His threats were not empty. AP reports:

Von. I. Meyer, 60, of Cedar Lake, was arrested Saturday after prosecutors filed formal charges of felony intimidation, domestic battery and resisting law enforcement against him. He was being held Sunday without bond at the Lake County Jail, pending an initial hearing on the charges, police said in a statement.

Cedar Lake Police officers were called to Meyer's home early Friday after he allegedly threatened to set his wife on fire once she fell asleep, the statement said.

Ok, clearly we have a man who is suffering from mental illness here, right? First he threatens his wife, then after a weekend full of horrible news about the Newtown tragedy he threatens to shoot up a local elementary school.

Here's the problem: He had the means to do it and he isn't necessarily mentally ill at all. Meyer travels with a rough group.

On Saturday, officers served warrants at Meyer's home and arrested him. The statement said police had learned that Meyer kept many weapons in his older, two-story home and "is a known member of the Invaders Motorcycle Gang."

Officers searched the home, finding 47 guns and ammunition worth more than $100,000 hidden throughout the home. Many of the weapons were collector's guns.

The name Invaders Motorcycle Gang makes them sound more benign than they are, if that's even possible. In 2010, charges were brought against their members for five gruesome murders. Law enforcement shut down one of their clubhouses in Portage, Indiana last summer. In 2008, several members located in the same area as Meyer were arrested in connection with a methamphetamine trafficking ring.

I have to believe there is more to this spate of violence than meets the eye. With all of the talk by the fringe right about how Obama is going to take their guns away, it's worth looking at the crazy rumors that have been revived. From 2009 on, Glenn Beck has been claiming that President Obama is going to put conservatives in concentration camps. Then there are the 12/21/2012 doom and gloom hawkers. If you were the type to keep your guns for the end times, it seems as though you might not care anymore about what you did. It might give you permission to do bad things, because if the world ends, may as well hasten it?

In addition to having a serious conversation about gun laws, it might also be time to figure out how much of this end-times talk is funded by gun manufacturers and gold hawkers, because they are clearly having a clearance sale on sanity and survival this month.

For Mitt Romney, the love that dare not speak its name is "vouchers." Two weeks after he delivered a major address on education policy in which he never mentioned the V word, the New York Times detailed Romney's proposal to divert $25 billion in taxpayer dollars to religious, private and for-profit schools. But voters don't have to imagine what that plan, an old GOP twofer designed to subsidize Christian institutions while bludgeoning Democratic-friendly teachers unions, will do to American public education. As the frightening results in states like Louisiana, Indiana, Georgia and Arizona show, the Republican voucher dream is fast becoming America's nightmare present.

Governor Romney has been an advocate of so-called "school choice" since his first run for the White House. In 2007, Romney suggested American parents should not only be encouraged to abandon the public schools; they should be rewarded for it with a tax break for home schooling their kids:

"I also believe parents who are teaching their kids at home, homeschoolers, deserve a break, and I've asked for a tax credit to help parents in their homes with the cost of being an at-home teacher."

Now, as the Republican nominee outlined in a recent speech to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Romney wants to redirect $25 billion from two federal programs into a new voucher scheme. As the New York Times explained:

As president, Mr. Romney would seek to overhaul the federal government's largest programs for kindergarten through 12th grade into a voucherlike system. Students would be free to use $25 billion in federal money to attend any school they choose -- public, charter, online or private -- a system, he said, that would introduce marketplace dynamics into education to drive academic gains.

But as the experience in Indiana and Louisiana suggests, that system would instead introduce large quantities of public cash into the coffers of religious schools and academies whose educational credentials may be suspect at best.

In "Vouchers Breathe New Life into Shrinking Catholic Schools," the Wall Street Journal last week revealed that Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels' voucher program is proving a major boon to the bishops supposedly concerned about government mandates. "Driven by expanding voucher programs, outreach to Hispanic Catholics and donations by business leaders," WSJ reported, "Catholic schools in several major cities are swinging back from closures and declining enrollment." For example:

Thanks to vouchers, St. Stanislaus, which was $140,000 in debt to the Catholic Diocese of Gary at the end of 2010, picked up 72 new students, boosting enrollment by 38%.

"God has been good to us," says Ms. [Principal Kathleen] Lowry. "Growth is a good problem to have."

Mark Gray of the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University explained why.

Continue reading »

Indiana prosecutors charged her with murder and feticide, and despite her attorneys' best efforts, she lost her appeal to have the charges dropped. The specific statute she is charged under was intended to punish violent attackers who do harm to a fetus in the process of committing a crime but Indiana's prosecutors have decided the statute also applies to depressed pregnant women, evidently.

