iPOPA Unleashed on 5-Way GOP Senate Roundtable; Your Official Drinking Game Rules

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz of Abdul in the Morning is "unleashing the kraken," politically speaking, by allowing me to do commentary today when Republicans Dan Coats, John Hostettler, Marlin Stutzman, Richard Behney, and Don Bates, Jr. sit down for a "Republican Roundtable" at the Indiana War Memorial Theater from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m.

Let's just say that the rhetorical knives have been sharpened for my segments, which I'm told will be around 3:15-3:45 p.m. and again around 5:30 p.m (on WXNT Talk Radio 1430-AM). I will be on air with Thomas Cook of Blue Indiana fame and Dan Burton's main man, Josh Gillespie, with Hoosier Access.

If you have a question for any of these gentleman, send it here.

For those of you fortunate enough to be able to drink at home at 3:00 p.m. today (or, unfortunately, alcoholic enough to be sneaking it at work), here are the "Official GOP Roundtable Drinking Game" rules.

1. Take a sip every time a GOP candidate for U.S. Senate:

- Says "government takeover" (this one might make you drunk before opening statements conclude);

- Specifically criticizes President Obama;

- Refers to 9-11;

- Uses the phrase "cut and run" to describe military policy;

- Refers to "judicial activism"; or

- Name drops "Ronald Reagan." (If Marlin Stutzman does it, take four drinks, as Stutzman was four years old when Reagan went into office)

2. Take a full drink every time a GOP candidate for U.S. Senate:

- Claims to be more pro-life than someone else on the stage;

- Specifically criticizes another Republican on the stage about anything; or

- Says anything positive about any Democrat at any level

4. Drink an entire bottle of scotch if:

- Any Republican calls Medicare "as socialist as healthcare reform" and calls for its repeal. (I know, it's exactly the same, but nobody will say it, I assure you).

iPOPA Unleashed on 5-Way GOP Senate Roundtable; Your Official Drinking Game Rules

Massa Marks Up Brizzi, Shows Democrats How It's Done

Last Friday, I wrote this:

...the Brizzi reign has reached such cataclysmically embarrassing proportions, I keep expecting an avalanche of high-ranking Republicans to ask publicly for Brizzi's resignation in concert. But nobody asks. Not Tom John, not Mark Massa, not Murray Clark, and not Governor Daniels. I can only conclude by their complete silence that they are okay with all of this.

Five days later (a/k/a "this morning" for the mathematically-challenged among us), Massa called for Brizzi's resignation, and he was joined shortly thereafter by Marion County GOP Chairman Tom John, to both their credit.

From my good friend, Jon Easter, at Indydemocrat:

Little did we know that the first to break the silence on the issue would be the guy trying to replace him from HIS OWN PARTY, Mark Massa.

Can I ask my own party and its candidates a gentle question?

What in the world were you waiting for?!?

Why were you all acting like you needed the Republicans to make it safe in the political water? Was there any doubt that the Brizzi administration was charting a path strewn with public confidence-crushing scandals?

To her credit, Democratic mayoral candidate Melina Kennedy today asked Mayor Ballard to show leadership and ask for Brizzi's resignation. (Technically, Hizzoner would be joining others again after-the-fact, but we'll take his "leadership" in whatever form we can get it).

Kennedy writes:

On election night in 2007, as television stations and thousands of viewers at home looked on, Greg Ballard chose one person to introduce him as the next mayor: Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi.

The rule of law is the basis of our system. If we lose confidence in the very person who is supposed to prosecute our laws, then our community's respect for the rule of law is deeply compromised. We are at a dangerous moment in the history of our city and we must take public corruption seriously.

Mayor Ballard is uniquely positioned to influence Brizzi given the close relationship described above. Indeed, as Marion County’s top Republican, and Indianapolis' top elected official, Ballard has both the ability and the duty to personally ask Brizzi to resign.

Without delay, Ballard should make every effort to end the reign of unethical and corrupt behavior in positions of public trust.

Now, some Demos have retorted that if Brizzi resigns, Governor Daniels gets to appoint his predecessor! You know he'd pick Massa, his former chief-of-staff, and he'd have eight months as an incumbent and all the perks of the office.

Folks, Democrats calling for Brizzi's resignation first wouldn't have made him leave, it would have emboldened him while giving all the Dems the PR benefit of the moral highground. Then Republicans would have had a harder time making the call themselves because they'd be following Democrats' lead. It could have been a win, win, win.

Instead, Republicans can say they lead the charge to clean up their own house while a lot of Democrats watched from the sideline. Are they wrong?

My kingdom for some Democratic media tacticians.

Massa Marks Up Brizzi, Shows Democrats How It's Done

Rokita Goes "Full Monty" on Abortion

Republican Indiana Secretary of State and 4th Congressional District aspirant Todd Rokita most have received polling data during his term showing he wasn't running strongly in evangelical circles.

As I noted in a previous post, Rokita employed a strong Christian overture in his affinity fraud PSA, he has been courting home schoolers, and he's been attending churches like Family Harvest, where the pastor refers to same-sex relationships as "a perversion" and calls for the repeal of Roe v. Wade. Between 6:40-7:00, this video shows Secretary Rokita standing and applauding when the pastor says we are "pro life and proud!"

It's unfair to automatically ascribe what a pastor says to a congregant's belief system. Many people pick a church for non-doctrinaire reasons, such as location, friends who attend, the music, anonymity in a congregation, devotion to serving those particular church members, etc., and many politicians visit churches without knowing in advance the message du jour.

But Rokita talks the talk, too.

When asked about his stance on abortion by a homeschool group, here's what Rokita said:

I am pro life. No exceptions. I’m a believer. I don’t value one life over another, even in cases of rape and incest and even if it’s a threat to the mother. It’s not up to us.

I vehemently oppose Rokita's position, but you can't fault it for lacking philosophical consistency.

If you believe, like Rokita apparently does, that life must be preserved from the second a little squirmer cracks the eggshell, how can you permit abortion just because a woman is raped or abused by her father? In what other context would you let a woman take a "human life" without repercussion because something tragic happened to her?

This is why I've never understood what I call the Republican Party's "compromise exception trilogy" of "rape, incest, and danger to the life of the mother." The issue of a threat to the mother's life is the diciest proposition of the three. What does a "pro lifer" advocate if a doctor says delivery will likely kill both mother and child? It would seem the "pro life" thing would be to save somebody, wouldn't it?

In making his declaration, Rokita puts himself in a camp of only 15% of Americans (according to a Wall Street Journal poll conducted on October 22-25, 2009), who believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.

Of course, this is a smart play politically, given that those 15% probably make up more than 50% of Republican Party primary voters in the 4th District.

Politics is, after all, coalition building, and Rokita is clearly angling for the strident, religious faction in the Republican Party. In a district where Democrats are always long-shots, Rokita can afford to be (and maybe even has to be) uncompromising.

Rokita Goes "Full Monty" on Abortion