Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Download Folder

0 items

Houston Voice, No. 805, March 29, 1996
File 009
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Houston Voice, No. 805, March 29, 1996 - File 009. 1996-03-29. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. December 14, 2017. http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/841/show/820.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

(1996-03-29). Houston Voice, No. 805, March 29, 1996 - File 009. Montrose Voice. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/841/show/820

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Houston Voice, No. 805, March 29, 1996 - File 009, 1996-03-29, Montrose Voice, University of Houston Libraries, accessed December 14, 2017, http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/841/show/820.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Houston Voice, No. 805, March 29, 1996
Contributor
  • Darbonne, Sheri Cohen
Publisher Window Media
Date March 29, 1996
Language English
Subject
  • LGBTQ community
  • LGBTQ people
  • Gay liberation movement
Place
  • Houston, Texas
Genre
  • newspapers
Type
  • Text
Identifier OCLC: 31485329
Rights In Copyright: This item is protected by copyright. Copyright to this resource is held by the creator or current rights holder, and the resource is provided here for educational purposes. It may not be reproduced or distributed in any format without permission of the copyright owner. Users assume full responsibility for any infringement of copyright or related rights.
Note This item was digitized from materials loaned by the Gulf Coast Archive and Museum (GCAM).
Item Description
Title File 009
Transcript 8 HOUSTON VOICE/ MARCH 29, 1996 Balloonists' reaction to gay marriage ban spotlights canceled race By DORIS HAUGEN Associated Press FOR THE HOUSTON VOICE SIOUX FALLS, S.D., Wednesday, March 20 (AP)—The plan: Gather a cadre of colorful hot-air balloons to sail across South Dakota's azure-blue sky, show off the state's wide-open spaces and boost tourism. The result: Instead, South Dakota, where wheat, corn or the weather often capture headlines, became a target of gay rights activism. Gov. Bill Janklow and state tourism officials had wanted to add a Governor's Cup race to an existing hot-air balloon rally in Mitchell as part of a plan to give the South Dakota event a regional spin. But all bets were off when Jacques Soukup and Kirk Thomas, internationally known balloonists and co-founders of a balloon museum in Mitchell, pulled their support because of a new state law banning gay marriages. State officials immediately canceled the race. Governors who had been invited were told to stay home. And debate began anew over the same-sex marriage bill Janklow signed into law last month. "I felt like I had been hit over the head with a two-by-four," said Bryan Hisel, executive director of the Mitchell Chamber of Commerce, which hoped the Governor's Cup could augment the existing balloon rally, still set to start June 21. "They (Soukup and Thomas) were harming a community and groups of volunteers and sponsors that really didn't care what their lifestyle was ... and I felt they were opening the door for a lot of needless controversy over what was going to be a fun event." The race had been sanctioned by a state government that adopted a "mean-spirited and hateful piece of legislation that hurts us, hurts the 60,000 gay and lesbian people of South Dakota, hurts members of our families and ultimately the people of South Dakota," Soukup and Thomas said in a statement released through the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in Washington, D.C. ..SIC BROTHERS 1232 WESTHEIMER OPEN MON.-SAT. 1f-9 SUN. 12-6 i (713) 522-1626 PLAIN SPEAKING by Larry Lingle Things Could Get Interesting. . .or Not Once again, it's election year, and an incumbent president from one of the former states of the Old Confederacy is battling an army of diverse forces ranging from an old workhorse of Republican conservatism to a politically shy retired general. And there is the growing and real threat of third-party division from the radical right and the just plain radical. While this may sound, look and taste like the election of 1996, it was in fact 1948. The sitting president (if he ever really sat except to play poker or the piano) was Harry S. Truman. He appeared so beatable that when the Republicans gathered in Philadelphia in June of that year, they saw themselves crowning, not simply selecting, a presidential candidate. In that case, they pushed aside the old conservative, Robert Taft—son and grandson of presidents—in favor of the slick (at least his hair) governor of New York, Thomas E. Dewey. And for his running mate, they chose Earl Warren from the California statehouse. The Democratic Party, still dominated by New Dealers and city bosses, in desperation turned to a retired general, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and led by the sons of Franklin Roosevelt offered the highest post to a man whose politics were unknown and wishes unexpressed. Even Truman conceded that if placed in nomination at the Democratic convention, Eisenhower would sweep the nod for the presidency. Eisenhower emphatically declined, this time and this party. And Truman easily won against a last-ditch candidate from the Southern branch of the party. The disgruntled Southern Democrats rallied in Birmingham to nominate Strom Thurmond (in 1996, the senile Republican senator from South Carolina) for president. The far left of the Democratic Party threw the biggest convention—and the youngest, with the most women and blacks—and named Henry Wallace to head their Progressive ticket. Wallace would consistently refuse to disavow his radical, in this case Communist, support, much like Pat Buchanan has not rejected the backing of the radical right and the likes of David Duke. Truman won in his four-way battle, but that's another story. And the election of 1996 is laking place in a different place and time. In 1948 there were no primaries—the nominations were fought out in the party conventions, a place of party bosses and smoke-filled rooms. Primaries were envisioned as a means of restoring democracy to the process, but, in practice—as in this year's only contested race, that of the Republican party—the outcome was clear after a dozen primaries in which a small fraction of the party faithful had an opportunity to voice their prefer ence. The conventions now are nothing more than a sideshow for the faithful and a revenue enhancer for the convention sites. Back when there appeared a chance that Colin Powell might gel in the race some hope remained for some excitement in this increasingly dull process. Pat Buchanan has added vinegar to the stomp, while Steve Forbes appeared briefly as a blip on the horizon. While I am not a forecaster, what if Buchanan, irate over Bob Dole and prospective running mate who might not pass the litmus test of the Eagle Forum, runs a third party race? What if Ross Perot does receive the nomination of his Reform Party? What if Ralph Nader and the Green Party get on the ballot, even in a handful of states? Obviously, Buchanan would draw from Dole's right and Perot's fringe. Perot would attract his hardcore, mainly snowbirds and hotheads. Nader, well, Ralph might score some in California, where any nut could pick up kindred spirits. The deciding factor, as is increasingly the case, would be television. Picture Bob Dole, sputtering about his war record to a populace whose only memory of the great war is old movies on the late show. Even the election of 1948, the first to receive any television coverage, had its revealing moment in front of the camera, when the young progressive mayor of Minneapolis. Hubert Humphrey, stood on the podium and declared that "the time has arrived for the Democratic Party to get out of the shadow of states' rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights.'" Humphrey spoke for a new Democratic Party, which lives even today. Luckily for Bill Clinton, the Republican Party has no Hubert Humphrey, no cry for human rights, only an obsession with states' rights, as if the states can do whai the federal government cannot. More importantly, Bill Clinton is no Harry Truman. After his nomination, Truman reconvened the Republican- controlled 80th Congress and forced it to repudiate its own party platform. Clinton faces a Republican controlled Congress which seems determined to set the ground rules for the forthcoming campaign. Truman heeded his own counsel and acted with a certitude of one acting from conviction, not polls or focus groups. And if all these third-party candidates do not materialize, the American public is in for one of the dullest campaigns in recent history. The result, either way, will be the re— election of Bill Clinton, an outcome most earnestly to be desired. If you get too bored during this forthcoming campaign, pick up David McCullough's fine biography of Truman and read aboul the election of 1948—it's much better than any current "novel" of modern politics. Get off it. Exercise. American Heart || Association-^^ '01995. Amern .r *i*':i" ■'■. ,v ■ -h ..
File Name uhlib_31485329_n805_008.jpg