Carolyn Goodman's Contextual Problems

There is a very troubling pattern emerging with Las Vegas mayoral front runner Carolyn Goodman that came up last Wednesday when I moderated the forum for the Lambda business group with both candidates and again tonight: Mrs. Goodman is not capable of admitting when she's wrong or unclear. She touts her own fallibility, but then when she actually must answer for her own prior remarks, she blames the media or the audience, not herself.

It's a time-worn politician's trick, but as Sharron Angle and Mitt Romney have more recently learned, it's losing its efficacy because, more often than not, there's VIDEO or AUDIO recordings.

At the Lambda event, I revisited the issue of the DREAM Act and Mrs. Goodman complained that what was gleaned from that discussion about her ignorance about it and her understanding of its history was untrue and "taken out of context." And yet I had transcribed the conversation verbatim and posted the entire audio for everyone to hear specifically to avoid such a claim.

Now, tonight, Carolyn Goodman did it again during a live televised debate moderated by Steve Sebelius and Jonathan Humbert on KLAS Channel 8. Here's an exchange between Sebelius and Goodman:

Sebelius: Speaking at the Lambda business lunch last week, you said if you were gay and you wanted to marry your partner, you would move to state where gay marriage is already legal. My question is, why should somebody have to do that? Why shouldn’t somebody have be able to marry the person they love and stay in the city that they love?

Goodman: Okay, were you there?

Sebelius: I was not.

Goodman: It was taken a little out of context whoever wrote it down. I was answering some questions. My words were, if there was some urgency, I totally support of the domestic partnerships. In fact it was the city and the council in 2008, or, oh, wrong, eight years ago, passed the ordinance so, um, that those of the same [sic] who would have it legalized and have the opportunity to share in those things. From a legal standpoint I'm 1,000% in support of that. The question that was asked of me was about lobbying going forward -- [muddled chatter I'm not even sure how to transcribe] -- my sense was, if there’s an urgency. I’m all about individual rights. There’s nobody stronger about individual rights than myself. Anybody should have the right to their own lives. And if there’s an urgency for some reason to get married, it is not legal in the state of Nevada. So what I said was were I in that situation, I would go to another state where it was legal but I would still come back here because in my heart and soul, I would feel as though I was legally married. Taken out of context, it’s a little different.

Now, compare that to what actually happened. This was the exchange from Wednesday. You can hear it on this audio recording or watch it on this YouTube video:

If you don't want to watch or listen, here was the very first exchange between us:

Friess: Do you support legalized same-sex marriage?

Goodman: I support domestic partnerships for sure. I support the collective voice, and I support the laws of our state. But were I in your situation and it were important to me, until the state's legislative body hears your voice, were I in your situation, I would be going to a state right now that legalizes a marriage of same sex individuals.

So here's the thing. I didn't believe then nor now that Mrs. Goodman was saying she wants gay couples to move away. Even in the moment, I knew what she was saying, which is what she clarified in her response to Sebelius, because the alternative reading was simply ridiculous and mean-spirited. Her explanation of her remarks makes a certain sense -- and a certain nonsense as I'll get to in a moment -- and her position of being pro-DPs but against gay marriage is still the same as what President Obama and Sen. Harry Reid profess.

But there are two other things here:

(a) Nothing was taken out of context. It was badly articulated. This is clearly the fault of the speaker. Mrs. Goodman should have said, "I'm sorry, I wasn't clear, that didn't come out right," etc. Instead, this woman who claims to be a non-politician, behaved as politicians love to, imagining they can bend time and history simply by saying the blue sky is purple.

(b) She wasn't being truthful on other details, either. She wasn't answering "some" questions; she was answering the very first question. Also, I didn't ask her a thing about "lobbying."

Look, Carolyn Goodman is probably not a homophobe. There is a way that she talks about all of this -- her lack of modern vocabulary makes it a wonder she doesn't use the word "homosexual" -- that makes it clear she just doesn't know very much about the topic. Yes, that's troubling given that she's likely to be the next mayor, but being ignorant is not the same as being a hater.

