September 09, 2005
The full slate
Here are your 2005 candidates for City of Houston offices (PDF). Greg has a pretty full analysis. Like him, I'm a little surprised that no one bothered to challenge either City Controller Annise Parker or At Large Council Member Ron Green, both of whom are first-termers. Green did benefit from being in the right place at the right time last year, after Bert Keller got flambeed on talk radio for getting weak-kneed on property tax cuts. I'd have thought someone from the right would have mounted a challenge to Green on principle. Not that I mind - I too like Green, as does Tiffany, who was his classmate at River Oaks Elementary School back in the day. The one sure way I can get Tiffany to accompany me to a political outing is to tell her that Ron Green will be there.
As for Parker, you'd think that the presence of the Double Secret Illegal Anti-Gay Marriage amendment on the November ballot would have inspired some zealot to run against her in hopes of catching a wave. Such a person would not have won, but his or her service to the ideological cause would surely have not gone unnoticed by the Harris County GOP. For not having to experience the ugliness that would have ensued, we should all be very grateful.
Closer to me, someone named Larry Williams slipped in under the deadline to challenge Adrian Garcia. Garcia is so ubiquitous at all kinds of neighborhood meetings and events that transitioning to campaign mode should be no big deal for him, and I expect him to cruise to a well-deserved reelection with a big margin.
Now I just need to find a complete list of HISD and HCC candidates, and I'll be done.
Posted by Charles Kuffner on September 09, 2005 to Election 2005
As for Parker, you'd think that the presence of the Double Secret Illegal Anti-Gay Marriage amendment on the November ballot would have inspired some zealot to run against her in hopes of catching a wave. Such a person would not have won, but his or her service to the ideological cause would surely have not gone unnoticed by the Harris County GOP.
A zealot, or a member of the 60% majority who are going to approve the amendment you don't like?
While there are surely some people who would make an issue of Parker's sexual orientation as related to the gay marriage amendment (a better term for those people is not zealots, but a-holes), I think it's a mistake to paint all Republicans as interested in gay bashing or as really giving a flip about Parker's lifestyle choices. However, quite a few do object to the notion of marriage being redefined to include gay marriage. Some ideologues may prefer to call that gay bashing, but opposition to state sanction of gay marriage is not self-evidently a position of hate or zealotry.
Indeed, that's just a bizarre view of the majority (not just Republicans) who are going to approve this amendment. It seems more bombastic than reasoned.
I'm confused. Mayor and City Controller aren't 4-year terms?
"...but opposition to state sanction of gay marriage is not self-evidently a position of hate or zealotry."
More bombastic than reasoned, indeed. Unbeknownst to some, "state sanction of gay marriage" is NOT what is up for a vote in November.
Sue - Nope, all municipal offices are 2-year terms.
Kevin, I swear, you really try hard to misunderstand what I say sometimes. I didn't say that people who vote for "an amendmant I disagree with" are zealots. I said I was surprised that someone who is a zealot on this issue wouldn't take advantage of it to run a campaign against our openly gay City Controller. Where exactly is the bombast in that?