Selective spin
Bruce Hetrick’s [Oct. 22] column “spouted off” on two examples of GOP “spin,” one regarding Republican Paul Ryan, the other regarding Republican Mitt Romney.
Bruce Hetrick’s [Oct. 22] column “spouted off” on two examples of GOP “spin,” one regarding Republican Paul Ryan, the other regarding Republican Mitt Romney.
Indiana is blessed with abundant energy resources. We have a 300-year supply of coal. A substantial part of the 214 million barrels of oil and 4.7 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Illinois Basin sits in southwestern Indiana. We have even more natural gas locked away as shale gas, coal bed methane and landfill gas.
Mike Pence has been running a strategically brilliant campaign, taking care to mask his inner culture warrior while displaying a previously invisible interest in economic development and job creation.
When social media meets finance, society births a technique for small business to raise capital called “crowdfunding.”
Just days before a presidential election, there’s no doubt we will be bombarded with poll results and election models designed to predict winners and losers. It is useful to explain how these work without technical jargon.
Over the past month, Mitt Romney has aggressively appealed to moderate voters. President Barack Obama, for some reason, hasn’t.
The U.S. economy finally seems to be recovering in earnest, with housing on the rebound and job creation outpacing growth in the working-age population. But it will take years to restore full employment. Why has the slump been so protracted?
Apparently, the Republican Party has waged a war on women. I’ve heard this from the mainstream media, many Democratic candidates and even a few Indiana University professors.
Politics is an amazing, yet perplexing, profession. I have often wondered why President Obama trails Mitt Romney by a large margin in rural areas.
Democratic gubernatorial candidate John Gregg has hauled out the canard that Mike Pence is a “show horse,” not a “work horse,” based upon two “polls” in 2006 and 2008. Neither was scientific: They were anonymous, voting multiple times could be easily done, and rivals could rig the voting.
If you know me, I think you agree that I am not a firebrand partisan with automatic reactions based on my Democratic Party affiliation.
All of a sudden, when I check out news stories on the Internet, a negative political ad pops up and I can’t make it go away. That is, unless I want the news story to go away, too.
It is only a few days until the election, and the Mourdock-Donnelly Senate race is still in limbo.
Politics is about compromise. But compromise is always around an agenda and elections are about agendas.
Almost every politics-attentive person around Indianapolis probably sees the Nov. 6 elections as of huge consequence.
Americans seem to be full of contradictions. Perhaps that is why we are so admired, and yet so hated, by the rest of the world.
With Indiana ranked a dismal 48th for voter turnout, you would think Republicans and Democrats could agree that our state needs to take aggressive steps to increase the number of active voters.
The ballot this year will ask you whether two judges of the Indiana Supreme Court and four on the Court of Appeals will be retained in office. Don’t forget to vote yes on all six retention questions.
For too long, power over urban schools has rested too much with district central offices and not enough with parents.
I do not think parents need a trigger law to allow them to do what they should be doing already by advocating for their children.