View Full Version : Former Gay Prostitute Loses Primary
UnkHiram
03-08-2006, 04:26 PM
Just thought I would update yall on this story out of Dallas. The former Gay Prostitute that was running as a Democrat for the Congressional Seat out of the "Oak Lawn" section of Dallas --------Lost. He only got 40% of the vote, guess his rates were too high
BEST45CAL
03-08-2006, 05:41 PM
He actually got 40%? That's scary. lol
After losing his dignity, I doubt losing the primary meant much. Sicko.
Native American
03-09-2006, 10:00 AM
Just spotted this thread for the first time, and I was curious as to the guy's party affiliation. Without having read the thread yet, I was guessing the guy was a disciple of the Democrat Party.
My guess was right, I see.
Rhino
03-09-2006, 10:06 AM
He actually got 40%? That's scary. lolTwo factors temper that observation.
1. It was the "Oak Lawn" section of Dallas.
2. It was a democratic primary rather than a general election.
UnkHiram
03-09-2006, 03:42 PM
Rhino
Good eyes, you spotted the reference to the "Oak Lawn" section of Dallas.
Rhino
03-10-2006, 07:33 AM
I had my reading glasses on. LOL!
Lazarus
03-10-2006, 01:13 PM
After losing his dignity, I doubt losing the primary meant much. Sicko.Good call, Melz... ;)
Ok, inquiring minds want to know... What's the deal with "Oak Lawn"?
Native American
03-10-2006, 01:23 PM
Ok, inquiring minds want to know... What's the deal with "Oak Lawn"?
Gay life in Dallas is found all throughout the city, but the Oak Lawn neighborhood on Cedar Springs Road and Oak Lawn Avenue, is the definite gay hub of Dallas. Sporting a wide variety of gay clubs, bars, restaurants and retail outlets, the Oak Lawn neighborhood is quite busy during the day but extraordinarily lively by night, especially on the weekends!
Popular bars and clubs include the Round-Up Saloon for those looking for a country-western flair, the Throckmorton Mining Company (TMC) and S-4 for late night dancing and entertainment on multiple floors, Woody’s, JR’s and Mickey’s for that neighborhood bar environment, Kaliente and Bamboleo’s for the latin crowd, and Buddies II and Sue Ellen’s for the ladies.
http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/blah.bmp
http://www.gaywork.com/page.cfm?Sectionid=4&typeofsite=storydetail&ID=229&storyset=yes
Proud American
03-11-2006, 12:08 AM
Today: A former prostitute gets 40% in a primary election.
Tomorrow: A former drunk driver will be elected president of the United States.
UnkHiram
03-11-2006, 06:50 AM
Today: A former prostitute gets 40% in a primary election.
Tomorrow: A former drunk driver will be elected president of the United States.
You are not really comparing President Bush's DUI coonviction to this clown's former occupation as a Gay Prosititue are you? I would suggest that their is a significant difference between a SINGLE conviction for drunk driving (When nobody was harmed) and a CAREER as a whore.
Native American
03-11-2006, 06:57 AM
I would suggest that their is a significant difference between a SINGLE conviction for drunk driving (When nobody was harmed) and a CAREER as a whore.
Liberals can't tell the difference, else they would never have elected (and reelected, again and again) Ted Kennedy. I think that's because most liberals are themselves whores and drunks. Hence they can't tell where one stops and the other starts.
Liberals are fundamentally mindless, and operate on little more than raw emotion. As such, they are very base creatures indeed.
Proud American
03-11-2006, 07:55 AM
A prostitute only endangers those who purchase their services. The customers go into the willingly
A drunk driver endangers everybody who is driving on a public road so IMO drunk driving is a much worse crime than hooking.
I lost my best friend in high school to a drunk driver. He did nothing wrong except be at the wrong place and time.
I don't give a shit whether the lush is a conservative or liberal, its reprehensible behavior.
You can argue the prostitution is a victimless crime since people only go into voluntarily. The same thing cannot be said for drunk driving.
Native American
03-11-2006, 07:59 AM
A prostitute only endangers those who purchase their services. The customers go into the willingly
A drunk driver endagers everybody who is driving on a public road so IMO drunk driving is a much worse crime than hooking.
I lost my best friend in high school to a drunk driver. He did nothing wrong except be at the wrong place and time.
You can argue the prostitution is a victimless crime since people only go into voluntarily. The same thing cannot be said for drunk driving.
Mary Jo Kopechne's parents lost their best daughter. She did nothing wrong except accept a ride in a buffoonish Democrat's car and trust him.
Proud American
03-11-2006, 08:01 AM
I don't excuse Ted Kennedy's crimes.
Why do you seem so quick to excuse Boy George's crimes?
UnkHiram
03-11-2006, 08:17 AM
I don't excuse Ted Kennedy's crimes.
Teddy Killed a woman
Why do you seem so quick to excuse Boy George's crimes?
President Bush harmed no one. Surely you can see the difference in the two? Are we to assume you have never made a mistake in your life?
Today: A former prostitute gets 40% in a primary election.
Tomorrow: A former drunk driver will be elected president of the United States.
:unsmile: You do realise that you cannot compare these two things, right? You must be joking.
A prostitute only endangers those who purchase their services. The customers go into the willingly
A drunk driver endangers everybody who is driving on a public road so IMO drunk driving is a much worse crime than hooking.
I lost my best friend in high school to a drunk driver. He did nothing wrong except be at the wrong place and time.
I don't give a shit whether the lush is a conservative or liberal, its reprehensible behavior.
You can argue the prostitution is a victimless crime since people only go into voluntarily. The same thing cannot be said for drunk driving.
You see, it's wrong to drive a car when you are drunk but each case should be looked at individually. In G.W. Bush's case nobody was hurt. Therefor you cannot hold him responsible for what COULD have happened but what DID happen.
bickleej
03-14-2006, 07:48 PM
A former gay prostitute running for audience in Texas? For goodness sakes people, know your audience. That's just as dumb as when Janet Reno ran for the Florida Governors race.:rolleyes:
ldb83
03-15-2006, 03:01 PM
You see, it's wrong to drive a car when you are drunk but each case should be looked at individually. In G.W. Bush's case nobody was hurt. Therefor you cannot hold him responsible for what COULD have happened but what DID happen.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to prove. It sounds like you're trying to downplay the seriousness of drunk driving based on the end result of it. If I fire a gun into a crowd of people and happen not to kill anyone, that doesn't really matter. Yeah, good thing nobody got hurt, but don't act like it's all of a sudden less serious.
Rhino
03-15-2006, 03:29 PM
I'm not sure what point you're trying to prove. It sounds like you're trying to downplay the seriousness of drunk driving based on the end result of it. If I fire a gun into a crowd of people and happen not to kill anyone, that doesn't really matter. Yeah, good thing nobody got hurt, but don't act like it's all of a sudden less serious.But it is. Reckless endangerment, or even attempted murder, is less serious than murder itself, hence lesser penalties. The act is being confused with the effect here. Drunk driving is drunk driving, whether you hurt someone or not. But it doesn't become manslaughter or murder if you don't kill someone with your car. While the act hasn't changed, the result certainly has. Culpability, responsibility and punishment will also change with that result. That doesn't downplay drunk driving though. Not in my book.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.