Is the Indiana General Assembly positioning itself for a showdown with the federal government? Yesterday afternoon I attended a four-hour presentation at the State House hosted by Senator Mike Delph. The symposium featured one of the nation’s foremost Constitutional legal authorities,Professor Herb Titus, a founding Dean of the College of Law and Government at Regent University. Also on the panel was Dr. Paul Jehl, Director of the Plymouth Rock Foundation and an author of curricula on the US Constitution.

A dozen legislators attended the forum on “Interposition.” This term concerns the proper roles of various branches and levels of government and the checks and balances set forth by our founding documents. Many legislators had questions about how states in previous generations asserted their rights and how interposition might be practiced today.

Each speaker explained the foundations of government and the historic conflicts that have occurred between states and the federal government and conflicts between the three branches of the federal government itself. With all of the required meetings and committee hearings a legislator must attend, it is not often you have legislators voluntarily stay at a four-hour meeting. One thing became obvious – many legislators expect a standoff between Indiana and the Obama administration over the Health Care Reform Act.

On April 9th, 2009, the Indiana Senate passed (44-3) Senate Resolution # 42 restating roles and duties under the 10th Amendment and it asked the Federal Government to “cease and desist” with all mandates upon Indiana beyond its defined limits. Indiana may soon have to contend with all the ramifications placed upon state health and welfare agencies stemming from Obamacare. Many of the cost cutting and efficiencies achieved by the Daniels Administration are at risk under a mandatory revamping and expansion of Medicaid that could cost the state billions that we simply do not have.

This could be something interesting to watch next year as legal challenges to Obamacare play out in the courts. There may also be efforts from various state legislatures signaling that they will not, or cannot, abide by this new slew of federal mandates.

A Call to Further Regulate Indiana’s Home School Families

Over the last few months, a controversy has emerged in Wayne County largely generated by the Richmond school administration and the Palladium-Item newspaper. I have been monitoring this situation and have spoken with the Home School Legal Defense Association, which is also aware of the situation.

The “controversy” which has made front-page headlines and been the talk of many local radio call-in shows is the “problem” of high school dropouts. Although it may not surprise you, apparently the Superintendent of the Richmond school system, Allen Bourff, was surprised to learn that when a high school student drops out of one of the Richmond schools, they are not very interested in continuing their education. In fact, they do worse educationally after leaving school. (The obvious is now big news in Richmond, when the local school leadership is stating it in a press release.)

The school administration has concocted a study finding that students who drop out of high school aren’t doing too well academically. They then conclude that these students are being home schooled and use their findings as an indictment on home education or a call to further regulate home education in Indiana. They have called upon State School Superintendent Dr. Tony Bennett to look into further regulating home education to address their problem.

What is actually happening is a secondary consequence of perhaps a well intentioned law that attempted to address high drop out rates by prohibiting dropping out before the age of 18. Prior to that, a student age 16 to 18 could drop out for any reason. Schools, parents and students have now realized that if an uninterested, failing or disruptive child wants to drop out of school there is now just one easy way to do so – claim that you are going to be home educated. This, however is not an indictment of parents who do actually educate their child at home as much as it is of the drop out law, itself.

AFA of Indiana, the Indiana Association of Home Educators, and many other leaders are watching this matter and will weigh in with the legislature and the Department of Education when appropriate.

“Please Play the Blooper Reel Mr. Producer”

Here are two “oops” moments that you may not hear much about in the mainstream media, unless, of course, Former Governor Sarah Palin had said the same things. Then it would be all over the news shows and fodder for all the late night hosts.

Blooper #1 – Forty-two members of Congress have signed on to a letter to President Obamaexpressing their concern over a statement he made in Indonesia last month. While speaking to students, the President said that the United States and Indonesia share a similar history (don’t ask what that means, just keep reading). “It is a story written into our national mottos. In the United States, our motto is ‘E Pluribus Unum‘ — out of many, one,” the President claimed.   At the time, some TV stations aired this clip without any comment.

The President must have forgotten that the E Pluribus phrase is not our national motto. Our national motto, as over a million Hoosier motorists with motto license plates know, is “In God We Trust.” It has been the unofficial motto since appearing on our money before the Civil War, and the official national motto adopted by Congress in 1956, five years before the President was born . . . wherever that might have been.