I suspect that were a set of gay activists to sit down with her in a non-pressurized circumstance and explain to her what exactly the issues were, she may have a different view. It is clear that she simply doesn't get it, doesn't know that going to another state to marry does nothing for couples who live here, that a Nevada domestic partnership does not give a gay couple Social Security benefits or enable a man to keep his non-citizen spouse in the U.S. or any number of other details that make federal marriage equality important to those who want it.

I also suspect that there are plenty of Jews, including her own rabbi at Temple Beth Sholom, who could explain to her that religious teachings -- which she has cited as her opposition to same-sex marriage -- have evolved since she was young. In 2006, the overlords of Conservative Judaism endorsed same-sex unions and the ordination of openly gay clergy. So she is actually not in step with her own faith. When she was young, very few girls had Bat Mitzvahs. Her daughter had one and, from what she told me, the FBI spied on it because of the mobsters who attended. So times change.

Carolyn Goodman may be teachable on this stuff and, in fact, has come a long way from my first interview with her in March when she didn't even understand why gays needed domestic partnerships.

So I'm not troubled by her statements because I know lots of Jewish grandmas like her. I had two, in fact, until I came out and fell in love and they figured out how to square their desire for my happiness with whatever they had been told decades before.

But her knee-jerk willingness to be dishonest about her own prior comments should alarm even her. She must have watched politicians her whole life do that, as we all have, and hated it. She'd be more human, more reasonable, more sympathetic if she could resist that instinct and offered up more humility.

Odds are good she's going to have to make many, many more public statements in the future. It would be nice if we didn't have to take them with grains of salt.

The GLBT Mayoral Forum I Moderate on Wed

As crushed as many readers and podcast listeners may be to learn this, Chuck Monster of VegasTripping.Com cannot actually run for mayor of Las Vegas. That's a shame, too, given his fully formed, almost doable plan to save Vegas, which takes about five minutes to hear on this excerpt from our show.

That said, it's not as though the actual candidates aren't fun or interesting. In the left corner is Chris Giunchigliani, county commissioner and undefeated politico who scraped into the finale by a mere 15 votes. In the slightly-more-rightish corner is Carolyn Goodman, the frontrunner who readily admits she intends to not only capitalize on her husband's wild popularity but also is focused largely on seeing his plans through.

On Wednesday, the two candidates are scheduled to appear for a forum before the Lambda Business and Professional Association, Vegas' gay chamber of commerce. The event is at Las Palmas restaurant in Commercial Center, 953 E. Sahara, costs $15 for lunch and is open to all. It's also historic: It's the first time in Las Vegas history the candidates for mayor are appearing together before a GLBT audience.

Oh, and I'm the moderator/interviewer/host/medium/whatever. We tried to get the candidates to appear for a one-on-one debate but, as Delen Goldberg wrote in yesterday's Las Vegas Sun, one party didn't want to do it that way. Still, we decided it was worthwhile to have them both in whichever format we could, and I'll be there to make sure the candidates' feet are held to the fire.

While the audience will be largely GLBT people, I can assure you the line of questioning will not solely encompass that area by any stretch of the imagination. Last fall, when I moderated a proxy debate for Lambda between State Sen. Steven Horsford (standing in for Harry Reid) and UNLV College Republicans dude Mark Ciavoli (for Sharron Angle), the discussion was at least 75% about the economic issues of the day.

If you have questions for one or both of the mayoral candidates, please email them to me at Steve(at)SteveFriess.Com or leave it on a voicemail at 702-997-3300.

I'm going to see if we can stream the thing live via UStream. I really depends on the lighting; when I streamed the Celine Dion stuff last month it was actually difficult to see her because of the poor quality of the built-in camera on my Mac and iPhone. I'll test that out on Wednesday, so stay tuned.

The Mayoral Primary & The Race of The C.G.s

As I pretty much anticipated in last week's AOL/HuffPo piece, it's Carolyn Goodman versus Chris Giunchigliani in the June 7 general election for Las Vegas Mayor. And it'll be a bruiser, if the remarks found in my AOL/HuffPo piece this morning are any indication. With Chris' amazingly tight 15-vote win over Commissioner Larry Brown for second place, it's pretty fair to say that the controversy generated by Mrs. Goodman's remarks to me probably energized Giunchigliani's folks just that tad more that put her over the top.

