Rupert Will Announce His Gubernatorial Decision Saturday

Word just came from Rupert Boneham's campaign that this Saturday he will announce whether he will choose to seek the Libertarian Party's nomination to be their gubernatorial candidate in 2012.  Boneham formed an exploratory committee for that race in late August (see my story here,) and put up a Rupert for Governor web page. At the time, he said that he would spend the several weeks visiting with Hoosiers around the state. He indicated that he knew he was ready for the Governor's race, but wanted to spend time with Hoosiers to see if they were ready to consider him a viable candidate.

It appears that decision has been made. This Saturday afternoon, Boneham has announced he will face the media and publicly announce what his decision will be. Rupert's press conference will be held at 2:00 at American Legion Post 64 on Holt Road in Indianapolis.

According to Boneham's campaign manager, Evan McMahon,

"Over the past couple of months, Rupert has been visiting with everyday Hoosiers and small business owners from all across the state. After hearing their stories and concerns and weighing those of his family and supporters, Rupert has come to a decision."

I fully expect we'll hear Rupert announce his intentions are, in fact, to seek the Libertarian Party's nomination, and McMahon's statements sure don't lead you to think otherwise.  If Boneham had other thoughts, I can't imagine there would be a press conference announced this many days ahead of time.  It seems like today's announcement of the upcoming press conference is well-crafted to allow plenty of time for the media, both locally and nationally, to grab hold of the story and build some anticipation.  (Of course, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie recently did just that in his announcement that he will not be running for president, so anything is possible.)

Rupert is, of course, famous for his appearances on several incarnations of the reality TV show Survivor.  In his personal life, Boneham is well-known for his youth mentoring program, Rupert's Kids, which, according to their website, is an

"organization dedicated to serving an easily overlooked population of youth: those that have become too old for the youth social service system, but are not old enough for the adult social service system. We teach these youth valuable skills and trades, while also empowering them to discover their inner strengths, passions and interests."

In the spirit of self-sufficiency, Rupert's Kids has never accepted any government funding (a fact that I'm sure is very popular among the Libertarians Boneham is seeking the nomination from.)

The big question since Boneham filed his exploratory committee has been whether his potential candidacy was serious, or if it was a publicity stunt.  When asked whether Rupert feels the media and the Hoosier voters are ready to take Boneham seriously, McMahon stated,

"This truly has been a tough decision for him. He has struggled with the unknown impact this will have on his family and community work. He's also been faced with a few hostile members of the media, that have done everything they can to discredit not only his potential campaign but also the legitimacy of other Libertarian candidates. But, he has also had a great deal of supporters calling and emailing the campaign. He gets stopped everywhere he goes by people encouraging him to take this stand for Hoosiers. It has been a rough couple of weeks."

Again, it sure sounds like Rupert's going to announce he's giving the green-light for a full campaign to start immediately.  Saturday's the big day.  I hope he runs.  It's going to make for a very fun and exciting 2012.

December Presidential Primaries? It's Time for Consolidation of Dates

"You're vote counts!"     "I vote. I count."      "No vote is a wasted vote."

Are these statements still true?  In most cases, I am a firm believer that they are.  In the case of presidential primaries, though, it may be becoming less of a fact.  If you are a primary voter and live in a state with a later primary date, it is becoming more and more likely that many, if not all, of your choices are going to be mathematically eliminated from victory before you can even cast a ballot. In that case, you either vote for who is left, or you vote on principal for who has been eliminated.

There's a recent surge among the states to be the first state to hold presidential primaries.  It's been a trend over recent years, a trend has been accelerating exponentially throughout recent months. Florida moved up its primary to January 31st.  Nevada is heading to the polls January 14th.  South Carolina is shooting for January 10th.

And now there is New Hampshire.  New Hampshire is now saying they may hold their 2012 presidential primary on December 13th.  Maybe even December 6th. Yep, in 2011.  A couple weeks before we even get to Christmas.

States need to feel important.  They want the attention the media gives them for being the first to cast an official presidential ballot.  They like the fact that their votes...well, count.

But this rush to be number one is now getting out of hand.  Every state wants to be first, and every state will change their primary dates to make it happen.  Do you think December 6th is way too early for a primary?  I do, too.  I promise you, though, that in 2016 there will be a state, or probably states, that will move their primary even earlier.  It's ridiculous now, it'll be even more ridiculous then.


"No one state is more important than another."   Except in the case of choosing major party presidential candidates, it would seem.



So what's the solution?  Alas, there is only one. (Okay, there's two, but the second will never happen as long as two parties maintain control.)  That solution is a constitutional amendment requiring all primaries for the office of President of the United States to be held on the same day.  No more super-early primaries.  No more late primaries where votes truly don't count.  Everyone votes the same day, and neither a person nor a state is more important than another.  It is the only way.

("The only way?  But, Josh, you mentioned a second possibility!"  That second possibility is that the major parties assume control of their own candidate selection.  You see, you think your vote for who you want the presidential candidate from your party to be really counts, but it doesn't.  The parties themselves pick their candidates at convention.  To make you feel all warm and fuzzy, they select the candidate the people picked in primaries.  But, a few state laws easily pushed aside and they wouldn't have to.  Candidate selection is private party business.  The Rs and the Ds just passed laws to make the taxpayers pay for an very expensive and unnecessary primary system so they can make you feel important to the selection process, to gain brand loyalty, and to maintain the image that they are the only real players in town.  It's done very well for them over the years, but it's cost you an I an assload of our money.)


So, let's do what we can to end this craziness before it is so far out of hand that we are voting in a presidential primary in the even-numbered years between presidential elections.  This is a bad trend, and it is one that will continue to occur.  Let's call on our federal government to focus some of its power on the things it should: federal issues.  You won't hear me calling for the feds to reign in the states on too many occasions, but this is one issue that the states will continue to go crazy with until that intervention occurs.

Charlie White Going After Bayh: Proper Complaint, Improper Reason

"Huh-uh, YOU did!"

Charlie White

Yep, Indiana politics has turned in to a game of childish finger pointing. The entire local blog world (Advance Indiana, Ogden on Politics, Indiana Barrister, et al) and the entire local news world (WRTV, WISH, WTHR) is reporting that Secretary of State Charlie White has filed a complaint against Evan Bayh, charging that the former Indiana Senator has committed felony voter fraud by lying about his primary residence when voting.

Hmmm...sound familiar?  Let's see, an Indiana politician being charged with lying about his primary residence when voting....gosh, I swear I've heard that before.  Oh, yeah!  Those accusations have been made against Charlie White!

In an interesting turn of events on the Charlie White saga, White himself decided to file a complaint with Marion County Prosecutor Terry Curry asking Curry to appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate whether or not Bayh committed voter fraud by lying about his primary residence for May's primary. (Indiana Barrister has the whole complaint, thanks to Abdul Hakim-Shabazz)

Evan Bayh

And this is where this whole thing will go sour.  You see, White has a legitimate complaint about Bayh.  As Paul Ogden points out, White could also easily make this same complaint against Dick Lugar, but since Lugar is a Republican, White took a pass. I mean, White is clearly going to great lengths to prove that the Democrats are after him, and you make that point by turning the tables against Democrats, not against fellow Republicans.

But White's choosing to only go after Bayh is exactly what is going to make everyone snicker about this.  By going after only the big-name Democrat, you turn this mess into a piece of children screaming "Well he did it first!"  Trying to spin it that way makes White look like an idiot, and will make this whole thing be a news story for, oh, about as long as it takes you to finish this blog.  This is all going to be gone that quick.

