Biggest city in Texas elects openly gay mayor!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

My apologies, I'm not 'dipping' into the 'homosexual' argument at all.

Sorry if it seemed that way.

I don't consider anyone's sexual 'affiliation', ever - though many do. I think it's a form of discrimination, actually. But - you'll not see me standing up at any rally, demanding equal rights about it, either.

I think she's gonna do a good job as mayor, because of her prior experience, political connections, and commercial connections. That's it.

No, I'm not naive, not at all. Just not gonna 'dip' into the 'homosexual' stance that MANY FOLK (not VJers ) have already chosen, so to do.

I'm not a liberal or a conservative, I don't play with red vs blue states demographics - it's near impossible to put one 'label' on me. Whew!

Here's a label for you - indecisive. That's what folks who claim no label are labeled

[peejay 327]

...the usual suspects have made the homosexual angle of the election into some sort of mandate on homosexuality.

It has to with tolerance of gays, peejay. There are plenty of Texans, such as yourself who have a low regard for homosexuals in general. To pretend this election is nothing major is ignoring your own bigotry.

So you are now a spokesman for my beliefs, values, and attitudes? I think because this thread hasn't turned out as you would have liked that you now have a bad case of sour grapes. But that is only my spin on it.

[HAL 9000 96]

So, Houston has bragging rights to an openly gay mayor. This is what makes people happy these days?

It made the gay lobby happy and that's what really counts. Will she be a good mayor? Doesn't matter when when someone is making history in their book.

Look out for the Gay Mafia....they're coming for you.

Its all part of Obama's strategy to make homosexual sex mandatory.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

...the usual suspects have made the homosexual angle of the election into some sort of mandate on homosexuality.

It has to with tolerance of gays, peejay. There are plenty of Texans, such as yourself who have a low regard for homosexuals in general. To pretend this election is nothing major is ignoring your own bigotry.

So you are now a spokesman for my beliefs, values, and attitudes? I think because this thread hasn't turned out as you would have liked that you now have a bad case of sour grapes. But that is only my spin on it.

Homosexuals have long been a target of discrimination and still face issues of inequality. That's not sour grapes. That's the reality and significance of this milestone.

[peejay 327]

...the usual suspects have made the homosexual angle of the election into some sort of mandate on homosexuality.

It has to with tolerance of gays, peejay. There are plenty of Texans, such as yourself who have a low regard for homosexuals in general. To pretend this election is nothing major is ignoring your own bigotry.

So you are now a spokesman for my beliefs, values, and attitudes? I think because this thread hasn't turned out as you would have liked that you now have a bad case of sour grapes. But that is only my spin on it.

Homosexuals have long been a target of discrimination and still face issues of inequality. That's not sour grapes. That's the reality and significance of this milestone.

What I really get a chuckle about is that the Left has habitually harped about "judging the content of someone's character", but in reality is habitually obsessed with various forms of identity politics. This is just one of many examples. I fail to see that the election was a referendum on homosexuality that you seem to think it is.

Edited December 13, 2009 by peejay

[one...two...tree 2,762]

...the usual suspects have made the homosexual angle of the election into some sort of mandate on homosexuality.

It has to with tolerance of gays, peejay. There are plenty of Texans, such as yourself who have a low regard for homosexuals in general. To pretend this election is nothing major is ignoring your own bigotry.

So you are now a spokesman for my beliefs, values, and attitudes? I think because this thread hasn't turned out as you would have liked that you now have a bad case of sour grapes. But that is only my spin on it.

Homosexuals have long been a target of discrimination and still face issues of inequality. That's not sour grapes. That's the reality and significance of this milestone.

What I really get a chuckle about is that the Left has habitually harped about "judging the content of someone's character", but in reality is habitually obsessed with various forms of identity politics. This is just one of many examples. I fail to see that the election was a referendum on homosexuality that you seem to think it is.

She didn't get elected because she was openly gay. She got elected in spite of it. You're being deliberately obtuse to imply that being an openly gay politician in the state of Texas isn't a liability politically.

[peejay 327]

...the usual suspects have made the homosexual angle of the election into some sort of mandate on homosexuality.

It has to with tolerance of gays, peejay. There are plenty of Texans, such as yourself who have a low regard for homosexuals in general. To pretend this election is nothing major is ignoring your own bigotry.

So you are now a spokesman for my beliefs, values, and attitudes? I think because this thread hasn't turned out as you would have liked that you now have a bad case of sour grapes. But that is only my spin on it.

Homosexuals have long been a target of discrimination and still face issues of inequality. That's not sour grapes. That's the reality and significance of this milestone.

What I really get a chuckle about is that the Left has habitually harped about "judging the content of someone's character", but in reality is habitually obsessed with various forms of identity politics. This is just one of many examples. I fail to see that the election was a referendum on homosexuality that you seem to think it is.

She didn't get elected because she was openly gay. She got elected in spite of it. You're being deliberately obtuse to imply that being an openly gay politician in the state of Texas isn't a liability politically.

Give us all examples of this woman running a "gay" campaign and I might buy your logic. Or that she was elected on "gay" issues. Or that she would have been elected if the candidate lineup in had been different in the general and runoff election.

Really...I'm not losing any sleep or getting any ulcers over the fact that she was elected. The beat goes on. I just draw way different conclusions in this election than what you opine.

[slim 1,525]

still face issues of inequality.

I think this argument is always funny in politics. Especially when coming from a group that has, what, 5% of the population? I'm all for having equal representation, but what always ends up happening in politics is if there's not someone representing every single group, then it's not fair. It's like nowadays we can't elect someone like us because if we do, we're racist or homophobic or sexist or whatever.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

still face issues of inequality.

I think this argument is always funny in politics. Especially when coming from a group that has, what, 5% of the population? I'm all for having equal representation, but what always ends up happening in politics is if there's not someone representing every single group, then it's not fair. It's like nowadays we can't elect someone like us because if we do, we're racist or homophobic or sexist or whatever.

First, it's equal protection under the law. Second - equal doesn't equate to exact same treatment. For example, adding a ramp to a public library to allow adequate access for the handicapped. Treating them the exact same would mean not making the handicapped a ramp, but making them take the stairs just like everyone else.

Edited December 14, 2009 by Galt's gallstones

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I need to amend my comment: If she has a lesbianic spikey hair do, she should immediately be removed from Office. that is just wrong.

You're just pissed she won't give you any.

Angelina Jolie. Now, she can make me switch teams in heartbeat.

You. Make. Me. Sick.

Bullsh1t. I just made you curious --- and no, you cannot watch. Pervert

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I need to amend my comment: If she has a lesbianic spikey hair do, she should immediately be removed from Office. that is just wrong.

You're just pissed she won't give you any.

Angelina Jolie. Now, she can make me switch teams in heartbeat.

You. Make. Me. Sick.

Bullsh1t. I just made you curious --- and no, you cannot watch. Pervert

Deviant!

[spookyturtle 9,466]

You're all a bunch of salami slurpin' homos.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I need to amend my comment: If she has a lesbianic spikey hair do, she should immediately be removed from Office. that is just wrong.

You're just pissed she won't give you any.

Angelina Jolie. Now, she can make me switch teams in heartbeat.

You. Make. Me. Sick.

Bullsh1t. I just made you curious --- and no, you cannot watch. Pervert

Deviant!

Duh. Tell me something I don't know.

[Darnell 8,478]

Duh - where are the true homophobes? I'd really like to hear from you, as that new immigration bill (both in the house and senate ) has had the wording changed - from 'spouse' to 'partner' - and if it's passed as is, expect to see a lof of the tv's from thailand coming in to live with their USC 'partners'. Are you righteously indignant? Give a ####? Did ya call yer congressman/woman already?

Sure, actual usage will vary by state - so if you live in a state that 'allows' homosexual legal unions, well, you might be getting some new PRs next year.

Personally, I think it's a shame for that wording change, but it was lobbied for change-up, and the wording is still in there. There's some excellent things in the bill concening SPOUSAL visas, process and procedures - I, for one, will take the good with the 'bad'...

Happy Sunday ! and sorry for the thread drift !

[TBoneTX 45,305]

Voter turnout constituted a whopping 16.5% of the Houston electorate... meaning that whoever was elected to ANY office received an indisputably overwhelming mandate.