Like Rennie Gibbs in Mississippi, Bei Bei Shuai is being held captive to a "back door" personhood law. By placing the life of the fetus over the life of the mother, Indiana is imposing their own version of Sharia law on Bei Bei Shuai.

Via RH Reality Check:

Pregnant women are not immune from the mental illness or severe depression that leads some people to attempt to end their lives. Indiana, like virtually every other state in the country, addresses suicide and attempted suicide as a public health issue, not a crime. Prosecutors simply may not decide that a suicide attempt is a public health issue for everyone except pregnant women. Moreover, there is wide consensus that subjecting pregnant women to special criminal penalties does not work. Rather, it undermines legitimate interests in maternal, fetal, and child health by stigmatizing pregnant women and by making them vulnerable to punishment if they seek help of any kind.

If this prosecution is allowed to go forward, the law will not just apply to one desperate pregnant woman who attempted suicide by swallowing rat poison – it will create legal precedent that makes every woman criminally liable for the outcome of her pregnancy. This precedent would mean that women who undergo significant risks to their lives and health by bringing forth life, sometimes undergoing major surgery to do so, may then be arrested as criminals if they are unable to guarantee the birth of a live and healthy baby. In addition, if Ms. Shuai’s prosecution is upheld, it leaves no doubt that women who intentionally end their pregnancies will go to jail as murderers if Roe is ever overturned.

Continue reading »

In what was an expected outcome, but still one that is a bit shocking, tea party-aligned candidate Richard Mourdock defeated Sen. Richard Lugar in the Indiana Republican primary on Tuesday. Mourdock is the state's treasurer and he hasn't spent much time on the national scene, but it's clear that he's one of the most extreme right-wing candidates running in the 2012 elections. Let's take a closer look...

Despite the fact that Indiana's economy depends heavily on the auto industry and the fact that Indiana greatly benefited from the auto industry bailout, Mourdock argued in an editorial in the South Bend Tribune that the bailout was illegal:

By any traditional legal analysis, fundamental elements of the Obama administration’s Chrysler bankruptcy plan were illegal. It turned 200 years of U.S. bankruptcy law on its head by awarding more value to a select group of unsecured creditors than to secured creditors. Others are apparently willing to tolerate the violation of federal bankruptcy laws simply because they liked the result: It helped their friends. But most Americans, including the Hoosier retirees who had their property stolen away, see such picking and choosing by the federal government as fundamentally un-American.

Mourdock has consistently railed against bipartisanship:

Those who want to call out for bipartisanship are wrong. It is bipartisanship that has taken this country to the very brink of bankruptcy.

He opposes the direct election of senators (while running to be directly elected as a senator):

Repealing the 17th amendment. Do I think it will ever happen? No. Is it something that I would like to see? Yes it is. And I’ll tell you the trackers in the room, my Democrat tracker friends who are here as they always are probably seeing something that you’ll see in a tv commercial not too far from now. You know the issue of the 17th amendment is so troubling to me, our founding fathers, again those geniuses, made the point that the House of Representatives was there to represent the people. The Senate was there to represent the states. In other words the government of the states. I will tell you as someone who spends a lot of time in the statehouse obviously, and a lot of time in local government, one of the most frustrating things state government and local government deals with are called unfunded mandates. It’s where the federal government will say you must do this, and we’re not going to pay for it. You got to figure out a way to go get the money and you must do this. How many unfunded mandates do you think would be coming from the United States Congress, if those same Senators had to come back every two years to help those people get reelected so they would elect them. You know I think most senators if they had to come back every two years and by the way that would solve another problem. It would solve the idea that Senators move out of their state and never return. But it would cause those senators to have much greater contact with their states. You know just think of this. In today’s you see millions and millions of dollars spent on Senate campaigns. Two years ago, in 2010, Sharon Angle out in Nevada spent 31 million dollars, just herself. How much money would be spent in federal senate races if the state legislators were electing those people. You just took the money out of politics. Is that a bad thing? (AB 21 Tracking Footage, 2/4/12)

He thinks that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are unconstitutional, and shows that he doesn't understand basic constitutional law or the Ninth Amendment or the Elastic Clause:

I challenge you in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution where those so-called enumerated powers are listed. I challenge you to find words that talk about Medicare or Medicaid or, yes, even Social Security. You know, Article I, Section 8 says the U.S. government shall have the power to tax to pay off its debts, to pay for its defense, and then it says to provide for the general welfare.

