Tuesday, November 20, 2007

No Imperial Direction From Sir Andrew Needed

Occasionally, the Star publishes a letter to the editor that's worth passing along. Today is one such occasion when Richard Schmid puts former U.S. Rep. Andy Jacobs' attempt to anoint U.S. Rep. Julia Carson's grandson, Andre, into its proper perspective. Schmid writes:

I awoke to the local Town Crier reporting that Sir Andrew Jacobs has directed all us serfs to vote for the heir apparent to Queen Julia, Prince Andre.

His quote "that it seems appropriate for me to ask Julia's constituents to choose her grandson . . . to succeed her if and when she retires" smacks so much of the old political cronyism so rampant in this kingdom and a little bit of Merry Olde England.

Isn't it about time that we peons stand up and say to the "monarchy'' we can think for ourselves and elect someone without imperial direction? It certainly is time to take back the kingdom. It's also time for the sheriff of Marionshire and Sir Bauer of Obstructionville to go their merry ways.

23 comments:

Berita dari gunung said...

cronyism: touchy issue, but somehow it is in the very vein!

Sir Hailstone said...

Now that's funny I don't care who you are.

Anonymous said...

Andy is a revered figure in our party, Gary. His advice is often sought, and his wisdom is bouondless. He's frugal to a fault, and has a pretty good ex-Marine value set.

But there is no amount of push he can put behind Andre, that will make committeemen love Andre--yet. The pup has not earned it. It's that simple.

If there weren't other qualified candidates, it'd be a different story. I can name five who would do a great job, and there are likely more. All have decent experience in government and the private sector.

The calendar will be Andre's biggest ally in slating. Slating could take on a different role this year, if and when Julia retires and/or resigns. Naming her replacement for the remainder of a term may be a completely different process than slating's choice.

Look for Julia to hold her announcement as long as psosible, thereby thwarting the potential for many candidates to court committeepersons without appearing to be vultures.

It's a fine line.

Some will cross it regardless, if the strong Julia rumors are true. And Wilson's crowd will bash them, without regard to that candidate's qualifications or fitness to serve.

Sean Shepard said...

I'll preface this by saying that I think Andrew is a nice guy, but
does anyone else wonder what Julia must have on her former boss to ensure his endorsement/support?

It's bad enough we could end up having gone (8+4+8+8+[maybe 4 or 8]) 32 or 36 years without a Bush, including VP, or Clinton in the White House. The politics of "having the right name" needs to end.

No kings, queens, princes or princesses inheriting the reins of power please.

Wilson46201 said...

Advice from a supporter of Blankenbaker, Hoffmeister, Scott, McVey, Horning and Dickerson about the 7th District? Pshaw!

Zappatista said...

How exactly does a MAYOR repeal a STATES property tax? Call me simple....but he wasn't elected to the highest house on the hill, was he?

Anonymous said...

Jacobs needs to allow the citizens of Indy to make up their own minds without input from him. He has done a disservice to the 7th and his continued endorsement of the most unqualified candidates ever sent to Congress makes one wonder if he (Jacobs) is hitting on all cylinders.
Jacobs needs to quit talking and go fishing. Enjoy that retirement and leave the rest of us in peace and with a chance of representation that works.

Anonymous said...

I always supported Andy but he is yesterday......Andre has great potential but his is not his time.....the Dems in the 7th will not allow this conressional seat to be treated like a monarchy.

Anonymous said...

Ah, rats, Hailstone, you beat me to the remark!!!

Thanks for sharing the good laugh, Gary!

Shofar said...

I will give Jacobs credit for several things.

1. He retired on top, the man knew when to pull the plug and get on with his life, unlike his heir, Julia.

2. He had the respect of both sides of the aisle, and represented the interests of Indiana and Indianapolis with professionalism. Another thing that Julia's people cannot claim regarding her.

3. He ran clean and frugal campaigns, and was not beholden to groups like the ghetto Mafia and the like.

Unfortunately, he is becoming like the eccentric uncle that all families have. He is throwing his support towards a bastard step-child (Andre Carson) who is in no way qualified to hold any elected office. Jacobs support is only coming out of a misguided loyalty to a disgraced and feeble party relative.

