Mayor Peterson Re-Elected By Default

Sorry folks, but the Marion County GOP dropped the ball big time. As a consequence, only token opposition has filed to run as a Republican for Indianapolis mayor, effectively sealing Mayor Bart Peterson's undeserved re-election to a third term. The Star reports that businessman Bob Parker, who the party was poised to support, dropped his bid after Matt Tully disclosed comments he made which were offensive to people of Jewish faith. The Star's Brendan O'Shaughnessy reports that six unknowns filed for mayor on the Republican side. They are: Lawrence Shouse, David Moscrip, Greg Ballard, Michael Simpson, Darrell Morris and James Black. You can bet at least one or two of those were put up by Democrats to confuse voters, anticipating that Republicans would get their act together and find a credible candidate. Even the Democrats underestimated the ability of the Marion Co. GOP to beat itself.

Here'a rundown of the candidates filing for 25 district and at-large city-county council races:

J.M. Evans (D)-District 1
Charles Henderson (D)-District 1
Bruce Henry (R)-District 1

Angela Mansfield* (D)-District 2
Brownell Payne (D)-District 2
Bruce Schumacher (R)-District 2

Cody Kendall (D)-District 3
Ryan Vaughn* (R)-District 3

Christine Scales (R)-District 4
Pamela Hickman (D)-District 4
Carey Hamilton (D)-District 4

Ginny Cain*(R)-District 5
Rodney Bradburn (R)-District 5

Frank Scott, Jr. (D)-District 6
Janice McHenry (R)-District 6

Leroy Robinson (D)-District 7
Cherrish Pryor* (D)-District 7
Annette Johnson (D)-District 7

Monroe Gray*(D)-District 8

Tom Knapp (D)-District 9
Jackie Nytes*(D)-District 9

Danny White (D)-District 10
William Oliver*(D)-District 10

Michael Heacy (R)-District 11
Paul Bateman, Jr.* (D)-District 11

Michael McQuillen (R)-District 12
Sherron Franklin*(D)-District 12

Anna Peay (D)-District 13
Robert Lutz (R)-District 13

Marilyn Pfisterer*(R)-District 14
Gloria Harvey (D)-District 14

Patrice Abduallah*(D)-District 15

Will Jackson (D)-District 16
Brian Mahern (D)-District 16
Scott Keller*(R)-District 16

Mary Moriarty Adams*(D)-District 17
Gary Whitmore (R)-District 17
Jody Tilford (R)-District 17

Vernon Brown*(D)-District 18
Adam Longworth (R)-District 18
Bob Steiner (R)-District 18

Dane Mahern*(D)-District 19
David McGrath (R)-District 19
Harry Liggett (R)-District 19

Keric Fitzgerald (D)-District 20
Sue Day*(R)-District 20

David Young (R)-District 21
Benjamin Hunter (R)-District 21
Jon Katz (D)-District 21
Joe Billerman (D)-District 21

Stephen Terrell (D)-District 22
Bob Cochrum*(R)-District 22

Jeffery Cardwell (R)-District 23

Mike Speedy*(R)-District 24
Tyson Wray (R)-District 24

Lincoln Plowman*(R)-District 25

Ruth Hiland (R)-At Large
Jerry Sedam (R)-At Large
Michael Jezierski (R)-At Large
Michael Hegg (R)-At Large
Larry Cooper (R)-At Large
Kent Smith (R)-At Large
Barbara Malone (R)-At Large
Ed Coleman (R)-At Large
Lonnell Conley*(D)-At Large
Joanne Sanders*(D)-At Large
Odessa Alums-Shobe (D)-At Large
Rozelle Boyd*(D)-At Large
Ron Gibson*(D)-At Large
Harvey Knox (D)-At Large
Brent Clemmon (D)-At Large

* Denotes incumbent

GOP Rethinking Support For Parker

Today at noon is the last day for filing paperwork to be a candidate in this year's mayoral election, but the Marion County GOP has yet to settle on a candidate. That's because the party has been forced to reassess its planned support of the candidacy of businessman Bob Parker after he made offensive comments about Jews in an interview with Star political reporter Matt Tully. Marion Co. GOP Chairman Tom John released this statement late yesterday according to the Star's Brendan O'Shaughnessy:

Dating back to the days of Abraham Lincoln, the Republican Party has always been the party of inclusion, and rebukes any statement that could be construed as disrespectful or offensive to any person or people within our community," Party Chairman Tom John said in a statement. As a consequence of Parker's remarks, the Marion County Republican Central Committee would review the "appropriateness" of slating him as the party's choice in the 2008 mayor's race.