And what's really sad is Charlie White had a point.  We all know Evan Bayh hasn't lived here in years.  Most of us are too young to remember when Lugar lived here at all.  Yet they continue to claim Indiana residences, and they continue to vote in our precincts, and Lugar still claims to be a Hoosier when he represents us in D.C.  This is a major problem with Federal politics, and it is one that needs some serious attention drawn to it.

Richard Lugar

Charlie White, despite all his problems, actually had the opportunity to draw our attention to this the right way.  He could have stood up and said, ' You know what?  I did it.  You are all right, I lied and I did it.  It's time for me to accept my wrong doing, and time to be punished for it.  And I think it's time we took a hard look at the other politicians around here.  Evan Bayh and Richard Lugar have failed to live in this state for years and years, but continue to claim residence.  I agree it's time I took my punishment, but it's time they took their punishment, too."

But, of course, Charlie White didn't do that.  Instead, he just pointed the finger at Bayh.  In doing so, he turned this into just another political mess that we'll all ignore.  Just some more finger-pointing across party lines.  Just some more of the typical political hypocrisy...."it's OK when I do it, but it's a horrible injustice when they do."

I do find it ironic that, by pointing out the Bayh situation, White all but admitted guilt himself. According to White's Attorney, former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, in the WISH-TV article:

Carl Brizzi, White's defense attorney, said White was trying to make a point that the charges against him were politically motivated when he had done the same thing as Bayh, a former Indiana secretary of state and governor.


"The case is just intended to show the similarities in their two situations," Brizzi said. "This whole thing started because of politics."

Guess what, Carl...you just said your client did it.  White presented truly damning evidence against Bayh, and you just said White did the same thing.  You said the two cases are similar.  Oops.

So now we're left with what will soon be yesterday's news.  Charlie White accuses Evan Bayh of doing what Charlie White is accused of doing.  Charlie White's attorney, who says that Charlie White is innocent, says that Charlie White is proving a point by showing the hypocrisy involved by Democrats by not charging Evan Bayh of what is clearly illegal, and that that illegal thing is the same thing that Charlie White did. And since Charlie White chose to only point fingers at Evan Bayh, and not at Dick Lugar, this all looks like a big bunch of political finger-pointing and we'll all forget about it tomorrow...when instead we should truly be investigating them all.

Coleman Goes Prime-Time

City-Councillor Ed Coleman, seeking re-election in the Southside's 24th District, has released a couple of commercials.  If you live on that side of town, you may have already noticed it hitting the airwaves, most notably during the last couple of Colts games.

Coleman is possibly the best-funded individual District Council candidate in Indianapolis' history.  His going to TV, especially in high-viewership prime-time spots, is a uncommon thing to see out of local district candidates.  It is especially unusual for a Libertarian, and is yet another indication that the Libertarians are becoming a real force in Marion County politics.

Coleman may not be an unfamiliar face to those on the south side.  Ed has been out in his neighborhoods knocking on doors and meeting constituents in the district for several months.

Here's Ed's full-length commercial, and the 30-second ad you may have already seen.


Indianapolis City-County Councilor, Ed Coleman from Ed Coleman on Vimeo.



Ed Coleman 30sec Spot from Englehart Group on Vimeo.

Council Says "Keep it Georgia Street!"

At tonight's City-County Council meeting, the Georgia Street proposal was introduced and went straight to a rare same-day vote. Unanimously, the CCC voted to recommend that one of Indy's original street names remains unchanged.

I don't know if it's the councillors falling in line with public opinion less than a month before all of their jobs are decided. It probably is.

But it's also a big sign to Mayor Ballard. For the incumbent mayor to not get one single vote from his own party on an issue that, until just days ago, he was a huge proponent of has got to be a blow. Even after conceding an immediate change, Ballard seemed to be a fan of still changing it later (presumably when the election was behind him.)

I doubt we'll hear anything more about Ballard on Georgia Street for now. Just before an election and in light of tonight's vote, the topic can do him too much damage to the mayor. It shows his unwillingness to listen to the will of the people of his city, even when it comes to things as simple as the name of a street.