Blooper # 2 – On Sunday, ABC’s This Week aired a clip of Indiana Senator Evan Bayh speaking about the repeal of what has been called the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy on homosexuality in the military. The clip showed Senator Bayh implying that homosexuality has never been a big deal within the US military saying in a Senate hearing, “In all likelihood, there were gay Americans serving at Valley Forge.”

Actually, in all likelihood there were not, Senator.   As I have repeatedly mentioned, homosexuality has been expressly forbidden in the US military since our nation’s founding. General George Washington personally presided over the public humiliation and removal of a soldier who attempted to sodomize another soldier in the Continental Army. Washington made a big deal of the incident, which he called “abhorrent” in his March 14th, 1778, general orders. He issued those orders requiring all available troops to gather to witness the dismissal and drumming out of service of the homosexual soldier as an example and a clear statement that debunks Senator Bayh’s statement.

Accuracy in Media noted that ABC’s This Week reporter John Donavan actually confirmed this incident later in the Sunday show making it the first time they have found any report in the mainstream media informing the public that homosexuality has always been against military policy . . . even among the founders who secured our freedoms and liberties.

No related posts.

Indianapolis Candidate Forum this Friday

There will be a candidate forum on the East side of Indianapolis at Crossroads Bible College this Friday evening at 6:00 pm. The college is located at 601 North Shortridge Road. The event is freeand will include several state and federal candidates. Big Victory for the US Military!

While our US servicemen and women have been faithfully serving around the world to defend our nation, liberals in Washington, DC, have been actively working to enact radical social engineering schemes under the guise of military funding legislation.

Yesterday, Senate leader Harry Reid attempted to bring the $726 billion Defense Reauthorization bill to a vote. In order to do this, he needed 60 votes to end debate under the Senate rules. Amazingly, every Republican, including RINO’s like Susan Collins, and a few Democrats in election trouble like Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas stood firm and the bill failed on a 56-43 vote – four short of the 60 needed.

The reason for the bill’s demise was due to the controversial amendments stuck on the funding measure. The most egregious of which was the effort to repeal the ban on open homosexuality in the military known as “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” (At the time of its passage under President Clinton, DADT was considered a compromise with homosexual demands groups, but they haven’t compromised and walked away from their ultimate goals.)

The legislation also included efforts to expand abortion on military bases and the “Dream Act” which many see as an amnesty plan for the children of illegal immigrants.

I found a line an Associated Press account of this victory rather amusing. It noted that Republicans, conservatives and military officers opposed the repeal of DADT.  Republicans, social conservatives, and, oh, yeah, military officers don’t like it either, as if that is just a minor point. It’s a huge point! Yesterday, even President Obama’s nominee to be the next Marine Corps Commandant spoke out before the Senate’s Armed Services Committee. He did so in opposition to the avid support the President has expressed for homosexuals in the military.

Marine General James Amos, told the Committee, “In my personal view, the current law and associated policy have supported the unique requirements of the Marine Corps, and thus I do not recommend its repeal.” He added that Marine input from an online survey regarding Congress’ plan to allow open homosexuality in the military “has been predominantly negative.”

There are a lot of reasons why most military personnel do not like the idea of allowing homosexuality in the military. Here are just a few:

• It undermines troop morale for several reasons including violations of personal privacy and modesty through forced cohabitation with soldiers sexually attracted to each other. For the same problematic reasons, we do not allow male and female soldiers to bunk and shower in the same barracks. Forcing heterosexuals to serve with homosexuals also undermines military cohesion.
• It would harm recruitment efforts. Polling shows that if DADT is repealed, up to 25% of current duty service members would not re-enlist or would consider not re-enlisting if forced to share quarters with people who engage in homosexual acts.
• Recruitment levels have been higher with segments of the population who hold to traditional values. Such groups would be less inclined to join the service if homosexuality is allowed and endorsed.
• It would cause a loss of military chaplains who will not compromise their religious beliefs or risk punishment for expressing what their faith says about homosexual behavior.
• It would lead to “sensitivity training” for soldiers who disagree with homosexuality because the repeal of the ban on homosexual conduct, which goes back even to the Continental Army under General George Washington, would elevate homosexual choices to the moral equivalent of race and skin color.

