tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post116892136979548848..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169500501756441112007-01-22T16:15:00.000-05:002007-01-22T16:15:00.000-05:00I was a student of Ms Hershmans when she was married to Brant. She was devestated by the incident and was never the same he promised her their union would stay intact IF she had the abortion, then filed for divorce. He lied, killed and probably cheated. She was in love with him, and never thought she could have a child. Then he took away that which she thougth she would never, and as far as I know has never had since. Bad, Bad, man!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169318983901391082007-01-20T13:49:00.000-05:002007-01-20T13:49:00.000-05:00Buyer is recovering from surgery from a ski accident.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169239284815696592007-01-19T15:41:00.000-05:002007-01-19T15:41:00.000-05:00Homophobes always make me wonder what they are afraid of..... that someone might LIKE that awful (file) photo of Hershman.. be attracted to his thinner, youthful, less balding self? (Photo is about 10 years old. Can't get away with that in a chat room, dude!)<BR/><BR/>BUYER--- hmm.. where has he been for all these votes lately. Certainly not in his district-- since he never sets foot in Lafayette.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169064475230240202007-01-17T15:07:00.000-05:002007-01-17T15:07:00.000-05:00Brandt Hershman killed his unborn child to avoid child-support payments thereby preserving and protecting the institution of marriage. He and Buyer are two of the biggest hypocritical homophobes around.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169057692549977842007-01-17T13:14:00.000-05:002007-01-17T13:14:00.000-05:00they havhe their Hail, we have our Wilson...it kind of balances outAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169044701509932262007-01-17T09:38:00.000-05:002007-01-17T09:38:00.000-05:00Hmmmm.....the ubiquitous Sir Hailstone is noticably quiet on this. <BR/><BR/>Gary, one of the reasons I like your blog is that you're not afraid to call your fellow republicans to the carpet. I wish others could take off their partisan blindersAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169041952669951002007-01-17T08:52:00.000-05:002007-01-17T08:52:00.000-05:00Delph...Comcast...two examples of superior customer service.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1169038547804019692007-01-17T07:55:00.000-05:002007-01-17T07:55:00.000-05:00I'm a bit conflicted as to whether or not to publicly blast Senator Hershman for the abortion matter, but something else does seem to be directly relevant to his authorship of SJR7: SJR7 very closely tracks the original version of the so-called Federal Marriage Amendment which Congress has failed to adopt. Both restrict state legislatures (not just "activist judges" and both use the term "unmarried couples". Seeing problems with the first FMA version, conservative supporters changed it in 2004 to keep state legislatures free to enact at least some benefits for same-sex couples. They also got rid of "unmarried couples" because of the possibility of unintended consequences. But did Senator Hershman reflect the change in the Indiana version? No. <BR/>Does he continue to say the legislature remains free in this area? You bet. Is misrepresentation sinful? Yes. Is he a sinner? Only his Maker knows for sure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168984307379099512007-01-16T16:51:00.000-05:002007-01-16T16:51:00.000-05:00The last I checked, Delph no longer worked for Burton. According to his bio, he's working government relations for Comcast--I'm sure there's no conflict of interest with his legislative work.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168983305302849212007-01-16T16:35:00.000-05:002007-01-16T16:35:00.000-05:00Federal workplace rules, alas, do not apply to MCs (Members of Congress) or their offices.<BR/><BR/>But as a common courtesy to Indiana taxpayers, you'd think Rep. Buyer would demand that Mr./Sen. Hershman's time away from the MC office be counted as vacation/personal days, and, when exhausted, unpaid time off. <BR/><BR/>I know someone who workedin that office. Mr./Sen. Hershman takes customary vacations. Like, away with family trips. So, he's clearly not deducting the legislature time from his federal paycheck.<BR/><BR/>Ditto this question for Mr./Sen. Delph. (Dan Burton's staff)<BR/><BR/>Isn't it interesting, it's anti-big-government ultra-right conservatives who flaunt this double-dip?<BR/><BR/>When either Mr./Senator gets a legislature phone call while on federal duty, they use federal phones, complete with those nitfy long-distance-free lines, and FAXes, office equipment, furniture, etc.<BR/><BR/>Are any "trips" around the "district" (which one?) reimbursed with federal mileage payments, and indeed they were partially/fully legislature business?<BR/><BR/>What a hornet's nest of inconsistent values.<BR/><BR/>Excellent post in many respects, although it dances close to the personal-business arena...