As I did with Carolyn Goodman, I plan to sit down with Giunchigliani for an in-depth conversation about her life and background soon. And lest anyone in the Vegas press wonders, all indications are that this race is of great interest to the large audience of tourists who read this blog, our podcast and my Twitter stream. The Carolyn Goodman interview quite quickly became one of the top-downloaded discussions I've posted in The Strip feed in at least a year.

Speaking of which, a few folks now tell me that when they try to download the Goodman interview, they're only getting a three-minute file. I'm really not sure why that is, or why some people are having no trouble while others aren't. However, at the very bottom of this post is a nifty little widget on which you can play the show. I just discovered this page and it's not our actual show site -- trust me, we don't have 0 subscribers -- but it's another way to hear what we have to offer. As you can see to the right, the file is absolutely nearly two hours long.

So it was certainly interesting stopping in last night at the various campaign events. I hadn't had any contact with either Goodman since all of this hullabaloo broke out, and the first thing that happened was Mayor Goodman pointed at me and bellowed, "You! You're no good!" I took it in stride, but he made a few more derogatory snarks about "stupid blogs" and grabbed a few campaign volunteers to quiz them on their views of the DREAM Act. His point was that most people aren't versed in such political minutiae; I reminded him that most people aren't vying for major public office, either.

Anyhow, Goodman chilled -- or at least I was undeterred from quizzing him about the race -- although there were a few remarks about "whacking Friess." Later I sat down again with Carolyn and she gave me this remark:

"The political world is all about bits and pieces and people taking shots and taking things out of context. That's the name of the game. If you don't like the fire, get out of the kitchen. If you know what's inside, those things don't penetrate, and you know things are not true."

It was pretty clear what she was getting at, and both Goodmans made that charge in veiled or direct ways during my time over there. Then, a little later, we had this exchange:

Goodman: I have a 10 o'clock appointment, no I have an 8 o'clock appointment, I have a manicure, very important. Downtime for me. And then I have an appointment with the media group here to plan what kind of media we want to do going forward for the next couple of months.
Friess: You're not going to take any time off from campaigning?
Goodman: Oh, I love this.
Friess: You love what?
Goodman: Oh, I love campaigning. I have loved it.
Friess: Really?
Goodman: Yes, I've really loved it. I have met so many fabulous people that are working. They're so awesome, they're great. And I've loved it. And any time there's a jab or somebody takes something out of context...
Friess: I didn't take anything out of context.
Goodman: Oh, are YOU guilty!
Friess: No, I just know...
Goodman: Yeah? Hey, look at this! Oh my gosh, you look so guilty.

At that point, her attention was turned elsewhere and it was a lighthearted exchange. And while I'm not surprised by the standard-issue notion that she felt her words had been twisted, I want to remind everybody of two facts:

1. The exchange was published verbatim and in context online.
2. The audio of the conversation was posted in full for all to hear.

Nothing was taken out of context. But this is how politicians do it. Mrs. Goodman claimed she isn't a politician, but blaming the media is a hallmark that she's learning very, very quickly.

One more thing. I got a little accidental screen time on Fox5...


...while sending out this tweet.

Here's the audio widget for the Carolyn Goodman interview:

BREAKING: The Goodmans are JEWISH!

Those of you who listened to the Carolyn Goodman conversation that was posted in the podcast feed over the weekend might have wondered what my obsession was with her Jewish upbringing. Truth be told, I'm highly unlikely to ask Brian Sandoval how he takes his communion wafers or Harry Reid if he's wearing his magic underoos, so what gives? And yet, Carolyn spoke in detail about making gefilte fish, right?

Well, I don't ask anything without having a reason, and this time it was for part of a lengthy profile of Mayor Oscar Goodman that appears today in Tablet, a popular website devoted to Jewish issues. You may recall I also profiled the poker-playing Mizrachis and Rep. Shelley Berkley for Tablet last year.

There's not a lot in the piece that local Las Vegans or careful Vegas-watchers may not know, although Carolyn does debunk the myths surrounding Oscar's drinking and there are a few other tidbits therein. Check it out if you wish.

