Counterbalance: "This Is Not A Good Man."
Commentary by Darryl Wood, ^©2004 Wood Communications, LLC 

In case you missed the third presidential debate, John Kerry developed a major case of foot-in-mouth disease when answering journalist/moderator Bob Schieffer's question about whether homosexuality is either a choice or genetically determined. When the question was first put to the president, he simply and honestly answered, "I don't know. I just don't know." When it was his turn to respond, John Kerry plainly crossed a line from which there may be no return. Depending on whom you choose to believe, he either unwittingly, or opportunistically used the vice-president's daughter as his example stating: "I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as. I think if you talk to anybody, it's not choice." Did Kerry attempt to 'out' or expose the V.P.'s daughter and subsequently drive a wedge between the Bush/Cheney camp and conservative voters unaware of this fact? Was he attempting to sway the traditional, anti-gay religious base? These are questions only Mr. Kerry can answer. It's not likely the mainstream press will take him to task on such questions. However, the press couldn't ignore perhaps the most important reaction to Kerry's remark.

The Cheneys-particularly wife Lynne-was reportedly furious and has said so publicly. Following a post-debate rally Mrs. Cheney responded to John Kerry: "And the only thing I could conclude is this is not a good man. This is not a good man. And, of course, I am speaking as a mom and a pretty indignant mom. This is not a good man. What a cheap and tawdry political trick." My guess is that lots of mothers who take seriously the obligation of protecting their offspring are identifying with the "indignant" Lynne Cheney.

Women Scorned?
There are personal boundaries across which even the fiercest political opponents dare not tread. Whether John Kerry purposely stepped across to draw blood, or whether he clumsily, if unintentionally tripped over that line only he knows. Nevertheless, when a mother like Lynne Cheney responds in hurt, angry fashion to an attack-especially on her child-whether perceived or real, others are sure to have a sympathetic reaction. And that could well explain the sudden shift in polling numbers and why some voters have chosen to cross lines if only temporarily as a means of expressing their extreme displeasure with the democratic presidential contender.

Subsequent news analysis and national news stories repeatedly and predominantly declared that Kerry was the winner of all three debates. Regardless, following the third and final debate, and unlike results which previously show Mr. Kerry gaining ground, voter surveys by several respected independent polling organizations showed the president once again edging forward, while also showing Mr. Kerry either stuck in neutral or loosing ground.

Some Politicians Will Say Anything
Unfortunately, more often than not politics are a dirty, down-in-the-mud proposition. Kerry is willing to throw as much sludge as needed, saying whatever he thinks will add votes, regardless of the short or long-term consequences. Think about it. Before, during and since the last debate, he's hurled ridiculous assertions hoping something will stick and resonate with voters. For example: women earn 76-cents for every dollar paid their male counterparts for the same work; the shortage of flu vaccine is the president's fault; there's an attempt to suppress the black vote; fifty-percent of black men in New York are unemployed; the president has never met with any of America's civil rights leadership; he's [Kerry] never called the president a liar; he has a plan to get more international cooperation in the war on terror, but can't give details; the president plans to bring back the military draft; he [Kerry] committed war crimes and witnessed others doing the same in Vietnam and the list goes on. None of these statements has given Kerry significant traction with voters. But one opinion may have cost him support.

I contend it was his statement about homosexuality that resonated with Americans, and not in a good way. Not because he strongly believes it's nature versus nurture, but because by politicizing an unsubstantiated position that is scientifically unproven, he once again sought to somehow capitalize on an issue-even if it meant using the vice president and Mrs. Cheney's daughter. As a result, many are now able to see John F. Kerry for whom he really is.

While a divided, undecided electorate may be prone to give Kerry a pass on a lot of his bogus positions and dubious comments, using the opposition's family-especially the candidate's child-for political gain is out-of-bounds behavior many voters will not and should not pardon.