The World Newser is World News' daily blog. Here, you'll find our staff's thoughts on the day's news and the way we build our broadcast. Plus, we'll share reports from our team of correspondents in the field, as well as producers behind-the-scenes.
RECENT POSTS
- Clem's Chronicles: Afghanistan/WH State Dinner/Holiday Travel
- Photos: White House State Dinners Through the Years
- Are We Becoming A Nation of Know-Nothings?
- Quotes of the Day: 'President Obama has the information he wants... to make his decision'
- Clem's Chronicles: Jobs/Afghanistan/Health Care Reform/Deficit
- Child Safety: Crib Recall and Other Recently Recalled Kids Products
- You Buying Less This Holiday?
- President Lou Dobbs?
- The Democrats Need LBJ
- Another Vampire Blockbuster? Why?
- Documenting the Planet's Demise -- One Striking Photograph at a Time
- President Obama Answers Questions From Anti-Castro Blogger
WORLD NEWSER CATEGORIES
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Will Houston Elect Its First Gay Mayor?
November 03, 2009 1:34 PM
Big (sort of) election day! You have a couple of governor races, some important referendums and a handful of mayoral races. Which brings us to the nation’s 4th biggest city of Houston where an openly gay woman is running for mayor. 52 year old city controller Annise Parker finds herself today in the midst of a very tight race (there will likely be a run-off). If she wins, she’ll be the first openly gay woman to be mayor of a major American city.
November 3, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (15)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Does it matter in what way this woman likes to be pleasured in the bedroom?
How is this something that anyone cares about?
Why do we need to know her sexual preferences?
: o )
Posted by: Noz | Nov 3, 2009 2:25:26 PM
For the same reason we needed to focus on the president being HALF black... It's a media bonanza. What they don't seem to understand is we (the people) could care less what color they are OR what their sexual preference is AS LONG AS THEY DO THE JOB THEY WERE ELECTED TO DO! Until the media stops their glory-seeking headlines, this country will remain in a mess.
Posted by: sle | Nov 3, 2009 3:11:46 PM
Although Ms. Parker's sexual orientation shouldn't matter, in the long run it will matter and in a positive way. As more and more lesbians and gay men are elected and more Americans have a chance to see that they are no worse than any heterosexual politician, the most open-minded of us will finally accept that sexual orientation is not nor should it be a bar to public office nor to full and equal enjoyment of all of the legal and social rights and obligations of citizenship.
Posted by: Sisko24 | Nov 3, 2009 3:26:32 PM
It is sad that we are hiring people who are living impure and unholy passions.
Posted by: DVM | Nov 3, 2009 5:51:02 PM
dvm - it sad that we must read posts from those who feel that because they have "faith" in some god that that "faith" gives them some higher moral standing! please keep your "un-holy" thoughts to yourself.
Posted by: john copeland | Nov 3, 2009 6:16:38 PM
As long as an individual does the job he is elceted to do and respect his electoral platform, it does not make any difference what that person does in her bedroom.
THe NEWS industry is making a show out of colour, races, sexual preferences or habits and that is absolutely repulsive.
Have a great day.
Posted by: Roger Bertrand | Nov 3, 2009 6:34:57 PM
I thought Houston's once mayor Katy Whitmeyer was a lez.
Posted by: Mojo | Nov 3, 2009 6:56:26 PM
"It is sad that we are hiring people who are living impure and unholy passions."
Umm..what? It's more sad to me that it's 2009 and a significant number of people still want to discriminate against gays and lesbians.
Posted by: Eric | Nov 3, 2009 8:20:19 PM
How does this focus on a Houston mayoral contestant's sexual orientation constitute news? We're a nation unified by the belief that anybody can do anything, yet every news story like this intensifies our surprise when anyone with any kind of "difference" actually makes a difference. The people interviewed for this story were clearly surprised and annoyed by the focus of the questions. If regular people feel this way, why can't you guys figure it out?
Posted by: Deborah Murphey | Nov 3, 2009 8:54:26 PM
Kathy Withmeyer was highly favored by the gay community but no certainty on whether she was actually gay or not. Certainly not openly if she were, and the operative word is 'openly' in above statement about Annise Parker.
I think the significance of her sexual orientation is that we as Texans are not known for open mindedness as compared to Maine for example or California and as a state, a Republican stronghold, a given never a swing state.I say never in recent history of politics.
We have had enough politicians come up with sexual scandals. This one is not one of them.
Posted by: Htowner | Nov 4, 2009 1:07:45 AM
"Umm..what? It's more sad to me that it's 2009 and a significant number of people still want to discriminate against gays and lesbians." - Eric
Dearest Eric, the fact that there is a story about Annise Parker being gay when it isn't relevant to her running for office is in itself a form of discrimination.
Posted by: Noz | Nov 4, 2009 10:14:31 AM
I don't care about preference as long as it has nothing to do with the way a politician coducts his or herself in office. The economy is the main issue at hand and any gay rights issues brought up in the short term is just smoke and mirrors to hide an inability to deal with the problems facing our entire community.
Posted by: Michael | Nov 4, 2009 5:25:15 PM
So she likes women. Hey, I like women. But in so doing, she would seem to refute the moral teachings of most religions.
So then where do her moral values lie? If she does not believe religious assertions that man was created for women and vice versus, does she also not believe you should love your neighbor, not steal, not bear false witness, etc?
Just saying....
Posted by: STREETLAW | Nov 4, 2009 11:54:56 PM
It's important to me that Anise Parker does not win the run off, she is gay and her life-style is immoral, I know that no ones perfect but I will never support a person that rejects the morality of God in her personal life because she will eventually do the same thing in other areas of her decision making. You can not be immoral in one part and it does not effect other areas. How she is living is wrong and I desire to have someone represent me that respects the commands of my God. She obviously does not. He has ruled it as immoral and sinful and that is what it is. We can debate this on earth but we will all have to leave this world and go before God and there will be no debating before Him. Where is this so called Tea Party Express, obviously it had no impact here.
Posted by: Mary Baker | Nov 5, 2009 12:50:21 AM
Dear Mary,
It is a shame that you were never taught to think.
I hope you never loose your sight or the ability to walk.
People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)
And I hope you aren't wearing any fabric blends.
Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19
Hope you never had sex during your period.
If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their people" (Leviticus 20:18)
Been to the beauty parlor lately? will I see you in hell?
Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
The Bill of Rights is supposed to ensure certain basic rights including Freedom of Religion! Where do Christians get off trying to impose their beliefs on the minority. Furthermore not even all Christians would agree with you. People like you are, quite frankly, disgusting in your ignorance. Don't impose your false sense of morality.... Your own relgion states that you are not without sin. Do you believe you are? Should we discover your sins and stone you, cast you out, fire you, kick you out of your house, deny you the right to see your husband if he is in the hospital.
Can the majority of the population vote? Yes? Does that mean their action is just? No! Just because a majority votes in favor of an action does not make the action just. If the majority of the population decided that murder was acceptable, would that mean it is right? Tyranny of the majority is and will always be one of the pitfalls of democracy - and the uneducated such as yourself are the ones who will take us there.
Posted by: Mr. Willy | Nov 5, 2009 3:44:24 AM
Post a comment