There is no constitutional right to serve in the military. Our armed services have always had the ability and the obligation to set standards for service which best uphold military readiness and effectiveness. This legislation was fatally flawed and deserved to be defeated, though its outcome was uncertain right up to the moment of the vote. Homosexual demands groups poured millions of dollars and thousands of hours of effort into this vote, and they had the support of a sympathetic mainstream media, Senate leader Harry Reid and President Obama. Many expect this issue to come back during the dangerous “lame duck” session in December after the accountability of the November election is removed from the backs of many legislators.

Incidentally, for all his quirks and “maverick” wanderings that bother many conservatives, Sen. John McCain whose military service and knowledge is unquestionable, deserves a lot of credit for leading the opposition to the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” on the floor of the Senate. In spite of the opposition to the repeal of DADT from the Indianapolis-based American Legion, the nation’s largest veterans group, Senator Bayh voted with Senator Reid. Senator Lugar voted with the GOP.

Democrats Gaining Momentum . . . But Perhaps Not In Indiana?

There is a new poll from Zogby Polling that is probably receiving a lot of attention behind closed doors in campaign circles all across the nation today. The poll shows Democrats ahead of Republicans for the first time since May in the generic ballot question for whom Americans would rather see control congress. It seems as though Democrat voters are gelling around their candidates with an eight-point jump in support among the party’s base. Pollster John Zogby explains, “President Obama’s attempts to draw contrasts with the Republicans and raise fears about a Republican takeover of Congress appear to have been successful, especially among Democratic voters.”

However, if this poll is correct in revealing a new change in trends that shift has not seemed to help Indiana Democrats this week.

A political magazine web site (Hotline on Call) is claiming that the national Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee has shifted significant amounts of money away from a planned advertisement buy in mid-October for Indiana 9th District Congressman Baron Hill. It seems that this money is now going to Columbus, Ohio for Congresswoman Mary Jo Kilroy. Apparently, the Hill campaign is furious over this decision and is still arguing that their campaign is worthy of continuous national support.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is also wavering on financial support for Congressman Brad Ellsworth in his bid for the open Senate seat against former Ambassador Dan Coats. Ellsworth does have about $1.2 million on hand, giving him the ability to do advertising in the final days of the campaign. Nevertheless, his campaign had to answer questions this week about rumors that he would have no national party support. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has already aired TV ads for candidates in Delaware, Colorado, Missouri and Pennsylvania.

Conventional Wisdom May be Overlooking Concerns of Voters

Speaking of polling, I was in Washington, DC, a week ago for a meeting of pro-family and conservative state and national leaders who gathered before the start of the Values Voter Summit. Part of our six-hour meeting involved an in-depth presentation from a leading political polling firm. One of the interesting things we learned was that many polling firms are operating from conventional wisdom regarding the views of voters.

We were shown numerous slides breaking down various polling data on the “top concerns” of voters. As you would imagine, with a lingering 10% unemployment rate jobs and the economy have consistently been at the top of the minds of most voters. This has caused other issues to be ignored in many polls, but it doesn’t mean that those issues are not on the minds of voters.

Polls that do look at other issues are finding that voters are still very concerned about moral, cultural and family issues. For example, a recent poll from a Democrat polling firm conducted in mid August found that among Republicans, 72% rate family values as one of their top concerns. A majority, (nearly 60%) of Independent voters also ranked “family values” as a priority issue. The issue ranked above taxes, immigration, nuclear weapons proliferation, energy and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan all of which seem to receive far more media and polling attention.

This may explain why AFA of Indiana has received such a positive response to our new billboard campaign reminding voters of the importance of marriage. Two more of our “Marriage: Unique by Design” billboards went up near Huntington last Wednesday.

Important Voting Information Online

Do you know where your polling place is? Are you registered to vote, or need to? Do you need an absentee voter ballot? Answers to these and many more questions can be found at this statewide voter information site:
https://indianavoters.in.gov/PublicSite/PublicMain.aspx

Related posts:

1. Judicial sabatoge, Children at risk, Polling Micah Clark’s weekly Update The Foxes Are Guarding the Hen...
2. Speaking of life being precious, it’s time to call Senator Bayh The Health Care reform debate took another turn on Wednesday...