The man Parker would run against, Mayor Bart Peterson (D), thought Parker's comments were "appalling." A political science professor is comparing Parker's comments to the infamous remark of former Sen. George Allen (R-VA) during last year's campaign describing a non-white staffer for his political opponent as a "macacca". Parker was supposed to file his paperwork with the Elections Department yesterday and formally announced his candidacy today. Matt Tully has more on how the GOP chose the wrong candiate here.

Fort Wayne Journal Gazette: Tolerate Student Views

The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette editorializes against Woodlan school administrators' decision to censor a student newspaper after they objected to a student-written editorial by 10th-grader Megan Chase encouraging tolerance of gays and lesbians. While I'm happy to see the paper weighing in on the subject, I'm disappointed at their rationale, which can be summed up in this paragraph:

But Yoder’s plan to subject the student newspaper to prior review contradicts the aim of school journalism to provide a forum for the exchange of student opinion. It contradicts the goal of allowing students to explore journalism as a career opportunity.

The newspaper's editorial offers no opinion on the subject of tolerance towards gays. Instead, they seem to lament the fact that Chase's message got a far wider audience than it otherwise might have because of the school administrators' actions. "Yoder guaranteed a wide audience for Chase’s student newspaper editorial when he responded to the Jan. 19 opinion piece with a letter to the staff and journalism adviser Amy Sorrell demanding that each issue of the Woodlan Tomahawk be submitted for prior review and approval," the editors wrote. Does the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette have a problem with Chase's editorial getting a wide audience?

Calls For Parker To Quit Mayor's Race, Before His Formal Announcement

Republican mayoral hopeful Bob Parker hasn't even formally announced his candidacy and there is already at least one group calling for his withdrawal. Parker's analysis of the "wealth" the "Jewish faction" brings to the Democratic Party and how it will influence the Democrats to support an Israeli war against Iran during an interview with Matt Tully isn't being well-received by the local Jewish relations committee. As the Star's Brendan O'Shaughnessy reports:

Jewish groups today called on the Marion County GOP to pull its support of likely Republican mayoral candidate Bob Parker after he made what were viewed as "unbecoming" comments about the Jewish community.

Parker's comments, made in a recent interview with Indianapolis Star political columnist Matt Tully and reported online today, suggested that Jewish influence within the Democratic Party would drive the party to support an Israeli attack of Iran and Syria.

"I'm sure you realize -- well, most people don't -- millionaire Democrats outnumber millionaire Republicans four to one," Parker said. "It's mainly because of the Jewish faction inside the Democratic Party.

"Most Jewish people are Democrats and they bring that wealth. My opinion is, if Israel would go into Iran, Democrats will follow that cause."

The Indianapolis Jewish Community Relations Council called Parker's comments "ignorant" and "offensive."

The National Jewish Democratic Council said Parker's words were "unbecoming of someone seeking to lead a major U.S. city."

Parker's comments were made in response to questions about his interest in the mayor's race.

When someone posted a comment earlier today reminding us that Parker was the guy who challenged Sue Anne Gilroy for the GOP mayoral nomination in 1999, egged on by Rex Early, my memory of who he is was refreshed. God help the Marion County GOP this year. They're going to need it.

Earth To Rep. Jackie Walorski

Rep. Jackie Walorski has been drinking a little bit too much of the Kool-Aid Eric Miller and Micah Clark have been serving her concerning HB 1459, the hate crimes bill. She's worried about giving "special protections" to the "homosexuals" and "cross-dressers" which she's certain the bill does. She's also afraid ministers are going to be jailed for "hate speech." WFRN offered this news item today:

The Indiana House today could vote on a controversial hate crimes bill that has pro-family groups around the state up in arms. It would give special protections to homosexuals and cross-dressers who are the victims of crime. And Lakeville House Republican Jackie Walorski tells WFRN she's concerned it could also limit what pastors can say from the pulpit. Walorski says we should call our state reps and urge them to vote no to House Bill 1459, the Hate Crimes bill.

If Walorski had bothered to read HB 1459 she would understand it doesn't afford any group of citizens "special protections." It does provide that if you commit an underlying crime against a person because of their race, religion, national original, creed, gender identity, sexual orientation or sex, that is just one of several factors a court may consider in deciding whether to impose a harsher penalty for your crime. In the case of sexual orientation, it applies equally to straight and gay people alike.

It's funny that Walorski wasn't concerned about charging a minister with a "hate speech" last year when she and all her GOP colleagues voted for Sen. Brent Steele's bill which made it a Class D felony to protest within 500 feet of a funeral. That law targeted an extremist Christian minister from Kansas who conducted protests at military funerals, blaming their deaths on America's support of "homosexuality." Yes, Rep. Walorski supported legislation to jail Rev. Fred Phelps for preaching his "hate speech" at military funerals. Unlike that legislation, HB 1459 does nothing of the sort, unless of course the minister accompanies his "hate speech" with a criminal act, such as stoning a person to death in a public square because he's a "homosexual." Think about it, Jackie. You would be amazed what you could learn if you actually read the legislation you vote on in the General Assembly instead of just spewing the hate-filled rhetoric Eric Miller and Micah Clark pass on to you. Oh, and Jackie, if you doubt my word on the actual effect of HB 1459, you might want to call someone in one of the 45 states which has already enacted a hate crimes law.