A Very Mayoral Sunday In The Media

As my pal Amy and I ran our April Fool's errand to L.A. on Friday, the Vegas political blogosphere became engulfed in reactions to the excerpts I posted from my Thursday interview with Carolyn Goodman, the wife of Mayor Oscar Goodman and the frontrunner to replace him.

The Las Vegas Sun's Delen Goldberg wrote a piece on it for the Web and blogger Justin McAffee likened it to the Sarah Palin-Katie Couric moment in 2008 when Palin was flat-footed in response to reasonable questions about current events. Q Vegas' Chris Miller chased down Goodman for a re-affirmation that she doesn't want the state to repeal the domestic partnership law, too. And Jon Ralston's column today on the Sun assesses what Goodman's answers say about her competency as a candidate. (The only place this hasn't been covered? The R-J, whose City Hall scribe spent time on Saturday with Mrs. Goodman and evidently didn't ask. Odd.)

But wait, there's more! MUCH more. First, the entire interview is now available as a podcast so you can hear for yourself what The Good(man) Wife is all about. Obviously, the full measure of any candidate ought to be a lot more than a few controversial or unprepared remarks so listen and decide on your own. Click here to have it play or right-click here to download the LONG conversation and listen at your leisure. After the primary, I hope to do a similarly thorough sit-down for the podcast with her general election opponent.

Meanwhile, my AOL News/Huffington Post Politics piece on the race went online today chock full o' barbs and snark from and towards Mrs. Goodman. In particular, the exchange between County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani attempting to minimize Goodman's role in the formation of the Meadows School and Goodman's slap that Chris' childless life is empty and politically obsessed is a sign of the shape of things to come if these two face one another after Tuesday's primary. It's already getting some buzz, although blogger Christine Kramar is a little off the mark inasmuch as Carolyn Goodman didn't produce any children from her womb, either. Carolyn and I, in fact, delve into how and why she came to adopt her four kids in our Thursday marathon.

Finally, if you just haven't had enough about Las Vegas' mayoralty yet, Review-Journal columnist John L. Smith today has a wonderful column about his lunch on Thursday with the three living mayors and ex-mayors, Ron Lurie, Jan Laverty Jones and Oscar Goodman.

* * *

P.S. There's now a Carolyn For Mayor poker chip in the prize vault for The Strip Podcast. If we select your correct trivia question, it could be yours.

Carolyn Goodman on DREAM Act, Domestic Partnerships

[UPDATE: Hear the whole interview with Carolyn Goodman by clicking here or right-click here to download it. Also, check out my AOL News/Huffington Post Politics piece on the race.]

My fascinating and lengthy chat with Las Vegas mayoral frontrunner Carolyn Goodman will find its way into several different pieces I'm working on in coming days, of course. But because this morning I reported the strange responses to the DREAM Act and domestic partnership questions from Councilman Steve Ross and County Commissioner Larry Brown at a Hispanic Democratic group's forum on Wednesday, both also candidates in the April 5 primary, I decided to post this transcript with Oscar Goodman's wife.

These are important issues not because any Las Vegas mayor has the power to enact federal immigration legislation or to repeal a state gay partnership law but because if this race goes to a head-to-head general, it could come down to interest groups like Hispanics (and their unionize allegiances) and gays who may or may not be motivated to do the grassroots work that turns the tides of close, low-turnout contests.

It also matters because County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani, who seems to have a 50-50 chance along with Brown of going one-on-one with Goodman after next week, is a staunch supporter of both the DREAM Act and fully legalized, federally recognized marriages for gay couples. Chris G. is by far the most effective grassroots campaigner in serious contention, and she can use this to fire up these groups on her behalf.

Also, as I explained earlier, it could be bad for Vegas, which has pushed hard to court valuable gay travel dollars, if the mayor is seen in any way as anti-gay. True, the mayor does not have jurisdiction over the Strip, but the national press and certainly the gay media and gay tourists won't care.

So, without further ado, here's what Goodman told me:

Friess: Do you know what the DREAM Act is?

Goodman: Yes.

Friess: And what do you think of it?