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168969767728411532007-01-16T12:49:00.000-05:002007-01-16T12:49:00.000-05:00Interesting information Gary. His hypocrisy is staggering.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168963493015329382007-01-16T11:04:00.000-05:002007-01-16T11:04:00.000-05:00EXCELLENT post Gary!!!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168956301688791012007-01-16T09:05:00.000-05:002007-01-16T09:05:00.000-05:00Hershman's another double-dipper. He pulling down close to $80,000 a year from the federal government working as a Buyer's district director.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168953859454121162007-01-16T08:24:00.000-05:002007-01-16T08:24:00.000-05:00The story ran in the Logansport newspaper on the day of the election in 2000. According to his bio on the legislative website, he is now married to another woman. The bio doesn't indicate he has children.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168948364824358692007-01-16T06:52:00.000-05:002007-01-16T06:52:00.000-05:00I admire your courage, Gary. This is an explosive post.<BR/><BR/>What newspaper originally carried this account, and when? I'm a little confused about the trail of events and the reporting of same. Not your problem, granted...but it could have been made a little clearer up-front. It is an important feature of this sordied story. I read it twice and I'm still a tad confused...probably my early A.M foggy mind.<BR/><BR/>To me, the divorce is almost more important than the abortion. This man forced his wife to end their marriage and she's a practicing Catholic who doesn't believe in it. An abortion is a difficult one to make (abortion), and should remain private and available under certain conditions. But it sounds as if the good senator forced this one. Family values, indeed.<BR/><BR/>Is he remarried? Does he have other children, or kids since the incident? <BR/><BR/>The mainstream media won't touch this. One more reason we need blogs.<BR/><BR/>Thank you, I think. The toothpaste is out of the tube now.<BR/>It's not surprising to me that this gutless wonder works for Buyer. Are Republicans now stealing the Dems' thunder by electing public employees to positions of high power? <BR/><BR/>Who is paying his Congressional salary while the session continues and he's gone fulltime? Is he cutting his salary proportionately, or is he making up the time to we taxpayers in the Cong. office?<BR/><BR/>There's another good angle on this story.<BR/><BR/>And another chief proponent of the Amendment, of course, is the good senator from South Indy who has never married and "inherited" a good deal of money, and his fancy car, from an older gentleman friend. As if no one sees through THAT nonsense. "Family."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168925380766777652007-01-16T00:29:00.000-05:002007-01-16T00:29:00.000-05:00I agree with you AI. But, somewhat counterintuitively, I actually get more angry at people who have actually had the experience of a loving and committed marriage wanting to keep that from their fellow Americans. <BR/><BR/>As you rightly point out, the irony is that often those most vocal about "traditional marriage" tend to have nasty skeletons in their personal closets. Someone like Hershman, I almost expect him to be for the amendment, exactly because of the disregard he apparently holds for marriage. It is really all BS and pandering. But, again, those that actually do respect and uphold their own marriages, I can't fathom the lack of empathy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168924246211913662007-01-16T00:10:00.000-05:002007-01-16T00:10:00.000-05:00Erin, I respect your point of view, but the central focus of SJR-7 is the preservation of marriage. My contention is that it does nothing to protect marriage. Hershman, like Advance America's Eric Miller, is now on his second marriage. What happened to "til death do we part?" Isn't that part of "traditional marriage"? Hershman and Miller have both contributed to a breakdown in the family in our society. And just what did gays and lesbians do to cause their marriages to end? I believe whenever any public person wants to make family values part of their public agenda, which necessarily involves passing moral judgment on others, they need to be prepared to have their own life scrutinized. They can't have it both ways.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1168923563435688222007-01-15T23:59:00.000-05:002007-01-15T23:59:00.000-05:00AI- I understand your anger at Hershman's hypocrisy, but, your post makes me a little uneasy. Gay marriages, civil unions and commitments between two people whoever ARE family values. To me, they are all positive things that should be encouraged. I worry that by constantly pointing out the negative "values" of people who don't support gay rights, the message becomes- if you sin, why can't I? It places gay relationships in a comparison of negative behavior- which I think is the wrong way to approach it (and I know you don't mean to imply that, but, I think it has that connotation).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com