Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Bloggers Sign On With Howey

Two well-known area bloggers with differing political views have been enlisted by The Howey Political Report as contributing columnists. Democrat Jennifer Wagner of Taking Down Words and Republican Joshua Claybourne of Indiana Barrister and In The Agora are both featured at the Howey Politcal Report Online.

Both take aim at Gov. Mitch Daniels. Wagner debuts with a story entitled "Mitch's Bullying Government." She opens with: Wilson Mizner once said, “The worst-tempered people I've ever met were the people who knew they were wrong.”Mizner died more than a decade before Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels was born, but the screenwriter’s reflection applies perfectly to Indiana’s current commander-in-chief." You can pretty much figure out where this one heads.

Claybourne, an Evansville native, takes on Gov. Daniels in a story entitled "A Slight To Southwest Indiana."Here's Claybourne's beef with the Governor: "When Gov. Mitch Daniels went to Washington earlier this month to hype Indiana's progress in producing bio-based fuels such as ethanol, he pointed to plans to build bio-fuel facilities in 15 Indiana counties, including what will be the world's largest such facility in Kosciusko County. But none of these plants will be built in Southwestern Indiana, because decades of neglect have left that region without the transportation infrastructure necessary to attract investment."

Wagner and Claybourne are both students at IU School of Law-Indy. Wagner is also the communications director for the Indiana Democratic Party. Wagner's blog site, TDW, hasn't been afraid to take Howey to task in the past. In a recent post, TDW wrote about Howey speaking at a Lake County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner: "We know Brian's committed to writing about politics from a nonpartisan standpoint, which makes this appearance a little strange. To be fair, we don't know from the story whether this was a speech about covering politics or a speech about being a Republican and winning big in oh-six. It just struck us as odd."

6 comments:

Bil Browning said...

Jennifer Wagner is also a contributor to bilerico.com

paula said...

Great. Just what we need more noise from polar opposite viewpoints to further the divide in this state and country. Does any body even define "win win" in terms other than "I won because I got my way and you win because I am intelligent enough to know what is best for your own good."

Honestly, Gary, if the other party had rammed through two initiatives in the past two sessions as unpopular and unwanted as DST and MM, would Republicans acted like the Dems were courageous? It isn't ok for Dems to raise security concerns in deals with foreign entities and infrastucture, whether it be MM or Dubai and the ports, but it is OK for GWB to bring up 9-11 every time his poll numbers take a hit? Privatization and smaller govt is good, unless it involves indy and indyworks, then it is bad. There are certainly examples on both sides of the aisle. I was raised and am still registerd as Rep. But I can't support anything about that party when they continue to fund their campaigns with a full assault on my family (gay = bad, but lots of money from the people we - republicans- scare to death with the homo agenda)

Advance Indiana said...

Paula,

I don't disagree with you on GWB's hypocrisy on using 9/11 when it is convenient and then complaining when it is raised with Dubai. As you know, I opposed the Dubai deal--not because it involved a foreign entity--but because of the special circumstances (e.g. state-owned company in a country that outlaws religious freedom, has a recent past history of aiding and abetting terrorists and continues to facilitate nuclear materials acquisition by the likes of Iran, to name just a few).

I coudn't agree with you more on the assault of many within the GOP against gays. And I write about it all the time. However, think about all the African-American Democrats in the South. They didn't abandon the Democratic Party even though the white Southern Democrats were sympathizing with the KKK, enacting Jim Crow laws and standing in front of the school house door to block black children from entering. Instead, they stayed in the party and fought for civil rights. They changed a lot of minds of white southern politicians (e.g. Jimmy Carter whose state lawmaker father was a big segregationist and even George Wallace in the end). Remaining a Republican and fighting for a return to the party's historical roots in support of all basic civil rights serves a valuable purpose. That doesn't, however, mean supporting GOP candidates who advocate an anti-gay agenda.

Anonymous said...

A.I. said, “I coudn't agree with you more on the assault of many within the GOP against gays.” sugarcoats the harsh reality. The bitter truth is that the Christian fundamentalist Religious Right (RR) is a GOP controlling faction—not simply, as you seem to believe, “…(an) assault of many within the GOP against gays.”

