Howard Fimeman has an article called "Kerry runs warm and cold" about how "cold, very cold" Kerry revealed himself to be right here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6248749/
So, I sent Howard an email...
Dear Howard -
I'm saddened, but somehow not surprised, that there were "Gasps in the Newsroom" when John Kerry mentioned that Mary Cheney is a lesbian. Not that, as you point out, she's some great national secret, really. She's out, and she was mentioned in the VP debate, and also mentioned in other venues recently, most notably by the VP himself. Oddly, the GOP's, and the Cheneys' homophobe hypocrisy wasn't enough to draw gasps.
But is Kerry really "cold, very cold", as you say? I suppose by your own standards you'd have to say that Lynne Cheney is "cold, very cold" when she denied for years that her daughter is a lesbian? Which is worse, as Kerry might say? Lying about your own child, (out of what, shame?), or for praising a woman who knows that being gay, as Kerry pointed out, is not a matter of choice.
Did you ever check with the woman Bush mentioned in the (second?) debate to see how happy she was in his using her blatantly as a political prop? The one with whom he said he laughed, cried? Did you think he was using her for political gain? Some people saw him "speaking from the heart". I saw him reaching out to use the widow of a service man for political purposes. He, by all accounts is a President who has not been to a single military funeral, and here he is using that man's death in the debate. Is he "cold, very cold"?
Even more sadly, and this is my main point here, is your choice (and you're not alone) to write a column about this lesbian topic when the President himself made a (one of many, actually) comment that should have caused you and your press room pals to drop to the floor in anguish rather than simply gasp. When he claimed during the debate that he never said he didn't care about Osama Bin Laden, that he never said he wasn't concerned about him, you and the rest of the so-called journalists should have been the rushing to the exits trying to get the first story published about his deceptions, lies and his dropping the ball - just as many millions of people believe. That, I would say, "is a glimpse into at least one part of his personality that he is better off not showing on television." To me, a more important example than the one you choose to highlight.
That's the real message, Howard. It isn't about who created the Internet anymore. It isn't about Love Story. It isn't about the National Guard or Swift Boats. It isn't about smirks or guffaws or forgetting people's names, or even failing to know that Poland wasn't an original member of the coalition. Howard, it is all about the truth.
So when President Bush fails to tell the truth on WMDs, Osama, troop strength, veterans benefits, poverty, Social Security, joblessness, the effects the war in Iraq has had on the war on terror and our troops, I beg you to write about those very real issues.
Maybe the solution, Howard, would be for all the journalists to be home in your living rooms watching the debates with your families or neighbors. In this way, you'd get to digest the messages being sent across the screens without the filters of journalistic competition. Invite over a neighbor, or watch it at a homeless shelter, soup kitchen or even in a hospital lobby. The you'd see that President Bush, with all his lectern pounding passion, told the bigger lies. He made the living room in my home resound with a true GASP!