As if to add further insult to injury, Walorski has filed an amendment to HB 1459 to drag the whole abortion debate into it by adding language making it a Class C felony only if there is "bodily injury to a viable fetus" in the commission of a hate crime involving a battery offense. Because she has already announced her intention to oppose HB 1459, offering this amendment is only further evidence of her mean-spiritedness respecting a serious piece of legislation.

Now Drozda's Trying To Ban Gay Parent Adoptions

The intensity and mean-spiritidness of the assault on Indiana's GLBT community has never been higher than the level it's reaching during the 2007 legislative session. The Indiana Senate under the leadership of Senate President Pro Tempore David Long (R-Fort Wayne) is proving to be quite the breeding ground for hate and discrimination against GLBTs. The passage of SJR-7 isn't enough for these folks. Sen. Jeff Drozda filed an amendment to an adoption reform bill, SB 199 yesterday which would prohibit gays and lesbians from adopting children in the State of Indiana, or as his amendment reads: "A court may not grant an adoption if the petitioner is a homosexual."

You may recall Drozda pledged last year after the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that Indiana's Adoption Act does not prohibit either a gay person individually or a same-sex couple from adopting a child in Indiana to introduce legislation to overturn the court ruling. Drozda did not introduce a bill in this session, but he's trying to sneak into a much-needed bill to reform Indiana's adoption laws. This is about hate and discrimination pure and simple. You must speak up and stop these folks. These religious right zealots will stop at nothing to relegate Indiana's gay and lesbians citizens to permanent, second class status.

AFA's Warning If Hate Crimes Legislation Becomes Law

The American Family Association both nationally and here in Indiana has been active in opposing hate crimes legislation using the worst of anti-gay bigoted rhetoric. Both the AFA of Indiana's Micah Clark and Advance America's Eric Miller have been spreading false information about HB 1459, which is currently on second reading in the House after passing out of committee last week by a 9-1 vote. If you wonder where Miller and Clark get this heated rhetoric, you need look no further than the American Family Association's website and read what the organization is saying about pending federal hate crimes legislation. It begins with the erroneous claim that ministers will be criminally charged with "hate speech" if they preach against "homosexuality" from the pulpit and it goes downhill from there. This is what the AFA is saying:

• Preaching that homosexuality is a sin from the pulpit will result in the preacher being charged with “hate speech.”
• Churches will have their tax-exempt status revoked if they oppose homosexuality.
• Homosexual marriage will be legalized and recognized in all states.
• Polygamy will be legalized.
• Landlords will be forced to rent to homosexuals.
• Scouts, and all non-profit organizations, will be required to hire homosexuals as leaders.
• Biblical language used to define homosexuality will be considered “hate speech.” City officials have already had a billboard removed in Long Island, NY, because it was classified as “hate speech.” The billboard read: “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.” (Leviticus 20:13)
• Employees will not be allowed to say anything negative about homosexuality in their workplaces.
• Classes promoting the homosexual lifestyle will be included in school curricula beginning with the lower grades.
• Employers will be forced to hire homosexuals.
• Adoption by homosexuals will be legalized in every state.

This crap is so over the top and yet nobody in the mainstream media calls them out on it. Where's the outrage? I have to say I'm extremely disappointed Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, or any other public figure for that matter, has not spoken out against the attacks on HB 1459 by Miller, Clark and others from the religious right. This information is being disseminated to churches in our state, who are in turn contacting the legislators to oppose a bill based upon a complete misapprehension of what the legislation actually does. How can people claiming to be Christians bear false witness against their neighbors in the name of God?

Nuvo On Homophobia 101 At the State House

Nuvo's Laura McPhee is doing what none of the other reporters are doing at the State House in covering SJR-7: she's reading the fine print. McPhee picks up on the relation of SJR-7 to SB 65 and Sen. Brandt Hershman's past record of trying to strip domestic partners of their benefits at our state's public universities, both of which seriously undermine his contention that the second paragraph of SJR-7 will not do more than deprive same-sex couples of the right to marry. Here are some of the critical points covered by McPhee but overlooked by her mainstream colleagues in the media:

If ratified, according to opponents of the amendment, unmarried couples could lose every right or protection available to their families, touching nearly every facet of modern life, from health care to domestic partnership benefits to child and elder care. In stripping away these important rights, unmarried couples and their families would be vulnerable to future discrimination without legal recourse, severely limiting the opportunity for those of limited means to fight for their rights . . .

