Slog - Comments on Ted Kennedy's Brain Cancer: Good for the Gays?

Comment by patrick

patrick — Wed, 21 May 2008 10:40:43 -0800

Not at this price and not for that politician.

elenchos could give Barney a run for his money as an advocate for LGBTs.

Comment by Dickie McRausch

Dickie McRausch — Wed, 21 May 2008 10:43:08 -0800

It's all about you, isn't it?

What an incredible asshole. Please take a few days off and spare us your baboon-level thinking.

Comment by winkinest lemmy

winkinest lemmy — Wed, 21 May 2008 10:55:55 -0800

Ya know, when you apologize for something you've *just* done (and, by-the-by, can still undo while you're typing that apology) well, it just comes off as a tad disengenous. If you're so sorry about that headline, why did you type it?

Comment by bg

bg — Wed, 21 May 2008 10:56:19 -0800

Too soon!

Comment by Mike in MO

Mike in MO — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:00:30 -0800

There isn't one single gay in the whole US Senate? That is depressing...

Comment by michael strangeways

michael strangeways — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:07:31 -0800

well, none that are out of the airport restroom closet...

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:19:40 -0800

@5,

There are, but they're all Republicans.

Comment by NapoleonXIV

NapoleonXIV — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:25:27 -0800

We talked about this yesterday, in a slightly less callous manner.

Comment by cbc

cbc — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:26:19 -0800

Frank has said multiple times that he has no interest in being in the Senate even if there were an opening.

Comment by NapoleonXIV

NapoleonXIV — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:37:25 -0800

He'd give up seniority, a seat that he's got a lock on for life, and a hell of a lot of clout.

Comment by Makes so much sense

Makes so much sense — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:48:13 -0800

Of course. Because being gay is the only thing interesting about a gay person.

Comment by Mike in MO

Mike in MO — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:03:35 -0800

@ 6 & 7: Ah, I see openly is the important owrd there...

Comment by butterw

butterw — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:23:51 -0800

Considering Frank running for Kennedy's seat is reasonable. The headline, however, is vile. Shame on you, Dan.

Comment by Mahtli69

Mahtli69 — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:46:21 -0800

Don't apologize, Dan.

I don't understand why people see Ted's brain tumor as some sort of national tragedy. Everyone gets to die eventually, and of the billion or so ways to do it, that doesn't seem so bad.

He's 76 years old. He's already survived an ill-fated drive off of a bridge and a fucking plane crash! This is hardly a "before his time" story.

Besides, there's been a Kennedy in that Senate seat since 1953. New blood is good. It's Massachusetts not Mississippi, so it will be a liberal, gay or otherwise.

Comment by kinaidos

kinaidos — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:49:04 -0800

Every time you hear a bell, a Kennedy gets its wings.

Comment by horat!osanzser!f

horat!osanzser!f — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:51:54 -0800

As chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, BF has way more power and clout than he did in 2004, when he explored running for the Senate. And he likes it. I'd doubt he'd take up this offer, if it's extended to him.

Comment by Vince

Vince — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:18:23 -0800

Why? Everybody dies. Nobody is indespensible. Barney Frank would be great. But the Kennedy's think they own that seat and it will probably go to Ted's son.