ADVERTISEMENT

Indiana isn't getting new Toyota-Mazda plant

Unfortunate
Hmm, I do not know what eliminated Indiana. But I saw this story last week on Indiana's tendency to be a bit backward and its impact on bringing in jobs. Before reading the link, try to guess who the story focuses on.

I know Indianapolis and Jeffersonville applied gor Amazon's HQ. Anyone think being parochial is an advantage there?
 
Hmm, I do not know what eliminated Indiana. But I saw this story last week on Indiana's tendency to be a bit backward and its impact on bringing in jobs. Before reading the link, try to guess who the story focuses on.

I know Indianapolis and Jeffersonville applied gor Amazon's HQ. Anyone think being parochial is an advantage there?

“They didn’t want to poach from their existing projects,” Schalliol said. “And there were just concerns that Indiana would have enough workforce to handle this. Our contention would be that people would travel for those kind of jobs.”
 
Hmm, I do not know what eliminated Indiana. But I saw this story last week on Indiana's tendency to be a bit backward and its impact on bringing in jobs. Before reading the link, try to guess who the story focuses on.

I know Indianapolis and Jeffersonville applied gor Amazon's HQ. Anyone think being parochial is an advantage there?
From that article:

"It's superficial." Blair said. "A good way to make Indiana welcome all would be to update our state's civil rights law to include sexual orientation and gender identity."

Blair also noted that Holcomb signed laws this year targeting immigrants and abortion rights.

On the other end of the spectrum, such talk worries conservatives.

"We have a whole body of Republicans who are acting like Democrats and they will face consequences over that," said Monica Boyer of the conservative Indiana Liberty Coalition.
I'm sure a lot of liberal ideologues would be happy that civil issues are pinned to Democrats, but that's really both absurd and a political liability in any but liberal states. Civil rights are not partisan and shouldn't be. They're part of the social make-up of our society. Democrats should simply say that. Civil rights are civil rights and shouldn't be part of politics.
 
From that article:

"It's superficial." Blair said. "A good way to make Indiana welcome all would be to update our state's civil rights law to include sexual orientation and gender identity."

Blair also noted that Holcomb signed laws this year targeting immigrants and abortion rights.

On the other end of the spectrum, such talk worries conservatives.

"We have a whole body of Republicans who are acting like Democrats and they will face consequences over that," said Monica Boyer of the conservative Indiana Liberty Coalition.
I'm sure a lot of liberal ideologues would be happy that civil issues are pinned to Democrats, but that's really both absurd and a political liability in any but liberal states. Civil rights are not partisan and shouldn't be. They're part of the social make-up of our society. Democrats should simply say that. Civil rights are civil rights and shouldn't be part of politics.
But, but, what about the bible!?
 
Schalliol tried to claim credit for accomplishing something that he had no involvement with (a zoning change in a prior encounter with him) He was a Deputy Prosecutor who got a pay increase to handle economic development issues
 

Blair also noted that Holcomb signed laws this year targeting immigrants...

Civil rights are civil rights and shouldn't be part of politics.
I assume the law "targeting immigrants" they're referring to is the one which forbid Indiana colleges and universities from becoming "sanctuary campuses". I don't think that living here in violation of immigration laws -- or protecting those who do -- is a civil right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUCrazy2
I assume the law "targeting immigrants" they're referring to is the one which forbid Indiana colleges and universities from becoming "sanctuary campuses". I don't think that living here in violation of immigration laws -- or protecting those who do -- is a civil right.
I think they actually tried to block the resettlement of Syrian immigrants into Indiana.
 
I assume the law "targeting immigrants" they're referring to is the one which forbid Indiana colleges and universities from becoming "sanctuary campuses". I don't think that living here in violation of immigration laws -- or protecting those who do -- is a civil right.
I was referring to the "Republicans acting like Democrats" part. Sorry, should have highlighted it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT