Openly Gay Mayor In Dallas?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,247
Location
Edge's beanie closet
I hope he can win

http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4881411.html

DALLAS — Handicapping Dallas' mayoral contest in a recent interview, former Mayor Ron Kirk mentioned one thing as crucial to the candidacy of three-term councilman Ed Oakley: "The question for him is, 'Is Dallas ready for Ed Oakley?' "

If the 54-year-old small-business owner wins Saturday's runoff election, Dallas would become the first large city in the nation to elect an openly gay mayor.

This once-conservative stronghold has by all accounts become more diverse, more cosmopolitan and more politically liberal. But as city voters have become aware of Oakley's sexual orientation — which had not been prominently discussed in news coverage until last week — his campaign staff and key supporters said they are finding they are not quite living in freethinking Paris or Berlin, both led by gay mayors.

They say that wider knowledge of Oakley's sexual background — which he tersely acknowledges in interviews and debates — is hurting him in a Bible Belt city that remains home to scores of conservative churches, white and black, whose leaders regard homosexuality as a sin.

There has been no discussion of specific gay rights issues during the campaign. Dallas revoked a ban on the hiring of gay police officers 14 years ago and adopted a policy barring discrimination against gays in hiring. It also has adopted an ordinance against discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing and public accommodations.

The Washington-based Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, which supports homosexual candidates, pledged to raise $100,000 for Oakley's campaign and has raised about $80,000 to date, spokesman Denis Dison said.

The group's Web site casts the race as both historic and symbolic.

"Winning this mayoral race will not only make history for our community," the fundraising plea states, "it will send a message to every American that we can win — even in George Bush's backyard."
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
I hope he can win


because he's gay or because you have reviewed the candidates' abilities and resumes and feel he is the best person for the job ?
 
I hope he can win if he is the most qualified in spite of people praying in certain churches to get him off the ballot-stuff like that. I hope he can win in spite of prejudice against him because he's gay-prejudice that has absolutely nothing to do with his qualifications to be mayor.
 
This really highlights just how culturally different even supposedly conservative places can be in the US and New Zealand.

Dallas, US: Homosexual guy running for mayor causes a media stir and it may mean he won't win regardless of how qualified he might be.

Carterton, New Zealand: rural and conservative town elects Georgina Beyer as mayor in 1995. Born George Bertrand, she was a former drag queen, stripper, and prostitute, and she became the world's first transsexual mayor upon her election. She then ran for the rural and conservative Wairarapa district for the national parliament ... and won (first transsexual member of parliament in the world too). I don't even recall any controversy over her election as mayor. I only found out after the fact, when she was elected to parliament.

It seems that conservative in New Zealand translates as "raging liberal whackjob" in the US. :|
 
The current mayor of Dallas, is absolutely horrible.

Ed Oakley is a really nice guy, met him at an event years ago when I used to live there...

It will be interesting to see how the "conservative/ liberal" lines of Dallas matter in this. Overall Dallas is a pretty conservative city, with a handful of those megachurches with McDonalds in them, but it also has a pretty big gay community and one of the first predominately gay congregations at the Cathedral of Hope a 3500 member church...
 
Irvine511 said:




and so this will prevent the election of openly gay public officials? is that something to be proud of?

Unless you find an openly gay public official who's going to run on conservative views and family values. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Smallville said:
I'm just proud that Dallas is still overall conservative.

Not voting for a gay candidate simply because he's gay = bigotry.

Certainly something to celebrate!!!!
 
anitram said:


Not voting for a gay candidate simply because he's gay = bigotry.

Certainly something to celebrate!!!!

Where did I say that?

Some are all too willing to throw that 'bigot' word out aren't you?
 
Smallville said:


Unless you find an openly gay public official who's going to run on conservative views and family values. :shrug:

So, being a certain sexual orientation "runs on" conservative views and family values? Do certain races do this too?
 
Some of you are having a hard time reading. Where did I say there aren't conservative homosexuals? In fact I know some. I think some of you are showing your own prejudices!
 
Smallville said:


Unless you find an openly gay public official who's going to run on conservative views and family values. :shrug:

It seems like you're inferring that his homosexuality has something to do with family values. That's how I read that sentence anyway. :shrug:
 
Smallville said:
Where did I say there aren't conservative homosexuals? In fact I know some.



i agree. i know some too.

but the way in which "conservative" is now defined -- the marriage of a political view with a religious view -- no conservative could be authentically homosexual, because homosexuality does not exist, they are merely mentally ill heterosexuals.

so it seems incongruous, if Dallas is genuinely conservative, as the term is now understood, to have a gay mayor of a "conservative" city.

conservatives hate homosexuals. they've told us this over and over and over. they think they can be "changed." they want to rewrite the constitution in order to keep homosexuals out. they want to prevent homosexuals from adopting. they worked the issue as part of the Republican ground game in the 2004 election that just maybe, probably swung just enough conservative, rural districts in SE Ohio that gave Bush the election.

indeed, the entire Republcian social agenda has been centered around hating gay people. and, yes, i do equate the refusal of equal rights -- be it marriage or civil unions -- to be the equivalent of hate, whether or not someone who is opposed would agree.
 
phillyfan26 said:


It seems like you're inferring that his homosexuality has something to do with family values. That's how I read that sentence anyway. :shrug:

No my point was that the few openly gay politicians are usually liberal, even more than most of the Clinton and Obama types out there.
 
Smallville said:

No my point was that the few openly gay politicians are usually liberal, even more than most of the Clinton and Obama types out there.

It's just easier for them to be openly gay because their peers and supporters are more accepting of that (in general) than those of conservatives. I would imagine the percentage of gay people is pretty evenly distributed, with the only difference being openly vs not openly gay. I don't understand why you think they are more liberal than HRC or Barack Obama.

I would think the job of mayor is one of the least values and agenda driven jobs in politics and I also think being gay has as much to do with doing anything in politics as being straight does.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:

I don't understand why you think they are more liberal than HRC or Barack Obama.

I would think the job of mayor is one of the least values and agenda driven jobs in politics and I also think being gay has as much to do with doing anything in politics as being straight does.

I don't think gay has anything to do with politics, others seem to think that and have twisted my statements.

Why do I think they are more liberal? Obama and Clinton are trying really hard to be moderates and cater to the center. The very few openly gay public officials that I know of, don't really care to do that are pretty left.
 
[q]Conservative group sponsors anti-gay robo calls attacking mayoral candidate Ed Oakley
By David Webb Staff Writer
Jun 7, 2007, 20:28

Anti-gay robo calls denouncing gay mayoral candidate Ed Oakley and praising his opponent, Tom Leppert, spread across Dallas over the weekend.

The recorded phone messages, attributed to the Heritage Alliance’s political action committee on the recordings, told voters the three top issues of the mayoral runoff race are “crime, education and homosexuality.”

The messages also noted that Oakley would be the first openly-gay person to be elected mayor of a large city if he is elected on Saturday, June 16.

“We encourage you to vote for Tom Leppert, a Christian, married father of three children,” the female voice on the recordings said.

The phone calls apparently were timed to coincide with “Super Sunday,” a grass-roots event designed to turn out the vote in South Dallas. Both Oakley and Leppert campaigned vigorously in South Dallas on Sunday.

The Heritage Alliance’s mission, according to its Web site (www.txvote.com), is to “empower the handful of citizens necessary to restore principles of free enterprise, limited government, limited taxation and our traditional Judeo-Christian heritage in government. The group was founded by Dallas resident Richard Ford, who counts Focus on the Family founder James Dobson as one of his associates, his Web site notes.

The Leppert campaign quickly posted a message on its Web site disassociating the candidate from the robo calls. In a press release the campaign sent out on Sunday, June 9, Leppert called on the Heritage Alliance to discontinue making the calls.

Leppert had previously vowed in interviews not to make Oakley’s sexual orientation an issue in the race, but Oakley claimed last week that a “whisper campaign” has plagued him throughout the mayoral election.

Leppert said in interviews his campaign has had nothing to do with a whisper campaign or robo calls that went out on the day of the general election on May 12 accusing of Oakley having a “radical gay agenda” and also criticizing candidates Max Wells and Don Hill. Those calls omitted the sponsoring information heard on the most recent calls.

“I want to assure the citizens of Dallas that it is not our campaign,” Leppert said in the statement. “These tactics will only divide our city and discourage voters. Dallas voters have been tasked with the very important decision of who will lead our city into the future, and they deserve better than this.”

But Oakley said he suspects the Leppert campaign may have had prior knowledge of the calls, based on the speed in which Leppert had a message posted on his Web site condemning them. The calls were made to both Republicans and Democrats all over the city. Oakley said he even received one of the calls at his house.

“It was clearly a method to inflame the electorate from North to South,” Oakley said.
Oakley noted the recordings also included inaccurate information about crime and drop-out rates.
[/q]
 
Irvine511 said:
why do you think that gay people are more liberal?

(you're right, they are, in general -- how come?)

Why? Not sure, but all I have said is those in public office that I know of are usually on the left.

Why do I keep getting questioned about this?
 
Smallville said:


Why? Not sure, but all I have said is those in public office that I know of are usually on the left.

Why do I keep getting questioned about this?



it was posited that Dallas's generally more conservative citizens wouldn't elect a gay person.

you applauded the conservative citizenry, thusly approving of the refusal to elect a gay person.

now, you're being called to defend that.
 
Irvine511 said:




it was posited that Dallas's generally more conservative citizens wouldn't elect a gay person.

you applauded the conservative citizenry, thusly approving of the refusal to elect a gay person.

now, you're being called to defend that.

I'm glad Dallas wouldn't elect someone not running on a conservative and family value platform, gay or straight.

I have nothing against homosexuals, I don't agree with the campaign above that has to mention he's a homosexual. I believe homosexuals should be allowed civil unions, and marriage for those churches who are willing to do ceremonies.
 
Smallville said:

I have nothing against homosexuals, I don't agree with the campaign above that has to mention he's a homosexual.

He better get back into the closet, wouldn't want him to get all gay and uppity.

Why is it that presidential candidates need to all yammer on about God and their religion and yet it's inappropriate for this man to openly state he's gay?
 
anitram said:


He better get back into the closet, wouldn't want him to get all gay and uppity.

Why is it that presidential candidates need to all yammer on about God and their religion and yet it's inappropriate for this man to openly state he's gay?

Are you purposely trying to twist my words to make me into the bigot you wrongfully labeled me as earlier?!

"The recorded phone messages, attributed to the Heritage Alliance’s political action committee on the recordings, told voters the three top issues of the mayoral runoff race are “crime, education and homosexuality.”

The messages also noted that Oakley would be the first openly-gay person to be elected mayor of a large city if he is elected on Saturday, June 16."

I didn't agree with this campaign against him to use his sexuality as an issue! How is that wanting him to go back in the closet?!

Please tell me!!!
 
Back
Top Bottom