By Scott Tibbs, June 12, 2006
The following paragraph is from the March 29, 2006 Corydon Democrat.
|Hill also expressed disgust that the Democrats have allowed themselves to be painted as anti-family, anti-God and pro-gay. "I'm sick and tired of the Republicans saying that we are not family-oriented, that God is on their side. Hill said he and his wife, Betty, attend a United Methodist church in Seymour and would be there Sunday. "We love God, too. It's amazing that we have to defend ourselves that we are God-fearing and church-going people."|
Baron Hill does not want to be seen as pro-homosexual? Has he told the Bloomington City Council, which added "sexual orientation" to the city's Human Rights Ordinance over a decade ago and added "gender identity" to the ordinance earlier this year? This underscores a common criticism of Hill, that he talks like Nancy Pelosi in Bloomington while painting himself as a "blue dog" conservative Democrat in the rest of the Ninth District.
Baron Hill wants to have a debate, but he could have a debate all by himself. For example, Hill told the Howey Political Report, "I am a man of personal faith. I attend church regularly. It's the most important thing to me in the world. I don't try to wear religion on my sleeve for political gain; that would be wrong." So does Baron Hill believe the first three parts of his statement were wrong and should not have been said?
The Howey Report article opens with the statement: "Baron Hill wants the voters of the 9th CD to know that he's a Christian." He said, "it's amazing that we have to defend ourselves that we are God-fearing and church-going people." Baron, either it is wrong to wear your religion on your sleeve for political gain or it isn't. Make up your mind.
Even the Herald-Times has taken note of Hill's inconsistency, editorializing "(Baron) Hill was a staunch pro-lifer while in the Indiana House of Representatives in the mid-1980s, until shortly before he decided to run for U.S. senator against Dan Coats in 1990." At that point, Hill switched sides. Before "values voters" helped decide the 2004 presidential election and Democrats started openly recruiting pro-life candidates, it was commonly believed that if someone wanted to go anywhere in the national party he must toe the line on abortion. Did Hill sell his beliefs for support from the national party?
Let's not forget Hill's attack on a Republican "fat cat" fundraiser a couple months ago. Citizens for Truth exposed Hill's hypocrisy with a press release noting Hill's own fundraiser featuring disgraced ex-President Clinton and pointing out campaign contributions from "Barney Frank ($2000), Marion Berry ($2000), Nancy Pelosi ($1000), Charlie Rangel ($2000), and Sheila Jackson Lee ($1000)" in the 2004 election cycle.
I have to wonder if some local Democrats are seeing through the smokescreen Hill is trying to present. Hill only managed to get 59% of the vote in Monroe County's Democratic primary election, indicating he has some problems with his base. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the November election and how much Hill will have to mend fences with local Leftists.
I would respect Baron Hill a lot more if he could make a decision one way or another on where he stands. Instead, he looks like the worst sort of professional politician: someone who will say anything to get elected and does not care whether or not what he says is true. I have to wonder if Baron Hill has any core beliefs at all.