Goodman: You know, it was something I read about the other day and to be perfectly honest with you I remember reading it. I remember something came across my computer and should I do this and could I participate and I couldn’t because we had another event. And I thought, this issue, it’s an embryonic something and it’s something that just started and it needs addressing and exploration.

Again, as with Ross' remark yesterday, I'm puzzled how this topic has not come to the attention of prominent candidates for public office before. And given that Goodman has made her reputation as an educator and school founder, the fact that the DREAM Act is all about education makes it surprising she thinks it's an "embryonic" topic. Appealing to Hispanic voters was a deciding factor in Harry Reid's win over Sharron Angle last year and his support of the DREAM Act was a key part of that. Angle also ran menacing, fearmongering anti-immigrant ads that accelerated her demise.

Now onto the gay marriage/domestic partnership discussion:

Friess: The other question asked of all the candidates [at the mayoral panel] was whether they would support repealing the state’s domestic partner law. And of the people on the panel, Commissioner Brown and Councilman Ross said yes, they would like to stop the state from recognizing domestic partners.

Goodman: A crystallized commentary on that for me is difficult because you know I am about the rights of the human being but I’m also about legal rights. I’m certainly accepting of anybody and anybody’s rights to determine for themselves their own lifestyle as long as it’s not causing problems for anybody else and it’s legal. One of the things I remember asking years ago of my uncle who is a very astute lawyer because I didn’t understand, I had many friends and I’ve had friends all my life who are gay. I said I don’t understand why a legal contract wuldn’t suffice to bind two people together. You and I would have a legal contract, same sex let’s say, and I would agree that everything that’s mine it’s 50-50. If I die you would get everything, split down the middle. All I would say is why a legal binding contract wouldn’t work for a couple.

Friess: Well, because the federal government doesn’t recognize it.

Goodman: No, no. you and I are a same sex couple. And we enter into a legal – I’m not talking marital – but I’m saying. Understanding and wanting to hear everything. You and I are both guys and we’ve been together let’s say 20 years. I want to enter into a contract with you where I will say. We are 50-50 partners in everything. Everything. If I die, in my legal document, I say I want you to have everything.

Friess: Right, but I still wouldn’t get your Social Security. I still wouldn’t get your pension...

Goodman: [laughs] And at this point, what’s in there? But lookit, those are finite details. I’d like to know before I would even discuss it, what are the issues we’re dealing with here? My first question is, why wouldn’t a legal binding contract that you and I….

Friess: Well, let me ask you this. You’re a heterosexual couple, you can just go to City Hall and get married. I’m a gay couple, I have to go to lawyer and spend thousands of dollars to approximate the same arrangement. Is that right?

Goodman: Oh, you mean you have to spend the money to have the contract drawn.

Friess: The state law now, the domestic partner law, it allows for the same rights for gay couples as straight couples or any rights the state provides to gay couples.

Goodman: Oh, OK.

Friess: And that was the question. The question was, would you support repealing that?

Goodman: I would not support anything until I knew more and would give that thought. I have always believed in the right of the individual to determine his own life interactions and lifestyles. At this point, you know, you’re saying about Social Security, what other things are there. Why is it that I would be intent if I were a gay couple to have this? Then again, that’s not me. I’m so easily…

Friess: Why’d you get married?

Goodman: Probably because it was a religious thing, I think. I don’t know. That’s the way we were just raised. This is what you do if you’re going to have a family. Today, I think so many people live together, they don’t marry.

Friess: Let me just ask you directly. Do you support or don’t support legalized gay marriage in this country?

Goodman: I cannot answer one way or another at this point because I haven’t spent enough time looking at the whys and wherefores one way or another. What I do know is that I think everybody has the right to their own determination, how they live. Should I get further in questioning that for myself and getting advice both legally and emotionally from people, I would come to a conclusion. I can’t tell you I have one at this moment because I don’t. Were you my son and were you gay, I would say you and your partner must do everything you can to make your life meaningful and as rich as you want it to be. It’s up to you to do this. If that is paramount, and what are the reasons for this, I would want your input. I know I would talk to a lawyer to help you in your determination in your own life. And I can’t tell you because first of all I’m not a lawyer and second, I don’t have the full amount of information that I would give a binding statement one way or the other.