Andy needs to fade from the scene and allow the next generation of leaders to step to the podium and lead.

Anonymous said...

Gary: Maybe I'm alone in experiencing this problem, but take a look at your poll results on the 7th district potential candidates. Some of them are whited out so one can't see the actual percentages.

Advance Indiana said...

I hear you, anon 5:09. I have to put on my reading glasses to read the number through the light blue shade. On the Republican side, Dickerson has 96 votes to 94 votes for Elrod at this moment. The bar also graphically depicts the percentage voting for that particular candidate so use that as a cue.

Anonymous said...

I click and drag my mouse over the bar graph highlight it to read the numbers.

:)

Anonymous said...

Hail Sir Hailstone! You made quite the funny.

Anonymous said...

The Indiana House today was honoring legislators who died while in office. One of those was the father of current-Representative Vannessa Summers. During the recognition, Rep. Summers made the announcement that her son wants the seat after she leaves. One would hope that she was trying to be funny, but it sure didn't come across that way.

Add this to the on-going Carson story and to the Breaux-family succession in the Senate (among others?) and it makes one think there is some sort of cultural tendency towards these disgusting monarchical tendencies.

Am I wrong?

Wilson46201 said...

Like the Borsts, Bayhs and Bosmas?

Sir Hailstone said...

"Bayhs"

Whoa, whoa, whoa - don't pin that donkey's tail on us. He's one of yours.

Anonymous said...

Shofar, your comments are spot-on. But the "bastard" thing was low-brow and insulting.

Mind you, this Dem committeeman will not vote for Andrew if his slating opponent is a chair. He simply has not earned the right. Frankly, if I lived in his council district I'd be pissed, because he hasn't earned the right to do that either. But it's not my district.

Are you personally aware he's a "bastard" child? If so, how does that impact his ability to serve in any office? He is alive and among us--his parentage was not his choice.

It was uncalled for.

Anonymous said...

Wilson, you forgot the Maherns. Or perhaps you were just being alliterative.

Anonymous said...

Fair point about other families with multiple generations in public service. But with all three families mentioned by Wilson - Borsts, Bayhs and Bosmas - the later generations actually worked their way up through the political ranks. And none of them went straight into "their Daddy's seat."

Contrast that with the Breaux, Carson and Summer families where the outgoing generation effectively "wills" the seat to her younger family member - as if their family actually owns the seat.

I don't have a problem with multiple generations of one family being involved in politics. Our country has a rich tradition of that. What does disturb me is the handful of families who seem to think that they own a particular public office. That kind of thinking was defeated over 200 years ago. Yet, it seems to be reemerging in certain segments of our society.

Am I wrong?

Anonymous said...

Yet, it seems to be reemerging in certain segments of our society.

Am I wrong?


You are right. The problem I see is that the money is just too good to give up. Even if you just work as a state elected officials in the house or senate, full-time money for part-time work isn't bad at all. Add a part-time gig somewhere, or sit on some boards making a few grand a year, and life is pretty easy. These families fear losing all of that power. The idea they might actually have to work a "real" job scares the hell out of them. Look at Burton. I never once heard from that guy, maybe a mailer here and there. All of a sudden the entire family income and power stream is in trouble. What happens? Burton starts coming out more, making sure he shows up to vote, etc. etc.. I now hear him monthly on the radio saying he will be at so and so place. I think that is a good thing. When the entire family income is on the line (remember, his election money goes to various family members), that has to put a ton of stress upon you. If you screw up, the entire family becomes jobless all at the same time. Sorry, but I do get a laugh when these things happen: A family member loses an election and the entire family suffers because none of them worked outside of politics/public service.

Anonymous said...

Not to take this thread off topic but has anyone noticed that nearly every person that has worked on staff for Evan Bayh during some point no longer holds a public office. I believe that Peterson is the last of the Bayh former staffers to hold office.
The lone survivor of course, is Evan himself.
Interesting.

Anonymous said...

Gary, I think you are being unfair in your unofficial poll for congress....you give the repubs the choice of someone else but not the Dems...the Dem nominee probably will not be any of the 4 you listed.....someone else should have been an option for the Dems also