As if you need more evidence that every election matters or that the 2012 election will also be of vital importance, it is clear that the Obama Administration is systematically undermining the Judeo-Christian roots of our nation. Last week California federal Judge, Virginia Phillips, ruled that the 1993 military policy banning open homosexuals from the military was unconstitutional. Overlooked in most media reports is that every other federal court has upheld “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” and that there has never been a constitutional right to serve in the military. To the contrary the US military has the right and the obligation to set standards which best ensure unit cohesion and effectiveness. Just as was the case with the Massachusetts ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act, liberals have realized that if they shop around for the right judge, the Obama administration may make it easy for them to win cases they have previously lost. In this case, the Log Cabin Republicans, the plaintiffs in the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell case had an easy time of it. The Obama Justice Department, which is charged with defending federal law didn’t even call a single witness or military expert to testify in defense of the policy. In the DOMA case we have heard reports that they didn’t even argue the societal purposes for protecting marriage. In this DADT case they simply argued that the court had no jurisdiction over military policy, but to an activist judge, and from this expansive administration, that point lacks all credibility.

In spite of their duty to defend law, this administration has made it very clear that they support open homosexuality in the military and the repeal of DOMA in order to force same-sex marriage upon the states. By the way, as is the case with so many of the policy positions of this administration, most Americans disagree with the President. A new poll finds that most oppose the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Likewise, most also believe that punishing chaplains who disagree with homosexuality (silencing opposition is always part of the homosexual agenda) is wrong. The same poll also found that most Americans oppose abortions being performed on military bases.

Note: I am traveling to Washington, DC tomorrow for a long, closed door meeting with some of the nation’s top pro-family leaders who are gathering as part of the Values Voter Summit to discuss these two policy issues and the upcoming elections.

Take A Stand for Life
The 20th anniversary of the annual pro-life display called “Life Chain” will occur in several cities across Indiana and the nation on Sunday, October 3rd. In Indianapolis, for example the silent protest will occur from 2:30-3:30 on Meridian Street downtown. For more information you can e-mail centralindianalifechain@yahoo.com.

A Stain that Never Seems to Fade Away

It is a sad fact that throughout the decades of the 70’s & 80’s many homosexual activists in the United States were not shy about stating their ultimate agenda concerning sex and children. In 1972, the National Coalition of Gay Organizations issued a “Gay Rights Platform,” that included the demand to “repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.”

Many homosexual activists have tried to rewrite this history, and a few have denounced it, but there always seems to be plenty of people in the movement who still adhere to this objective. They seemed to know that over time their radical goal would become more acceptable as national mores declined.

In Europe, homosexual demands groups have succeeded more quickly than they have here. Ten years ago, following fierce lobbying by homosexual activists, Great Britain lowered its age of consent laws from 18 down to 16 years of age. (In 1994 these same groups had lobbied lowering age of consent laws in Britain from 21 to 16.) Now they have announced that they are again working to lower the age of sexual consent to 14. This would mean that a 40-year-old male could have sex with a 14-year-old boy or girl with no legal ramifications. Some believe that this policy goal is one reason why homosexual activists have worked so tirelessly to make kids comfortable with homosexuality through school programs over the last thirty years.

Peter Tatchell, founder of the British homosexual demands group OutRage! said this to justify their revived agenda,?“If we want to protect young people, and I do, the best way to do this is not by threatening them with arrest, but by giving them frank, high quality sex and relationship education from an early age. . . ? Despite what the puritans and sex-haters say, underage sex is mostly consenting, safe, and fun,” Tatchell said. “If there is harm caused, it is usually not as a result of sex, per se, but because of emotional abuse within relationships and because of unsafe sex.”

This is the same bizarre logic used by groups like NAMBLA and many of the original Kinsey researchers who said that there is nothing wrong with adult-child sex except for the guilt we as society place around it. As morality declines, children are often the ones who pay the greatest price.

Indiana’s Bellwether Congressional District

Some political pundits have said that Indiana’s 8th Congressional District could be a bellwether gauge for what Republicans and Democrats can expect to see on Election Night. The reason for this is that this district has always been hotly contested, closely won or lost, and this year, the two candidates are evenly funded and perhaps equally well known (which is not much.)

If this is the case, Democrats should be worried. A new Public Opinion Strategies poll has found Dr. Larry Bucshon leading State Representative Trent Van Haaften by sixteen points. The poll found Buschon leading Van Haaften 43% to 27%. The poll also found that in this open district from which US Rep. Brad Ellsworth is leaving to run for US Senate, has 69% of voters saying that America is “on the wrong track.” Seventy-Six percent disapprove of the job Congress has done and 55%disapprove of the President.

What’s Going On Here?