Continue reading »

Hopefully the Justice Department can effectively block this stuff and disappoint the ALEC-stacked state legislatures, because it's obviously aimed at suppressing Democratic voter turnout:

(Reuters) - The Obama administration on Monday blocked a new law in Texas requiring voters to show photo identification before they can cast a ballot, citing a concern that it could harm Hispanic voters who lacked such documents.

The law, which was approved in May 2011, required voters to show government-issued photo identification, such as a driver's license, military identification card, birth certificate with a photo, current U.S. passport, or concealed handgun permit.

The Justice Department said that data from Texas showed that almost 11 percent of Hispanic voters, or more than 300,000, did not have a driver's license or state-issued identification card, and that plans to mitigate those concerns were incomplete.

And in the meantime, a Wisconsin county judge has issued a permanent injunction against the state's new photo ID law:

Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess has issued a permanent injunction against Wisconsin's new photo ID law. In doing so, Niess became the second judge in less than a week to strike the new law, but the first one did so on a temporary basis.

Four lawsuits have been filed against the law requiring people to present a valid government-issued photo identification card in order to receive a ballot. Monday's ruling was in response to the suit the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin filed. It contends the provision violates Wisconsin's constitutional protections for voters.

[...] Voters had to follow the law during February's primary and no major problems were reported. Election officials were making preparations for Wisconsin's April 3 presidential primary when a much bigger turnout is expected.

The Supreme Court turned away a challenge to the Indiana voter ID law:

The 65 page PDF file, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the main opinion said " Valid neutral justifications for a nondiscriminatory law, such as SEA 483, should not be disregarded simply because partisan interests may have provided one motivation for the votes of individual legislators."

JUSTICE SCALIA, joined by JUSTICE THOMAS and JUSTICE ALITO, was of the view that petitioners’ premise that the voter-identification law might have imposed a special burden on some voters is irrelevant. The law should be upheld because its overall burden is minimal and justified.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (145)

PLAYS: (733)

Embed

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) repeatedly misled viewers about right-to-work (for less) laws and his own record on Fox News Sunday morning.

WALLACE: Finally, you just signed this month a law making Indiana the 23rd state, right-to-work state in the country, which means that people don't have to join the union to get a specific job. Question: What's wrong with unions?

DANIELS: Nothing is wrong with unions. And if that measure affected any way the right to bargain, the right to organize collectively, I wouldn't have been for it. That's completely untouched. All it says is the worker can decide whether or not it's worth the dues, whether they'd rather have that money themselves.

WALLACE: But doesn't that necessarily in a practical sense over the long run weaken unions? Certainly, the unions think so.

DANIELS: No, not necessarily. There are higher rates of unionization in some right-to-work states than there are in Indiana today. It really a matter of whether people think they're getting their money's worth. And we just knew it would bring more jobs to our state and that was my principal motive for doing it. And already, the phone is ringing and we are about to strike some agreement I think to put more Hoosiers to work.

WALLACE: All right. Back in 2006, you said that you opposed right-to-work as, in your words, too divisive. Now, the unions say, as a result of this decision to sign and make it a right-to-work state, that wages will go down and work places will become more dangerous.

DANIELS: Well, first of all, that's all bunk. Facts be could not be more clear that safety is unaffected, wages and job growth are much faster in the 22 right to work states than in the 28 that didn't provide this protection to workers.

Now for several years that really true I said -- I never said I was opposed to right to work, I said we can succeed under the labor laws we have. Ultimately, particularly in this terrible national economy I reluctantly came to the conclusion that we need to take this step if we were going to have the kind of opportunity state I wanted Indiana to be.

WALLACE: Governor Daniels, I want to thank you so much for coming in. It's always a pleasure to talk to you, sir. Please come back.

Continue reading »

Daniels before he flip-flopped on right-to-work for less laws

Despite strong public opposition, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels and House Speaker Brian Bosma are pushing through so-called right-to-work legislation that would strip working families of their rights. The bill passed the state House by a 55 to 41 vote on Wednesday and will now head to the state Senate, which previously passed a different version of the bill.

Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma and Gov. Daniels have been ramming the so-called right to work bill through even after the voters have made clear that they want a public referendum on the controversial anti-worker measure. Only one-third of Indiana voters favor passing the RTW for less law and a whopping 69 percent of Hoosier voters say that the Indiana General Assembly should slow down the process to allow more debate. An overwhelming 71 percent of respondents want to give voters—not the legislature—the final say on this controversial legislation.