Here's the Star's story on tonight's vote.

City-County Council: Leave Georgia Street name alone | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com

Ballard's Georgia Street Press Conference Doesn't Make Any Sense

The Mayor held a Friday Georgia Street press conference, one day after reports began circulating that he had asked for the name Georgia Street to, for now, remain unchanged. In it he announced the plans to erect pillars honoring thirty great Hoosiers.

Ballard also said that this great plan is why he was such a big supporter of changing the street's name. He said he just didn't feel right building an honor to history's great Hoosiers on a street named after another state.

On the surface, I think the Mayor's claim seems to make sense...but I don't buy it. Why would the mayor wait until after he conceded to keep the name to say why he had wanted it changed? Wouldn't announcing grand plans such as these be the first thing you did in the face of complete public disapproval over the issue? And definitely be something you did BEFORE backing down?

"Hi folks. I know there's a lot of people curious why I want to change the historic name of Georgia Street, a name that has been part of city since its inception. I wanna be clear to everybody that it has nothing to do with the Super Bowl or any of the NFL's wishes. We are proud today to announce that the incredible new look of Georgia Street is going to also serve as an honor to the lives of thirty of history's greatest Hoosiers.

"I would like to help add to the honoring of these great Hoosiers by also changing the name of Georgia Street to something more Indiana related. While Georgia Street is an important part of Indianapolis' long history, it just doesn't seem right to have this honor take place on a street named after another state. So, today I am asking for your support in changing this street's name to Hoosier Boulevard!"

That's all it would have taken. You present a plan and you support it with a reason. I'm not saying there would not still have been dissent, but there would have been a lot less of it.

By presenting the name change as an important part of a huge plan to honor our own, the mayor might've just been able to make it happen.

But that's not even close to what Ballard actually did. He promoted name change without rhyme or reason. We heard of Peyton Place and Hospitality Boulevard...cheesy names that Indianapolis doesn't feel represents its personality (and in hindsight do nothing to further the honoring of thirty great Hoosiers.)

Then, in the face of public outcry, the mayor finally backs down. And only then, after he concedes, does the mayor state what his thought process supposedly was from the beginning.

I just don't buy it. It doesn't make sense.

Georgia Street's New Name Will Be...Georgia Street!

It appears that Mayor Greg Ballard can actually listen to public input on a topic. Well, at least he seems able to a mere 39 days before an election and when his side of things is horribly unpopular. Today, the Mayor kinda conceded to leave the name of Georgia Street unchanged when it reopens after its facelift. (See the Channel 6 Story here.)

Why kinda? Because the Mayor said he would leave to option open for name changes in the future. Ballard seems to think that, after seeing all the exciting awesomeness of the new Georgia Street, the public is somehow going to suddenly flip its opinion and want a name change put in place. He has even announced a press conference Friday to announce a "significant addition" to Georgia Street.  Apparently the Mayor thinks his opportunity to sway our opinion might be now.

Um...what? Does Mayor Ballard actually think that's how public opinion sways in Indianapolis? Does he really think this city will look at the completed project and say, "Ooooooo, look at the pretty lights! We should call this Hospitality Way!"

If that's really Ballard's opinion, he has a lesser view of the Hoosier State's capitol than sitcoms and late-night talk show hosts seem to. His insinuation is insulting.

There's a large part of me that thinks that after election day, when Ballard's a lame duck, suddenly the name change will go through anyway. It won't matter what we voters think. (As Ballard's history shows, it rarely does.)

So, way to go Mayor Ballard. You finally made the right decision, and you finally paid attention to the outcries of your constituents. I find no surprise, though, that in one of your tries of doing what the voters demand, you also manage to insult us all.

Ballard can even find a way to screw up finally making the right decision. Yet another reason Republicans all over the city will be pulling the handle for Melina Kennedy or Chris Bowen on election day.