Not many people are paying attention to the Indiana Treasurer’s race at the moment, but some who are must be wondering what is going on. In what appears to be a Republican election year, many high level national Democrats are still fully rallying behind an unknown statewide candidate. US Senator Evan Bayh and five other Democrat members of Congress are hosting a fundraising event for Secretary of State candidate Pete Buttigeig on September 30th. The keynote speaker for the event is Dan Glickman, former US Secretary of Agriculture. (A few weeks ago one of the co-founders ofFacebook reportedly co-hosted a fundraiser in his New York City apartment for Buttigeig along with the political director of a national homosexual marriage group.)

Last year, Treasurer Richard Mourdock stood virtually alone in challenging the Obama Adminstration’s takeover of the auto industry. He opposed, in court, the bailout plan for Chrysler because of what it did in an unprecedented move to devalue the holdings of preferred stockholders, of which the state of Indiana was one. Could this challenge be a reason why Mourdock, who has gained the support of the TEA Party groups, now appears to be a significant political target of the political left?

Constitutional Seminar Coming to Indiana Next Month

The National Center for Constitutional Studies is coming to central Indiana to hold one of its Making of America seminars on October 23rd in Mooresville.

The seminar looks at the views and beliefs of our founders and the principles they used to set the foundation of America. The morning session, “Developing America’s Great Success Formula,” looks at the thoughts and ideas of Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Washington and others before them, which led to the creation of America.

The afternoon session, “The Perfect Plan of Liberty,” looks at the economic and political principles from the preamble through the constitutional amendments. The audience will learn how nearly every problem facing America today can be fixed by returning to these concepts and values.

If you would like to attend this unique seminar you can call 317-495-1378 or visit this web site to register. http://www.therefounders.us/nccs.html There is a discount for early registration.

The Refounders are hosting the seminar: http://www.therefounders.us/

Another Record Is Set

The United States poverty rate has jumped to a record level with the biggest increase in fifty years. The increase now places one-in-seven Americans beneath the poverty level. The longest recession since the Great Depression, with unemployment stuck at near double-digit numbers, is the reason cited by this Associated Press’ study of Census Department numbers to be released on Thursday.

A record level of one-in-six Americans is also now receiving government aid through anti-poverty programs. Food stamps have increased by 50% with 40 million Americans now on them.

Related posts:

1. Military Wins, Dems Quit, Polling Secrets By Micah Clark Indianapolis Candidate Forum this Friday There will...

Newly chosen Republican nominee Dan Coats earns 51% support while his Democratic rival Brad Ellsworth’s attracts 36% in the first Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of the Indiana Senate race following Tuesday’s GOP Primary.

More here.

Related posts:

1. Former Congressman Dan Coats to challenge Evan Bayh? According to Howey Politics, former Fort Wayne resident Dan Coats...
2. Three Pols walk into a bar Evan Bayh, Marlin Stutzman and John Hostetler walk into a...
3. Choice between a douche and a turd sandwich Pardon the title, it’s fitting. The mainstream media and the...

A recent SurveyUSA Poll show Dan Coats trailing two of his opponents in the Indiana US Senate race.

The poll was conducted late last week, and we’ve been given an advance of some of the data, but cannot post the results until it becomes public. What we can tell you is it does not look good for the NRSC shoe-in, Mr. Coats. Both Hostettler and Stutzman are polling ahead of Coats. Behney and Bates are gnats on the radar screen. And this just in earlier today..

GOP Senate candidate Dan Coats loaned his campaign $200,000 last week. Coats earlier loaned it $25,000, money he promised to provide as start-up funds.

State Democratic Chairman Dan Parker sees the new loan as a sign of trouble for the presumed front runner in the GOP primary. Coats spokesman Pete Seat, meantime, says it’s a bridge between pledges and deposits.

Coats filed the required paperwork to report the loan on time. He still hasn’t filed his overdue personal financial disclosure forms but Seat has news there, too. “The form has been filled out,” he says. “It is now being checked thoroughly to ensure its accuracy and completeness before filing prior to the primary.”

Will it show that Coats has $200,000 fewer assets than if he reported on time?

In other news, Evan Bayh is about to announce his run for president in 2012. Watch for it.