OK. So, this evening her campaign manager, Bradley Mayer, texted me to clarify Mrs. Goodman's position:

Wanted to make sure to clarify with you that Carolyn absolutely supports domestic partnerships as allowed under SB 283. She is not in favor of repealing.

Huh. But then why didn't she just say so? Again, as with the DREAM Act, I just don't understand how people who believe themselves to be up on current events -- let alone leading candidates for a major public office -- don't have clear views on important issues of the day. Gay marriage is not a new topic. It's fully legal in five states and D.C. now, although the feds don't recognize it except for when the IRS can make a play for grabbing higher taxes from same-sex partners. Why didn't Carolyn's astute lawyer uncle explain to her the problems with private contracts, the history of courts invalidating them and various institutions -- schools, hospitals, cemeteries, etc -- ignoring them?

I had a great time with Mrs. Goodman and Commissioner Brown and I have great respect for both of them. But it seems like these sorts of moments show candidates that have surprisingly not participated in or considered the predominant cultural dialogues of our time. That's just strange.

* * *

P.S. Mayer needs to get with Carolyn on the use of the term "lifestyle." It's one of those things that drives GLBT people bananas. See the NLGJA Stylebook here for why.

P.P.S. Proving that Vegas remains a small town at heart, Mayer was the campaign manager for Mark Manendo, the successful state senate candidate who I covered extensively here because his opponent, Grandmother Kathy McClain, sent out a blatantly gay-baiting mailer. Who ran her campaign and was responsible for that malicious hit job? Gary Gray. He's both Chris G.'s husband and campaign manager.

Odd Brown and Gay Moments In The Vegas Mayor Race

This week, I've finally started doing some reporting on the non-partisan race to replace Oscar Goodman as mayor of Las Vegas. The primary is April 5, there are 18 candidates in the scrum and the leader at the moment by all accounts is Goodman's wife, Meadows School founder Carolyn Goodman. I spent some time with the couple the other night at a Martinis With The Mayor event and I have a sit-down interview with Mrs. Goodman this afternoon.

But last night, I attended a forum featuring four Democratic candidates, Councilman Steve Ross, county commissioners Larry Brown and Chris Giunchigliani and activist Katie Duncan, put on by Si Se Puede, a Hispanic Democratic group. Carolyn Goodman, a registered independent, and Victor Chaltiel, the wealthy and free-spending Sheldon Adelson-backed Republican, were not invited because they're not Democrats.

I live-tweeted the event, which was emcee'd by ex-U.S. Rep. Dina Titus, who seemed to relish in taking (loving?) shots at the current mayor. At one point, in asking about graffiti prevention policy, she quipped: " "Do you agree with removing thumbs or do you have other ideas?" Later, when a question arose about being a spokesperson for the destination, she wryly noted to the audience before letting the quartet answer: "I don’t think any of these candidatess would go to a fourth grade class and say the only thing they would want on desert island is a bottle of gin."

But a few other moments stood out involving the two fellows to your right, Ross (left) and Brown. [Photo from Twitpic courtesy of @TheLMurrieta]

First, the candidates were asked their views on education and the DREAM Act, the federal bill that would create a path to citizenship for immigrant students who have lived in the U.S. for a certain length of time but are not legally here. It's important to the immigrant community because so many of these kids have been raised in the U.S. despite their undocumented status -- which many may or may not even kn0w -- and then cannot get college loans because they're not legal residents.

The point is, the DREAM Act is one of the most significant pieces of the Hispanic Democratic agenda and the candidates are appearing before an Hispanic Democratic group. It's been in the news constantly for years and, in fact, Sen. Harry Reid's championing of it helped rally the Hispanic vote that is widely credited with his victory last fall.

So what was the response of Ross, generally seen to be in fourth or fifth place in the polls for mayor?

"I don't know enough about that to answer one way or the other."

Huh? How is it even possible for a candidate -- nay, an elected official -- to not know something this basic? Either he's tragically ignorant or he didn't want to give his true answer because he knew the group wouldn't like it, but either way it looked awful for him.

The other thing was County Commissioner Larry Brown saying he would support repeal of Nevada's domestic partnership law, which passed two years ago. Ross said he would support repeal, too, but he had already been endorsed by the conservative group Nevada Concerned Citizens so that wasn't a surprise.