--Religious Right
The term "religious right" is often used synonymously with Christian right because most of its members are fundamentalist Protestants, traditionalist Catholics or Mormons; some Orthodox Jews can be considered to belong to this category. The Religious Right has become a powerful force within the GOP. This faction is socially conservative, believes that religion should not be separated from governance or education. Though what constitutes moral values is a matter of dispute, the Religious Right has consisted of social and cultural conservatives united in discouraging and legally restricting abortion, opposition to legalized same-sex marriage, discouraging some forms of taxpayer-funded embryonic stem cell research that involves the cloning and destruction of human embryos, promoting school prayer, and encouraging displays of public religiosity on coins ("In God We Trust"), or Christmas displays on government property. They have initiated or approved the increased role of religious organizations in welfare provision. In recent years, they have been active in lawsuits expanding religious expression in public schools and colleges, such as allowing religious clubs to meet and proselytize. The Religious Right rejects Thomas Jefferson's notion that there should be a "wall of separation" [1] between religion and the state. In recent years, portions of the Religious Right have been active in attacking the teaching of scientific evolution in the public school curriculum.
Prominent Religious Right Republicans include pundit Pat Robertson, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, U.S. Senators Rick Santorum (Pennsylvania) and Sam Brownback (Kansas), and activists Ralph Reed and Gary Bauer. The National Federation of Republican Assemblies is a Religious Right organization that operates as a faction of the Republican Party. The Christian Coalition is a Religious Right activist organization considered allied with the party. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factions_in_the_Republican_Party_%28United_States%29#Religious_Right)--

The RR is huge money-producing bloc that sets the anti-gay GOP policy, period. When you sugarcoat that fact, and allow/encourage yourself (or others) to overlook that anti-gay GOP policy you giving every single GOP politician—be they individually anti-gay or not—the pass-go-ticket to keep all LGBT second-class citizens.

Anon said...

A.I. said, "However, think about all the African-American Democrats in the South. They didn't abandon the Democratic Party even though the white Southern Democrats were sympathizing with the KKK, enacting Jim Crow laws and standing in front of the school house door to block black children from entering. Instead, they stayed in the party and fought for civil rights. They changed a lot of minds of white southern politicians (e.g. Jimmy Carter whose state lawmaker father was a big segregationist and even George Wallace in the end)."

For those interested in reading an untwisted historical accounting:

"Redemption(United States history)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redemption_%28U.S._history%29

and

"Solid South"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South

paula said...

Gary,
I respectfully submit that if ALL GOP candidates aren't advocating an anti-gay agenda, they are at least BENEFITING from one. The party is making boatloads of cash off scaring people into believing that there is a "homosexual agenda", and asking for donations to save society from it.

I honestly can't see the GOP backing away from this - regardless of how hard you work from within. Think of the Church as the GOP's built in "prayer chain". The GOP decides the talking points, gets to the Pastors, and all the sudden every Sunday the choir is singing directly from the GOP songbook. Who needs grassroots when you have a built in forest that meets each and every Sunday? Heck, you don't even need to spend money on postage!

Your comments on the parallels to the civil rights struggles of the 60's that continue today are interesting in that those same blacks are now siding WITH the KKK against gays. Many black pastors say that there isn't a parallel between the two struggles. I partially disagree, but not with the part they would think. The Church turned the tide in that struggle. Without good people of faith finally recognizing that it was wrong to demonize someone for the color of their skin there would still be large scale segregation in this country.

I don't expect the Church to "see the light" and flock to our side. That makes for a built in GOP ATM with no end to the amount of withdrawals they can make. I don't think the GOP gives a hoot whether we marry or not, have kids or not, adopt or not, or even if Roe v Wade stands for eternity. But the Church does, and as long as the GOP can make them think it cares, the money will keep rolling in.

I recall reading that William Rhenquist (I think - it was one of the SCOTUS justices) had a gay couple living next to him for quite some time. He was fond of this couple and was even upset when they moved away. As much as his personal experience was affected by this couple, he could still not see that "the homosexual agenda" wasn't some evil abstract concept, but real human beings that he could even enjoy the company of. His history of voting on gay issues before the court bore out that ridiculous disconnect.

That is what we are up against. Why provide ANY support to this machine? What gays in the party give is a a sense of "big tent" only the GOP isn't a big tent unless you are rich, white, and male. Everything else is a calculation to keep the money coming in and the party in power.