Related posts:

1. Liars about lying Josh Gillespie at Hoosier Access has a story regarding Marlin...

Of all the times in which one might think that Republicans might actually start to “get it” and see that Hoosiers are fed up with liberalism and political parties that mirror each other, this might be that year. Yet, in spite of political earthquakes in Massachusetts and now one here in Indiana this week, the Indianapolis Republican party leadership seems to be living on another planet right now.

Marion County GOP chairman (Tom John) appears to be fulfilling the stereotypical joke about the party observing that it has an uncanny knack for “snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.” On March 1st up to 500 Republican Precinct Committee Members will gather and vote to fill a vacancy in an Indianapolis at-large city council seat. Several candidates are vying for this vacancy including some talented Hispanics and at least one well-known and respected African-American leader (Jackie Cissell).  I only mention these demographics because the party chair has reportedly justified his choice with an excuse that the party needs “diversity.”   The diversity Mr. John has apparently sought (according to the candidate himself) was found in Chris Douglas, a homosexual activist and the leader of the Log Cabin Republicans. Chris Douglas is also a founding member of several gay activist groups and a regular contributing author for several homosexual blogs.

Having a lousy mathematician as a political party leader becomes a problem when he thinks that somehow reaching out to 2% of the population will grow his party while he offends 34% of his party that identify themselves as evangelical Christians. Someone should ask Mr. John, how many homosexuals among their 2 to 3% of the US population, actually vote Republican, and if embracing one of their more radical leaders is a smart or a risky political move.  After all, when the Indianapolis Republicans surprised many observers with an election sweep in 2007 that put them back in control of the city-county council, only one Republican lost. That councilor was the most pro-homosexual member of the caucus. Scott Keller had authored and repeatedly pushed a sexual orientation ordinance. He even had a booth at the Indy Pride Festival and a car in the hedonistic gay pride parade. This otherwise talented and well-funded campaigner got trounced in a Republican sweep.

One may ask what the GOP leadership is thinking if it now supports Chris Douglas given the losing record of their last failed diversity experiment with Scott Keller. Well, perhaps Chairman John is now trying to get Julia Carson supporters to back the Indianapolis GOP. Chris Douglas has been a consistent Julia Carson supporter. In a blog post less than a year ago, and one the year before, Mr. Douglas tells homosexual readers that he had always voted for Democrat Congresswoman Julia Carson when she ran against Republican candidates with lesser “humanity” like Marvin Scott, Gary Hofmeister and Brose McVey. But he did not stop there. Douglas also admitted that he was also a financial supporter of Representative Carson’s.

In this post and others, Chris Douglas, advises homosexual readers not to vote for any GOP candidate if it means that the Republican Party might gain the majority. So, when it most matters to his party, this Republican candidate, (who recently attempted to become a State Senator in another Republican vacancy vote) recommends voting Democratic.

Contrary to what one must assume about the GOP chairman’s naïve support of this council candidate,Chris even told homosexuals to reject Republicans who share their own views on gay rights. Douglas explains that he was not only a faithful Julia Carson supporter but he also refused to support Republican Jon Elrod for State Representative. Representative Elrod was the most pro-gay Republican state legislators to serve in a decade. (Like Scott Keller, he too was only elected once.) Yet, Douglas never supported him. Why? It could be because he wants Democrats to hold political power while he blurs the political and philosophical lines in the minds of voters, and undermines the GOP.   Perhaps, Douglas’ motivation may found in his blog statement that “the House Republican caucus is a great threat to the Constitution.”

Douglas also tells readers in a posted response to his own article that he “is not a supporter of the Bush Administration.” So one has to wonder, why would the GOP want an office holder who doesn’t support the party at the local or national level and has used his influence to help elect Democrats? Isn’t that exactly what voters are sick and tired of? If the Marion County GOP leadership wants someone to hold a council seat who supports Democrats, maybe they should be honest with voters actually and actually hand the council seat to an open Democrat. (There are certainly good and honorable ones to choose from.) However, if Chairman Tom John is so self-loathing that he wants his party commit suicide then go ahead and give the council seat to a homosexual activist like Chris Douglas who will drive social conservatives away from the party and who advises those whom he influences to vote for and support Democrats just as he has been doing all along behind the scenes.

Evan Bayh Says Goodbye to the US Senate
As you know, the big political news this week was the announcement of Senator Evan Bayh that he will not seek re-election. There is a lot of speculation about why a relatively popular incumbent with $12 million in his campaign war chest would quit. The constant political talk this week surrounds who will run for his seat on the Democrat side, and which of the Republicans will win the May primary.

