Insulting five of our state's leading businesses, House Minority Leader Brian Bosma accused them of engaging in "late-coming scare tactics" to defeat SJR-7. "There was no lack of clarity in the second portion of the amendment, and those who drew a different conclusion had an agenda to kill this amendment," Bosma told the Star's Bill Ruthhart. "It was a different tactic to go after part two, but the strategy to kill the amendment remained the same." Rep. Eric Turner (R), the amendment's House sponsor piled on, calling their concerns a "bogus argument." Eli Lilly and Co., Cummins, WellPoint, Emmis Communications and Dow AgroSciences opposed the amendment.
Stop insulting our intelligence, Rep. Bosma. There were plenty of problems with the meaning of the second paragraph, and there were plenty of knowledgeable legal experts who agreed with that conclusion. The only "experts" the proponents could muster to defend the second paragraph of the amendment were folks with an ideological agenda. But not even Terre Haute attorney Jim Bopp would show up to publicly defend the controversial second paragraph, which even Judge Robert Bork described as "poorly drafted" when discussing the same language in the original version of the federal marriage amendment.
What is particularly galling of Bosma is to suggest House Speaker Pat Bauer is the one playing politics with this amendment. "This is a symbolic vote of politics, not of setback," said Bosma. "The Democrat leader had a specific political agenda here and made it happen despite his promise to the contrary." And this coming from the man who has spent the last four years using this wedge issue in House races, and who last year wasted our taxpayer dollars defending sectarian prayers in the House.
A note to the Internal Revenue Service: Advance America's Eric Miller once again demonstrates that his organization is not a "nonpartisan" organization as it must do to maintain its tax-exempt status. "The only difference is that every time Speaker Pat Bauer is in charge of the House of Representatives, protecting marriage as between a man and a woman dies without making it to the floor of the House," said Miller. How much longer will our government sit by and permit this man to continually use his organization's tax-exempt status to advance the election of social conservatives, and to line his pockets with the group's tax-subsidized dollars through his self-dealing ways?
7 comments:
Remember the good old days when the Republicans were the party of sound business and small government? What the hell has happened to these people?
It is a absolutely reprehensible that Bosma would go on the attack against some of the state's largest and most well respected employers .
If they want to say that a vote for the people who voted down this flawed amendment is a vote for "gay marriage" (it's not), then it's fair game to say that a vote for Brian Bosma and Eric Turner is a vote against business, and a vote against Lilly, Cummins, WellPoint, Emmis, Dow AgroSciences(and I'm guessing soon to be more).
The crazies are sputtering mad over on the Indpls Star's Talkback forum but the voices of reason and civilized discussion are also out in full force. We are gaining in public relations skills!
"...that a vote for Brian Bosma and Eric Turner is a vote against business, and a vote against Lilly, Cummins, WellPoint, Emmis, Dow AgroSciences(and I'm guessing soon to be more). "
And a vote in favor of domestic violence.
I wish I could relax, but these wingut crazues are plotting as we speak...I have heard theyn plan to ask that teh House suspend its rules and allow SJR7 to come to the floor without a favorable committee vote.
House rules allow it. It is highly unusual. I don't have much faith that we're prepared.rvwdt
Of course the so-called and bogus "ominous threat" that the Indiana Supreme Court is imminently going to overturn the Morrison decision (and the long-standing low-threshold equal protection Collins test with it)that Bosma, Hershman, and others are peddling doesn't count as a "scare tactic", does it?
Late coming scare tactics? Somebody clued in these legislators that SJR-7 is legal-sounding gibberish? It reminds me of the 19th century Indiana legislature that nearly passed a bill resetting the value of pi until somebody clued in those legislators that the pi bill was written by another nutcase.
Post a Comment