From a reader:

Jonah,
I normally agree with much of what you say. But I think this time you’re off
the mark.
You’re argument that Kerry was using Mary Cheney’s sexual orientation as a
weapon is predicated on the notion that being gay is a bad or shameful
thing.
That’s where I have the problem with all this fuss over the comment.
If Kerry, as I do, truly believes that there is nothing wrong or shameful
about being gay, then why is it politically calculated or disingenuous to
point out that the republican policies concerning gay marriage are even
hurting some of their own?
Mary Cheney is out. She is actively campaigning for her father and the
president. Gay marriage is an issue that the BUSH candidacy placed on the
table. It seems to me an obvious point to make that Mary Cheney is a human
being who has rights like any other american, democrat or republican. And
that the Republican party has cruelly discounted even some of their own in
pursuit of this constitutional amendment.
I think a better example would be if Cheney’s daughter happened to be a
convert to Islam or Judaism, and the Bush administration was pursuing laws
that somehow limited the rights of religious expression. (I know we’re
playing with some way out there hypotheticals right now, but bear with me.)
If Kerry pointed out that Jews/Muslims were human beings with the right to
express their religious affiliation and pointed to Cheney’s daughter as an
example of that, would that be shameful? There’s nothing wrong with being a
member of a religion, and there’s nothing wrong with being gay. The
difference in opinion on this issue stems from whether people think being
gay is shameful, embarrassing, or unfortunate in the first place.
To me, debates are meant to point out weaknesses or inconsistencies in an
opponent’s position. Kerry simply did that. It wasn’t spiteful. And it
wasn’t calculated.
Nonetheless, thanks for your articles. I always enjoy them. Keep writing.

Me: Nice note, thanks. But I disagree. Kerry may or may not think there’s nothing wrong with being gay. We don’t know the answer to that. As I noted in my column, I don’t think it really matters to this controversy. What matters is if he thought he was bee-bopping and skatting off of somebody else’s family for political gain. His campaign manager said Mary was “fair game” for a reason. Look, I don’t think this whole story is as huge as some are making it. But I do think a lot of people saw a glimpse of the kind of man Kerry is at that debate. Not just during the Mary Cheney part, but when he agonized over how to say nice things about his wife and how he created a rhetorical Rube Goldberg machine to explain how religion influences his policies.

I think that man turned off a lot of voters even though they were willing to concede he’s a better debater. That’s why I predicted in my column that Bush would go up in the polls after the debate. I was right (which is sufficiently rare in my record of predictions that I don’t mind mentioning it). I don’t think it’s all about Mary Cheney, but she’s come to symbolize the man and the performance.