The bill was passed while 10,000 protesters stood outside in opposition to the bill and in the wake of 20,000 signed postcards opposing it as well.

Republicans across the country are pushing strong for state and national right-to-work laws and the presidential candidates all favor them in some form or another. Oklahoma passed a right-to-work for less law last year and found that it didn't perform as advertised. Laura Clawson at Daily Kos has a great rundown with the flaws in these laws.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and the AFL-CIO say that the GOP's choice of Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels to deliver the official Republican response to the State of the Union should be scary and that it is a sign that Republicans are going all-in on so-called 'right-to-work' laws in 2012. AFSCME released a video Tuesday highlighting the reasons people should be scared of Daniels, including:

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) and his allies in the state legislature are pushing so-called 'right-to-work' legislation in Indiana that they claim will create jobs when, in reality, the legislation is a thinly-veiled assault on Indiana workers. Two bills before the legislature, HB 1001 and SB 269, would establish Indiana as a 'right-to-work' state. The bills are based on model legislation from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and are a top priority for Republicans. An ad campaign in favor of the bills is being funded by a mysterious group known as the Indiana Opportunity Fund that refuses to divulge its donors.

Backers of the bills argue they are necessary to improve the economy of the state, but the real motives are something else:

So-called right-to-work laws, which are in effect in 22 states, make it harder for workers to organize, join, and maintain unions. “Right-to-work laws are about bankrupting unions in Indiana and across the country,” said Richard Knipp Teamster Local 142 secretary-treasurer in Gary. “The argument that such legislation attracts more corporate business is a complete fabrication. Right-to-work-for-less is designed to diminish union treasuries, weaken our political power, and kick our members out of the middle class.”

...

“Hoosiers (Indiana residents) want the General Assembly to focus on fixing the economy and creating good paying jobs rather than these tired old partisan attacks on collective bargaining rights, and we hope these commercials serve as a reminder of that,” said Nancy Guyott, Indiana AFL-CIO president.

Daniels also attempted to close off the statehouse to the public while the bills were being discussed in the legislature. Democrats are pushing for public hearings to allow the public to debate the bill, but Republicans have so far refused.

Conservative claims about 'right-to-work' fall flat:

Continue reading »

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) is dishonestly pushing a so-called 'right-to-work' law for Indiana that failed in 2011, but will likely return in 2012. For the first time, an Indiana Republican is challenging the governor's anti-union agenda. State Sen. Jim Tomes broke ranks with his party and penned a letter to the Evansville Courier & Press telling the truth about the law and the Republican agenda.

Like Republicans in other states, Daniels and his allies are lying about unions and what the law currently allows. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 already prohibits all the abuses that 'right-to-work' proponents claim to be fighting against. The reality of such laws is that they are assaults on unions and worker rights.

The letter Tomes wrote:

It is unfortunate that the upcoming Indiana legislative session is concentrating on targeting the working class, in particular those in the unionized sector.

I would have preferred to direct our efforts to accomplish goals of advancing all working families as well as small businesses and corporations.

It's my opinion that such an endeavor as that would be more beneficial for Indiana rather than seeking to single out one group at the expense of another.

There are already a great deal of statistics and data being presented in support of making Indiana a right to work state.

Some of the reports being used to support the argument for right to work were generated by the very groups pursuing this measure.

In my search, I found an unbiased report that used several models showing that right to work states have about a 6.5 percent lower wage. It also noted that the proximity of right to work states to non-right to work states enjoy somewhat of a higher wage than other right to work states.

Those workers who are members of a union are recipients of the services provided by their organizations, much like members of a country club, fraternal organization, or countless other local, state and national clubs and organizations.

Should we excuse anyone who receives services rendered from paying for that service? Should it be that if the plumber or auto mechanic that performs a duty as requested and expected be subjected to the notion that a person should opt to pay what they feel like paying or whether to pay at all?

That is the core of the right to work conflict -- to establish that a person under a union agreement can opt to pay dues or not.

For the building trades, those dues are used to maintain training centers. In those facilities, workers learn their trade; they achieve their apprenticeship, journeyman and master level in their field. It's that intense training that provides them the opportunity to excel, just like a college education provides students the opportunity to succeed.

Whether it's a labor or trade union, the individuals working in those jobs are people who want to carve out a good standard of living for themselves and their families, just like workers in all sectors of society.

Let's not seek to bring anyone down, but instead aim to move everyone up.

Jim Tomes is a Republican Indiana state senator from Wadesville.