Serious repercussions from legislation similar to SJR 7 have already been seen in Michigan, Utah and Ohio where the passage of a constitutional amendment resulted in the legal system’s inability to protect victims of domestic violence. In Michigan, one prosecutor has refused to issue protective orders because, in his words, “domestic violence laws are for wife-beaters, not girlfriend-beaters.” This past month, a Michigan judge upheld a ruling that denies domestic violence laws from being applied in the cases where the victim and abuser are not married.

Because Utah’s amendment states that no domestic status or union other than the legal union of one man and one woman has legal sanction or validity, protective orders in the context of an unmarried couple cannot be enforced. And in Ohio, where domestic violence law applies only to a person “living as a spouse,” the new constitutional amendment prohibits Ohio from recognizing a spouse outside the context of a legal union between one man and one woman.

In an effort to negate these concerns in Indiana, the Senate Rules Committee has taken SB 65, previously a “vehicle bill,” and changed the bill to amend the definition of domestic battery to provide that the offense is committed if the prohibited behavior results in the bodily injury of a family or household member of the person engaging in the behavior.

The bill, authored by Sen. Brandt Hershman, who also authored SJR 7, is a clumsy attempt to negate the criticism of SJR 7’s probable effects on Indiana’s domestic violence laws. There is little belief that the amendment will be passed.

Domestic partnership health benefits are also at stake if SJR 7 passes. Kentucky has a similar constitutional amendment already on the books and this year that state’s Legislature is well on its way to approving a statute which prohibits state universities from offering domestic partner benefits. The legislation was launched after the University of Louisville became the first public university in that state to announce it planned to offer domestic partner benefits.

During the recent Senate debate on SJR 7 here in Indiana, Hershman insisted that the claims that the amendment would strike down domestic partner benefits, such as those offered by Purdue University in his own district, were untrue. Hershman told the Lafayette Journal & Courier, “I have consulted constitutional scholars and the attorney general. And these assertions are simply false.”

Even if Hershman does not intend for SJR 7 to restrict health care benefits, he has tried to cut off domestic partnership benefits in the past. In 2003, Hershman introduced legislation to cut off state funding to Purdue University and other state educational institutions that offered domestic partner benefits to employees with same-sex partners.

For all those folks out there in the mainstream media, this is the story you should be writing if you were doing your job. McPhee earns a merit badge for holding the hypocritical Brandt Hershman's feet to the fire. She's the only reporter who's bothered to cover the fact that, according to his former wife, he demanded after 7 years of marriage without any children she get an abortion after she became pregnant, only to see him file for divorce one week after she complied with his wishes.

Bob Parker For Mayor?

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz reports businessman Bob Parker will file to run as a Republican for Indianapolis mayor today and formally announce his candidacy tomorrow. He writes today:

It looks like Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson will have a Republican challenger after all. Local businessman Bob Parker is expected to file paperwork today and formally announce tomorrow that he is running for Mayor of Indianapolis. Parker is a millionaire. And while GOP sources aren't saying what Parker will spend on the Mayor's race, they say he can be financially competitive with Peterson who has at least $2 million in his campaign account. Parker owns Parker Machinery, a company that works with factory equipment. Peterson is expected to make an official announcement today that he is seeking a third term as Mayor.

If Parker puts some of his own money into the race, he could close the huge financial advantage Peterson will have going into this race. Is Parker credible? I know very little about the guy, and nobody acting on his behalf has attempted to convince me he's credible to date so we'll just have to wait and see.

UPDATE: It didn't take too long to get that information I wanted to know about Bob Parker. Matt Tully shares some insight into Parker over at his blog which suggests Parker may just have some issues with people of Jewish faith to be kind. Tully writes:

A sign of what to expect came when I talked to Parker a few weeks ago. During a roughly 15-minute interview, I asked about his interest in the mayor's race.

During his answer, for no reason that was clear, he drifted.

"I personally see Israel going into Iran and Syria in the next couple of months," he said. "I'm sure you realize -- well, most people don't -- millionaire Democrats outnumber millionaire Republicans four to one. It's mainly because of the Jewish faction inside the Democratic Party. Most Jewish people are Democrats and they bring that wealth. My opinion is, if Israel would go into Iran, Democrats will follow that cause. I really do believe that."

Umm, OK, Bob. But as a candidate for mayor, perhaps you should focus on a plan to fill all those potholes.

Tully's also adds, "Republicans, though, also know Parker has a famous temper and a tendency to say what he is thinking. Many predict his campaign will be filled with controversy." Thank you, Tom John. Republicans and independents in this city can now look forward to enduring nine months of pure agony and hell as this clown tries to carry the torch for people looking for new leadership in this city. Keep it up, and the GOP will be lucky to end this year with only 10 members on the city-county council.