A GLBT President

[Papelucho]

This year's election is really exciting because I never thought that I would see a black candidate or a woman candidate get this far. I don't know if I was being naive or what.

It's true that this year in politics is not really a big year for GLBT rights, but it makes me wonder when a GLBT person would be able to make it as far as Barack and Hillary have.

What do you think?

-Papelucho
:flag2:

[jamieknyc]

Well, you know the rumors about Hillary.....LOL

[ambi53mm]

This year's election is really exciting because I never thought that I would see a black candidate or a woman candidate get this far. I don't know if I was being naive or what.

It's true that this year in politics is not really a big year for GLBT rights, but it makes me wonder when a GLBT person would be able to make it as far as Barack and Hillary have.

What do you think?

-Papelucho
:flag2:

I believe anything is possible...and hope we will evolve to a point where someone's sexual preference is not a point of exclusion in evaluating their potential to lead a country or any position of similarity......does make me wonder if truth be told...how many of our famed leaders through out our history were of that persuasion….so many men with so much time on their hands….how many deals were sealed with a little more than just a kiss….we’ve come a long way in many ways…and politics and sex have always seemed to go hand and hand both past and present……yep…anything’s possible.

Ambi:)

[FalconAngel]

Just because a person has risen to that height does not make them qualified to lead the nation. Look at Emperor Bush to prove my point.

What we need are real choices, not just people that give lip service to the issues or blindly follow the religious wrong. We need more than just the lesser of the evils.

Doesn't matter what their sex, sexuality, religion or color is; they need to be strong and honest, for a change.

[12voltman59]

We do need people who, as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, said--have their own strong degree of personal integrity and character---and they operate from that sense as well and don't operate under some form of narrow ideology ---they also don't make all decisions based upon some bottom line "the ends justifies the means" type of reasoning--and they respect and hold to the line that all citizens should be offered and provided their full panoply of civil and constiutional rights irrespective of things like gender orientation, ethnic and national origins, gender, etc. since they are American citizens.

Such a potential candidate has a firm belief and commitment to true justice for all citizens--not just give lip service to such an ideal and it doesn't matter whether that person is straght or GLBT or any other way of catagorizing them.

[darkeyes]

It don matta wetha a Pres (or a PM in the case ere) is bi gay trans man woman black wite green or ne thin else remotely human. Wot mattas is that he she or it has an integrity, a compassion an a set a policies an philosophies wich r relevant 2 the country an world in wich we liv, an has the strength, strategies an intellectual capacity 2 resist the powerful interest groups which transcend an dominate our politics. Wy we end up wiv such dummies leadin us, an self seekin scumbags is cos we rely far 2 much on the party system an cos the electoral systems stink both in the UK an the US. Its worse in the US cos ifya aint a Democrat or Republican ya can jus forget it..thats wer the political power lies an thats wer powerful an monetary interests will insist it stays... at its beck an call. Not much betta ere, tho at least we do hav a load a parties 2 choose from..tho only 2 wich count UK wise.. 3 ifya count the lib dems (an me don). Its different north a the border cosa the scottish Parliament an the votin system. Ther r 4 main parties vyin for our vote but nun r worth a sod, but at least ther is sum kinda choice. Not even me own party is worth much these days, in Scotland or the UK.

Point me tryin 2 make is this.. power is held an exercised from on high..the reality is parties r controlled by wicheva powerful an wealthy interest groups they rely on most for ther survival. Principle, integrity, ideology an political philosophy hav essentially an effectively gone outa the window. Weneva a political party wins power it claims it has been elected an will govern on behalf of all the people. We know thats a rite load a rubbish cos they rule for themsels an ther backers not for the people. So ya can hav a Gay or bi or TG Pres. Or PM or Chief Minister. It don matta... wot mattas is jus how much the backers, the powerful interest groups r prepared 2 allow government 2 legislate for an fit in the parliamentary timetable in between the legislation they want..not us..not the electors... the real power in so called democratic societies.. big biz an wealthy powerful interest groups.

A jaundiced view?? yea sure it is.. but not wivout reason an justification....

[BI BOYTOY]

This year's election is really exciting because I never thought that I would see a black candidate or a woman candidate get this far. I don't know if I was being naive or what.

It's true that this year in politics is not really a big year for GLBT rights, but it makes me wonder when a GLBT person would be able to make it as far as Barack and Hillary have.

What do you think?