I have never been a fan of Senator Bayh’s political views and his voting record on issues such as life or marriage protection. His consistent support of the Clinton and Obama Administrations contradict his image as a moderate. However, if this is the closing of a political legacy, then it is a time to commend a public servant who always held every office with dignity, free from personal scandal and dishonor.   Evan Bayh leaves office with something AFA of Indiana stands for which too many public officials have found that they have sacrificed only after it was too late. By all accounts the Senator has been blessed with a wonderful family, a lovely wife a two great twin boys whom he obviously adores. His love for his family often comes out in his interviews and comments. My prayer for our Senator is that he can spend time with his family, set aside politics for at least a while, and enjoy what truly matters most in this world.

Parental Rights Issue Appears in Legislature
I will focus on the Indiana General Assembly in next week’s AFA-IN email, but I had a legislator ask me to look into two pieces of legislation that are moving through the Indiana House and Senate simultaneously. Senate Bill 59 and House Bill 1055 concern the delicate matter of parental rights during custody and divorce cases. Both bills concern the issue of grandparent visitation and rights. There can be cases made from a family perspective both in support and opposition to these two bills. The intent of the supporters is to alleviate some of the litigation ordeals some grandparents may go through in an effort to visit their grandkids in a difficult situation involving marital dissolution, parental death or remarriage.

Opponents argue that parents should have the presumptive right regarding who will care for or associate with their children and that there may be legitimate reasons for their choices about visitation.
Both grandparent visitation bills are moving through the process. You may want to read these bills and contact your legislators with your views on this matter. You can look up these bills and your legislators at this General Assembly link: http://www.in.gov/legislative/index.htm

Grassroots Event this Saturday
Here is a final reminder about the grassroots training event this Saturday morning that is being hosted by the Indianapolis TEA party. Learn more about the event and registration at http://www.indianapolisteaparty.com

No related posts.

Who, you say?

Tamyra D’Ippolito, who was attempting to mount a primary challenge to Evan Bayh. According to the Indiana Daily Student, she only needs 1,000 or so signatures. On a Bloomington political discussion forum, she says that she needs signatures in particular from the 8th District.

The form to get her signatures is available here.

You do not need to be in contact with the campaign to get signatures. Just print the above form, get signatures of registered voters on it, and get it turned in to your county clerk’s office by noon tomorrow (February 16).

There is not a lot of time. Bayh declined reelection at the last possible minute so that no Democrat would be on the ballot for Senate in Indiana, and thus Democratic Party insiders (largely Bayh cronies) would pick who is on the ballot in November.

If Tamyra D’Ippolito is on the ballot, then that’s all she wrote. They can’t pick anyone else. She will be their nominee, period.

No related posts.

Sen. Evan Bayh will not run for re-election, a decision that will shock Democrats and Republicans alike in Indiana.

In prepared remarks, Bayh, 54, cited excessive partisanship that makes progress on public policy difficult to achieve as the motivation for his decision.

Holy crap!

No related posts.

They belly-up and the first one says, “I’m Marlin Stutzman and I’m running for Senate, give me a drink.”

The second one says “”I’m John Hostettler and I’m running for Senate, give me a drink”

The third one says “Hmm.. I’m Dan coats and people tell me that sounds like a good idea. Me, too.”

In the next seat was the RNSC representative. “Great, so it’s official!”

Related posts:

1. Former Congressman Dan Coats to challenge Evan Bayh? According to Howey Politics, former Fort Wayne resident Dan Coats...
2. Let’s get the facts straight about the Indiana GOP Rumor mills are blazing about the Indiana Senate race and...
3. Local staffer for Dan Coats using lies and deceit I’m sure Dan Coats doesn’t have time to check his...

Hi Marlin,

Kevin Tracy wrote today that the state GOP has asked you to step aside from the race.

True?

Regards,
Dan

From his blog: http://www.ktracy.com/2010/nrsc-knows-best-indiana/

========================================================

Since this happened, the state party has supposedly asked Marlin Stutzman (and probably the others) to step aside and let Coats take the primary without a fight.

========================================================

from Marlin Stutzman
to Dan Turkette
date Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 2:47 PM
subject Re: confidential

Not true at all…have actually had a lot of encouragement from party folks.

So if you think you have a beef with the folks in Indy, you’ve got the wrong people. Try National Republican Senatorial Committee, (NRSC) in Washington.

