News | Texas

City Councilman Makes Sexuality an Issue in Fort Worth Election


Worried about the outcome of a potential run-off between two candidates, Joel Burns and Chris Turner, in the six-candidate City Council race in Fort Worth, Texas, councilman Chuck Silcox urged a group of Republicans to vote for Turner because Burns is openly gay.

Said Silcox: "'This is an excellent time to have Republicans get out and support a Republican: Chris Turner,' Silcox told a group of about 50 at a Fort Worth Republican Women's Club meeting and a forum for Republican state House District 97 candidates. 'We have two people of opposite partisan politics, opposite philosophical persuasions and opposite sexual orientations. I didn't tell you which one was homosexual,' Silcox said as the crowd laughed. Pointing to Turner, Silcox continued: 'He's married to a female, and the other's married to a male. You make your own mind up.'"

Silcox told the Star-Telegram he brought it up because the paper, which has endorsed Burns, has not brought up the fact that he is gay: "The Star-Telegram doesn't talk about it. They don't put the negative out there. Every damn article that was written about Louis McBee (a former candidate) mentioned that he was gay. I'm just [angry] about the way that the Star-Telegram has treated this...I'm not trying to be derogatory about the young man. I've never even met him. From what I understand, he is openly gay. I'm not saying good, bad or otherwise. He has a different political philosophy and philosophy about life than most Republicans."

Said Burns of Silcox's remarks: "We live in the state of Texas, and I have a partner that I live with, who is a partner of 15 years. It is unfortunate that Mr. Silcox and Mr. Turner want to bring partisanship to a nonpartisan race."

Councilman raises issue of homosexuality in city race [fort worth star telegram]

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Even on a local level they are the scum of the f---king earth!

    And some of y'all talk about some damn Blumberg is a decent man. That's because he's a frickin' Democrat "passing" as a Republican.

    Posted by: Derrick From Philly | Oct 25, 2007 3:13:01 PM

  2. The "crowd" is going to be laughing a lot less in the coming decades...

    Posted by: Wes | Oct 25, 2007 3:23:43 PM

  3. Hmm... maybe the paper wasn't talking about Burns's sexuality because it has absolutely, positively no relevance to the race at hand. Shocker of shockers! As long as Burns didn't raise it as an issue, it wasn't an issue.

    Posted by: Ryan | Oct 25, 2007 3:25:15 PM

  4. "The Star-Telegram doesn't talk about it. They don't put the NEGATIVE out there.

    "From what I understand, he is openly gay. I'm not saying good, bad or otherwise."

    Seems thats exactly what you said, asshat.

    Posted by: Wes | Oct 25, 2007 3:25:32 PM

  5. This is shameless discrimination. Why is being a homosexual man in a relationship any better or any worse than a heterosexual in a relationship? I fail to see the point. So, as usual, its just blatant bigotry and hate toward gay men. Silcox is a disgusting hack.

    Posted by: Vi Agara | Oct 25, 2007 3:26:55 PM

  6. BTW, is he a frog or are there people camping in that extra chin?

    Sorry, I had to.

    Posted by: Wes | Oct 25, 2007 3:27:28 PM

  7. No, Wes. Apparently Mr. Silcox's brain has melted and the sticky residue has oozed into that huge turkey wattle under his chin. The huge empty cavern behind his dead eyes is now used for extra storage space for Mr. Turner's spare Rogaine supply.

    Sorry, it had to be said.

    Posted by: Brian | Oct 25, 2007 3:31:42 PM


    (and I live here)

    Posted by: stevo | Oct 25, 2007 3:34:33 PM

  9. Oh okay... I knew there had to be a medical explanation

    Posted by: Wes | Oct 25, 2007 3:49:53 PM

  10. Silcox looks like a caricature of a Southern lawmaker. He could be Boss Hogg's brother.

    Posted by: Paul | Oct 25, 2007 4:11:52 PM

  11. Turner looks like quite the fag, IMO.

    Posted by: Whaaat? | Oct 25, 2007 4:19:44 PM

  12. I would charitably describe Mister Silcox as a slob.

    Posted by: Esther Blodgett | Oct 25, 2007 4:25:17 PM

  13. Is it okay to say that Joel Burns is one of the most handsome men I've ever seen? I mean this literally. He's what I call shockingly good-looking.

    Hollywood Dave (formerly David from L.A.)

    Posted by: Hollywood Dave (formerly David from L.A.) | Oct 25, 2007 4:34:27 PM

  14. Meh, he gave the wrong response. He should have said: I have a partner I've been with for 15 years; unlike my Republican opponent, who like many other Repuglicans could be caught tapping his foot in a bathroom stall near you tomorrow, or dressing in diapers or asphyxiating himself in a wetsuit with a dildo up his bum.

    Now that would shut those Repuglicans up good.

    Posted by: beergoggles | Oct 25, 2007 4:36:18 PM

  15. Well, no, jackass, Burns isn't married to anyone because bigots like you keep voting against marriage equality.

    And before I read the article, I just *knew* Turner had to be the gay one because he looks as though he's about to break into a showtune.

    Posted by: peterparker | Oct 25, 2007 5:00:10 PM

  16. burns is hot. turner is totally gayface. silcox is a typical repug slimeball.

    Posted by: nic | Oct 25, 2007 5:41:47 PM

  17. I thought Turner was the gay. This is the story: ""The Star-Telegram doesn't talk about it... Every damn article that was written about Louis McBee (a former candidate) mentioned that he was gay." Why was Louis being gay newsworthy for the Star-Telegram but Burns, who they happen to endorse, being gay is treated like a State secret?

    There's no such thing as a non-partisan race. Everyone knows where candidate's loyalties lie even if the run-off won't be strictly between candidates of differing parties.

    Posted by: queendru | Oct 25, 2007 5:48:59 PM

  18. Send money to Burns. I did.

    Posted by: TomJ | Oct 25, 2007 7:11:01 PM

  19. "Councilman Chuck Silcox urged a group of Republicans to vote for Turner because Burns is openly gay."

    that is stone-cold idiocy, like voting for Hilary because she's a woman (heard that often enough from women) or for Barack because he's black, or any number of candidates because they are neither female nor of color. He should be voted for because he will best represent the party and his constituents. Silcox needs his butt kicked.

    Posted by: Nita | Oct 26, 2007 8:21:27 AM

  20. He gets my vote for being cute and gay, go Burns!

    Posted by: Sebastain | Oct 26, 2007 11:08:51 AM

  21. I got to add my vote for Turner being a closet case. When I saw the pics I immediately thought guy on the right is teh queer, but then I did a double take and read the names...the "straight" candidate is gayer than the gay one.

    Posted by: Wheezy | Oct 26, 2007 10:21:26 PM

  22. Meh, I don't expect much from Texas (and we're not talking about Austin here, but the evangelical heartland of Dallas-Ft. Worth). The main travel hub in the state is "George Bush Intercontinental Airport" for crying out loud.

    Posted by: John | Jan 29, 2008 3:27:28 PM

Post a comment


« «Towleroad Guide to the Tube #190« «