This actually matters a great deal and here's why: If the next mayor of Las Vegas is seen as hostile to gay couples, it would be disastrous to the decade-old efforts to aggressively court GLBT tourists to the destination. It was former Mayor Jan Jones way way WAY back in the 1990s who was only the second big-city mayor in America to endorse gay marriage -- Willie Brown of San Francisco was first, of course -- and then Jones took that message into her gig as a veep with Harrah's. There is a straight line from Jones' early and vocal support of marriage equality to the world's biggest gaming company's revolutionary efforts to court gay travelers to MGM and Wynn catching wise to the lobbying efforts that resulted in the domestic partnership law. The casino industry knows this is a very, very important and sensitive minority. The gay media will go nuts if there's even a whiff that Las Vegans have elected an anti-gay mayor.

So it matters if Brown, who is either second or third in the polls and has a 50/50 chance of facing off with Carolyn Goodman in the June general election, is in favor of stripping gay Nevadans of hard-won rights. Oscar Goodman as equally full-throated as Jones in his support of gays and gay business and culture, even appearing as half of a gay couple in a gay "Christmas Carol" spoof. (Chris G., the other candidate jockeying for second place in the primary, has long been an ardent pro-gay activist.)

The way the question was asked at the forum, however, the candidates were only allowed to give a yes or no answer. Near the end, Titus said she had received a request to ask the candidates to explain their views on domestic partnerships but she felt it had already been answered so she replaced it with some milquetoast question about general mayoral qualifications.

Afterward, then, gay activists Derek Washington, Laura Martin and Chris Miller chased Brown for an explanation but, uh, he ducked into the bathroom. When he came out, he was ready to talk to them but they weren't nearby so instead he sat down with me for a half-hour for my story.

Here's the odd exchange we had on that topic:

Friess: There’s a gaggle of gay activists who are waiting to ask you this. The question was, do you support repealing…

Brown: I’ve got to talk to Derek, because he has to explain to me first of all what the state law is and what we do at the local government in interpretation of it. I was the first one to answer out of that. I have to make sure what I answered yes or no to.

Friess: You answered yes to repealing the domestic partner law.

Brown: And I think they said that came from a Nevada Concerned Citizens survey. I’ll stand by the answer and I’ll have Derek and the other guy who’s chasing me around explain the background and the history, the status, how it affects local government. I remember having these conversations two years ago [when he was running for County Commission] because it was a partisan race. My concern back then was, separate fromt eh state law because I’m not real sure what it says …

Friess: I can tell you what it says. The law basically allows same-sex couples or non-married heterosexual couples to register as domestic partners and it grants them any rights that are given to married couples within the state.

Brown: And my big discussion two years ago is, what impact that has on the local government. It doesn’t matter if it’s a domestic couple or boyfriend-girlfriend or whatever gender, whatever, what impact fiscally does it have? So if it’s state law and the city has adopted it, I would have to be educated better.

Friess: Where do you stand on gay marriage?

Brown: Gay marriage or civil marriages or…

Friess: Do you think a gay couple should be able to get married either in the state or in the country?

Brown: Uhh, I’d have to get, uh, there’s some conflicting beliefs. Some conflicting beliefs.

We moved on to other topics at that point. But, again, I'm baffled -- as I was with Ross and the DREAM Act -- that a major elected official hasn't given serious thought to an issue like this. He doesn't know where he stands on gay marriage? Or civil unions? Or domestic partnerships? Doesn't he pay even a passing notice to the news? Is there even a week where there's not some gay news in the mainstream press nowadays? Is it credible for a Clark County commissioner, arguably one of the eight or nine most powerful people in the state, to claim he needs to be "educated" on this?

I'm not beating the gay-rights drum here. I'm not. I'm just saying that people running for public offices at this level ought to have a familiarity with the most significant social issues of the day. Telling an Hispanic group you don't know what the DREAM Act is is lethal to a candidacy. Telling the world that you oppose a domestic partnership law that was passed with a veto-proof majority in the state legislature could be extremely harmful to your city's main industry, tourism.