being intellectually dishonest or you should know that. I'd be totally against them if they did. The answer to hate speech is more speech (whether or not Europeans agree) not driving it underground, which can benefit those who promulgate by giving them a claim to unjust discriminatory treatment.

[havegonedc]

Thanks, Shep. BUT everyone is missing the point!

We do not seek nor do we want a special amendment or legislation to specifically allow gay marriage.

It is just so mind-blowingly simple that all we seek is MARRIAGE EQUALITY. In other words, we already have the 14th Amendment (Equal Protection Under the Law)... we demand this applies to all citizens.

Period.

[BowlingForRevenge]

Abortion..­.Gay Marriage whatever.
For 6 YEARS "BUSH & Co." had the power of the legislature to
#1 ABOLISH ABORTION and #2 LEGALIZE GAY MARRIAGE or outright BAN GAY MARRIAGE
Did they?
NO
Did they even want to?
NO
Why not?
It would have removed the switch that keeps the right wing zealots dancing to the Republican's tunes.
They are a gullible gang those Limbagheses mice, clueless of their masters true intent.

[WBP]

Bowling:

VERY well said indeed. That really is it is it not? I only wish I could take some joy (schadenfreude perhaps?) by watching the lemming haters do their jig, however as the ability to order the life of my family hangs in the balance, there is very little joy in watching the bigots and the haters dance.

[BowlingForRevenge]

The honest truth is... it's painful for those of us with a conscience to watch.
The Republican penchant for "morose delectation" is nauseating.
While I may turn my back to the visual there remains a bit of malice in my heart for the inevitable. I am human.

[PC Contrarian]

What utter nonsense; and to think how many agree with you.

First, abortion was legalized by a Supreme Court decision. Ever hear of Roe v. Wade?
It will need to be overturned in a future Supreme decision to abolish abortion.

Second, conservatives don't want marriage nationalized; but kept as a state issue.
Just like Cheney, in this article (Hello!) supports gay marriage; but wants it decided state by state.
Shep was wrong; it's not a cope out, it's the Constitution.

So, your conclusion is either ill informed or outright delusional.