No cherry picking at all.
Oh, well if you deny it, then obviously it all disappears, right?
Let's recap. In a subdiscussion about how extreme the right has become in the US, someone said this: "The Conservative party in the UK lines up pretty well with Democrats in the US. David Cameron supports gay marriage for crying out loud."
The obvious general point is that British Conservatives are more like American Democrats than American Republicans. Gay marriage is offered as an example of this.
Your response? "Poor example. Dick Cheney has been publicly supporting gay marriage for years now. He's as right wing as they come. Then there are others like Chris Christie etc. who also support it."
You attempted to argue against a general point about Republicans as a whole by choosing two people whose views are NOT representative of the group and pretending that their minority viewpoint means anything about the group as a whole. That's cherry-picking. Textbook example.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus voiced support.
Where and when did he do that?
Here's what I see:
"I do believe, and I still will tell you that our party believes, that marriage is between one man and one woman."
That was less than two months ago. Doesn't exactly support your claims. Neither does this, from the same article:
That position opposing gay marriage is consistent with most Republicans' views. Per an April NBC/WSJ poll, just 27 percent of Republicans said they favored same-sex marriage (versus 73 percent of Democrats, 54 percent of independents, and 53 percent of all respondents).
As I said before, even arguing this is so ridiculous that I'm really surprised that you're trying.
Meanwhile:
Gay couples in Britain won the right to civil partnerships in 2004, which granted them nearly the same legal status as married heterosexual couples while avoiding the controversial use of the word “marriage.” But Prime Minister David Cameron and his Conservative-led coalition have launched a historic drive to grant gay men and lesbians the option of also entering into civil marriages, touching off a surprisingly fierce uproar in largely progressive Britain and fueling a rebellion on the right as the party comes under heavy fire from traditional allies in the British clergy.
Yet challenging tradition appears to be exactly Cameron’s point. The proposal, put forward this month despite the lack of a strong clamor for marriage within Britain’s gay community, is nevertheless emerging as the cornerstone of a bid by the 45-year-old prime minister and other young leaders on the right here to redefine what it means to be a modern Conservative.
“I don’t support gay marriage despite being a Conservative,” Cameron said in a recent landmark speech on the issue. “I support gay marriage because I am a Conservative.”
What happens to Republicans who say things like that?
Now, care to explain again how it's a "bad example" of just how much farther right American conservatives are?