Related posts:

1. Former Congressman Dan Coats to challenge Evan Bayh? According to Howey Politics, former Fort Wayne resident Dan Coats...
2. Three Pols walk into a bar Evan Bayh, Marlin Stutzman and John Hostetler walk into a...

I will have an analysis, hopefully tomorrow.

Related posts:

1. Former Congressman Dan Coats to challenge Evan Bayh? According to Howey Politics, former Fort Wayne resident Dan Coats...
2. It’s buh-bye to Bayh’s seat This just came out. Newly chosen Republican nominee Dan Coats...
3. Choice between a douche and a turd sandwich Pardon the title, it’s fitting. The mainstream media and the...

The mainstream media and the democrats are having a field day with Dan Coats’ announcement he’s testing the waters for a run against Evan Bayh. The tea party types are pissed off and they’re expressing it. Conservative politicos are also angry, but afraid to say anything.

Mr. Coats has spent the last decade as a special interest lobbyist in Washington, D.C. He’s registered to vote there, not in Indiana. And now the RNC & NRSC are attempting to shove him down our throats. They’re even paying $2 a signature for petitioners to get Coats on ballot. I hope one of them come knocking on my door.

While Coats served us well during his time in the house, IMHO, he’s not the guy we need to take on Evan Bayh.

Scott Fluhr at Hoosier Pundit pretty well summed it up when it comes to the Tea Party sentiment:

I am not sure how somebody that is a lobbyist for a bank that got TARP money (that’s three strikes against in one in the eyes of the Tea Party folks) is going to “tap into the Tea Party energy and immediately draw close to Bayh.”

Coats may have some appeal to them that I haven’t seen yet; it’s still early.

Tea Parties are all about citizens taking back their government. How does Dan Coats fit into that framework?

And now we bring you, turd sandwich via South Park.

Related posts:

1. Former Congressman Dan Coats to challenge Evan Bayh? According to Howey Politics, former Fort Wayne resident Dan Coats...
2. Three Pols walk into a bar Evan Bayh, Marlin Stutzman and John Hostetler walk into a...
3. Bayh -v- Coats >> open thread I’m not buying the crap floating around the blogosphere, Twitter...

Coats was a member of congress from 1981 – 1989 serving in the 4th district, and in the U.S. Senate from 1989 to 1999. From 2001 to 2005, Coats served as the United States Ambassador to Germany. He’s currently a Washington lobbyist.

Informed and reliable sources are telling Howey Politics Indiana that former U.S. Sen. Dan Coats will announce Wednesday he will challenge U.S. Sen. Evan Bayh.

The source, former aide Curt Smith of the Indiana Family Institute, said that Coats knows he has about two weeks to gather the 4,500 signatures – 500 per Congressional district – in two weeks.

Coats was up for re-election in 1998 when he decided to retire, citing the pressures of constant fundraising. Bayh went on that year to defeat former Fort Wayne Mayor Paul Helmke to reclaim his father’s Senate seat.

Coats was almost named President George W. Bush’s Defense Secretary instead of Donald Rumsfeld, and later was named ambassador to Germany .

Coats would join the Republican field that includes State Sen. Marlin Stutzman, plumber Richard Behney, former Congressman John Hostettler and Winchester financier Don. Bates Jr. — Howey Politics Indiana

I’m guessing the GOP thinks we have a weak field and pushed Coats into the race.

So we now have the following cast of characters running on the GOP ticket against Bayh. Lobbyist Dan Coats, State Senator Marlin Stutzman, plumber Richard Behney, former Congressman John Hostettler and Winchester Indiana financial advisor Don Bates Jr.

Take the poll on the right and let us know how you would vote.

Related posts:

1. Three Pols walk into a bar Evan Bayh, Marlin Stutzman and John Hostetler walk into a...
2. Let’s get the facts straight about the Indiana GOP Rumor mills are blazing about the Indiana Senate race and...
3. Local staffer for Dan Coats using lies and deceit I’m sure Dan Coats doesn’t have time to check his...

A recent poll by Public Opinion Strategies ranks Obama’s approval rating at a mere 44%. Conversely, Mitch Daniels received a 65% approval rating.

On healthcare, 51% strongly oppose the proposed reforms with only 23% strongly favoring.

Do you hear us Mr. Bayh?

No related posts.