-Papelucho
:flag2:

that would be cool;but i dont thingk it will ever happen. but we are about ready to go through a MUCH NEEDED CHANGE depending on who gets electedmfor pres.:bigrin:

[DiamondDog]

Been there and done that.

James Buchanan the United States' 15th president was a homosexual male, and the United States has already had a bisexual first lady Eleanor Roosevelt.

I've heard that Lincoln could have been homosexual but I've also heard that this is completely false and that it's just a bias in a biography about him that's plagarized by a historian.

[TaylorMade]

Been there and done that.

James Buchanan the United States' 15th president was a homosexual male, and the United States has already had a bisexual first lady Eleanor Roosevelt.

I've heard that Lincoln could have been homosexual but I've also heard that this is completely false and that it's just a bias in a biography about him that's plagarized by a historian.

Damn you for beating me to it!!!

*Taylor*

[jamieknyc]

Been there and done that.

James Buchanan the United States' 15th president was a homosexual male, and the United States has already had a bisexual first lady Eleanor Roosevelt.

I've heard that Lincoln could have been homosexual but I've also heard that this is completely false and that it's just a bias in a biography about him that's plagarized by a historian.

Not a credit to the LGBT community. Buchanan was arguably the worst president in history.

[Papelucho]

Been there and done that.

James Buchanan the United States' 15th president was a homosexual male, and the United States has already had a bisexual first lady Eleanor Roosevelt.


Really, James Buchanan, did people know about it?

I tend to be a worrying person sometimes, and seeing that millions of people got past old prejudices enough to vote for someone that wasn't a heterosexual white man is inspirational.

I'm not naive enough to believe that it will change every day life very much, but it is one thing. As many have pointed out here, there are a lot of other very important aspects that need to be considered as well.

[BiDanielle]

This year's election is really exciting because I never thought that I would see a black candidate or a woman candidate get this far. I don't know if I was being naive or what.

It's true that this year in politics is not really a big year for GLBT rights, but it makes me wonder when a GLBT person would be able to make it as far as Barack and Hillary have.

What do you think?

-Papelucho
:flag2:



I think you will discover that both Hillary and Obama (and his wife Michelle) are all bisexual. But they can't admit it. I guess we will have to wait for Chelsea to come out of the closet when she runs in 2020 for an OPENLY bisexual presidential candidate.

[TaylorMade]

Not a credit to the LGBT community. Buchanan was arguably the worst president in history.

That's why some are trying to use flawed history/research to pull Abraham Lincoln in. . .Lincoln may have been alot of things: possibly bipolar, possibly a victim of domestic violence- - but there is little to no reliable, contemporary evidence putting Lincoln as gay or bisexual.

It's like the attempt of many black historians to pull Cleopatra as black. . .when in reality she was Greek.

*Taylor*

[darkeyes]

Don matta eva wot a candidates sexuality is..well its shudn ne way..wot mattas she or he believes an dus wen in the job..

Wot mattas..is that they can..an openly..an peeps won give a sod bout it... an vote for wot she or he believes and dus.. not on wot she or he is..

[sdnaustin]

[QUOTE=Papelucho;102426]Really, James Buchanan, did people know about it?

[QUOTE]

It was one of those things people knew, but didn't really discuss...the average voter, probably had no clue, his party leaders and the leaders of the other party, yeah, they knew.

In fact, the term "First Lady" was coined to describe his niece who served as the White House hostess during his term.

[jamieknyc]

Really, James Buchanan, did people know about it?

I tend to be a worrying person sometimes, and seeing that millions of people got past old prejudices enough to vote for someone that wasn't a heterosexual white man is inspirational.

I'm not naive enough to believe that it will change every day life very much, but it is one thing. As many have pointed out here, there are a lot of other very important aspects that need to be considered as well.

Buchanan was not openly gay. There is no direct evidence of it, but there are a lot of reasons to believe that he might have been.

[softfruit]

While I'd love to see that out bi genderqueer president as a symbol that there are no limits to who we could be, I wonder if in the enthusiasm for someone like that we might be kidding ourselves a little.

Just because someone is (whatever) doesn't mean they'll be particularly good for that section of the community. In the UK we had a great rise in the number of female MPs in 1997 which was trumpeted as the start of a more caring, woman-friendly government: they went on to vote through rough deals for single parents (overwhelmingly affecting women). Similarly we've seen out gay MPs voting down equality legislation because their party told them to and even being compliant when lgbt rights victories are reversed.

Give me a straight white able-bodied man who actually cares about and legislates for a fair deal for people who are not those things, over someone who has sold out on their diverse roots any day...