Twisting arms and breaking legs for the sake of some party discipline.
So I have not been paying enough attention to the GOP race for AG here in Indiana lately. I knew there was a race and that I would be backing Jon Costas for two reasons:
1. He is from northern Indiana and being a big partisan from my part of our state I have to be with my people.
2. He is a former client and I would need a pretty good reason not to back someone I have help get elected in the past.
So what about Greg Zoeller? Greg is a great guy and would make a great AG but I can only choose one.
Now on to my subject. “arm twisting” and “strong arming”? Do we have a kerfuffle?
I know lots of friends and colleagues who are backing Zoeller and some are concerned about what the Governor’s endorsement means and some supposed “heavy handed” activity by his surrogates. Let’s all be grown ups for a bit.
Party discipline for Republicans has always been a fickle issue. We are all about it when we are getting our own way but cry foul when it goes against us. In all seriousness Indiana Republicans have been without any real party discipline for almost 20 years. Ask anyone over the age of 45 who has been active in GOP politics and it used to be a different political world we operated in. Anyone remember Keith Bulen? I mean come on guys. We used to draw blood on each other on a pretty regular basis.
In regards to the the Governor weighing in…is anyone really surprised? He is the leader of the party. I would be the first one to admit as a former County Chairman that there were times when I wished he was more partisan and skipped all that talk about “bipartisan cooperation”. I backed Mike Delph for his Senate bid in 2005 despite some somewhat mixed signals from the Governor’s corner. I laid my cards down for my friend and never regretted it (a lot easier when they win). My point is that those of us that are actively involved with politics, despite what we say, often respect and admire political authority and those who use it. I genuinely believe that we want and expect strong leadership from the top of our party (I am a veteran of the Bush Cheney operation know what loyalty to the family means).
In less than a week our party will nominate one of two great guys and to go on to kick the crap out of the Democrats in the fall. So then those of us on the inside of party politics will need to go out for drink, yell a little, trade some stories and move on.
May 27th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
I’m in for the drink and maybe some laughs.
Thanks for the post, it felt like we were going to hear from Winston County dog catcher next.
May 28th, 2008 at 7:03 am
The difference is this. One guy running really wants the job and sought the position on his own. That person is Greg Zoeller.
The other guy (Costas) was “recruited” to run based on mainly, geography.
Which man is more qualified? Zoeller. It takes a lot of skill to run the AG’s office of 140 lawyers.
Bottom line: Greg Zoeller has the heart and skill for the position. He wants to do as he has been doing for the past 20 years; serving the Citizens of Indiana.
May 28th, 2008 at 8:32 am
No one is debating Z’s credentials or desire to serve. He is a great guy.
I think it is a little unfair to imply that Costas does not want the job, unless someone can prove that.
May 28th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Mary Katherine’s post is an example of what is really turning some people off to her chosen candidate. Promoting her candidate is one thing; but tearing down his opponent is quite another. So what if Costas was recruited?! It happens in politics more often than not. If Costas didn’t want the job he would have said no. Any time I’ve been asked to run for a public office, I’m always flattered that someone would think so much of me to ask. I always consider the request and weigh it against all the factors. If that’s the best argument that Costas’ opponents can come up with as to why we should support a Zoeller candidacy, that could translate that they don’t have much to work with.
May 28th, 2008 at 10:34 am
I would have to agree. There is nothing wrong with recruitment, in fact I think we need to encourage more of since that’s been one downfall for the party nationally and statewide the last five or six years. So, I would say Costas being recruited was a good thing.
Now, how/why Costas was recruited may be the issue for some Zoeller supporters, not the fact that Costas was recruited.
May 28th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Did you see the big endorsement annoucement from the Costas camp today? Senate President Pro Tem David Long endorsed Costas along with other big names like Jackie Walorski.
To see Senator David Long’s name on the list says a lot, especially to me. Senator Long spent a lot of time with taxpayers and intently listened to their concerns about the Tremco bidding scheme, which is much more than the AG ever did. In addition, there would not be a study commission to investigate the matter if it were not for Senator Long. Jackie Walorski is also another name that gets my attention. She’s a real patriot for the 2nd amendment and other conservative causes.
Another concern to consider is the fact that this Tremco scandal is getting ready to blow wide open, and the AG’s office will surely be drawn into it because of recent discoveries found in Wilson Education Center Board minutes. The Democrats will surely use this Tremco scandal against Zoeller in the November election, and who knows what else will be discovered before then. You can read the details here:
http://diana-vice.blogspot.com/
May 28th, 2008 at 10:59 am
I agree with Josh….it is the reasons for recruitment of Costas that are suspect. Has anyone considered how much GOP money is being spent on Costas’campaign? It makes no sense when we had a perfectly qualified, substantial, and honorable candidate to begin with in Greg Zoeller. Also, this is money taken away that could have been put to good use for Mitch and others in the fall.
It is no secret that the big Indy law firms have pumped money into the Costas campaign. For what reason? Because they have much to gain.
May 28th, 2008 at 11:08 am
How much money?
May 28th, 2008 at 11:43 am
You’re in the mailing business, Chris. How much would it cost to send a big slick-paper full-color mailing to 2,000 delegates? To send them all a letter after that, and a letter and a DVD of a professionally-produced 11 minute “let me brag about myself to you” commercial in between? (And I’m probaly forgetting at least one other mailing in there somewhere.)
If Costas hasn’t spent at least $40,000 so far to buy his selection (let alone the strong-arming, threats, and reprisal firings), I would be amazed.
And there is nothing wrong with candidate recruitment (save perhaps the reasoning behind it or those doing the recruiting in some cases). But Costas has never been consistent about why he was running either.
Originally, it was because he was recruited, but was never interested himself and never had higher ambition. Later, he was interested all along and always aspired to the post. Which is it?
Being straight about his motivations seems challenging to Jon Costas (let alone taking a public stand about what his campaign and his supporters are doing to win the nomination for him).
May 28th, 2008 at 11:58 am
I know I can count on you Scott to lay it out without any sugar.
Full disclosure - being in my business I am completely for the idea of spending a lot of money on your campaign! Having said that I did not do any of Jon’s stuff so I don’t know how much they spent. I have gotten just as much mail from Greg so not sure that is a fair comparison.
May 28th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Is Zoeller putting out a DVD that probably cost $30K to produce and mail?
That’d be hard to do on the salary of a deputy AG.
Harder still probably on the salary of the mayor of a small city.
I’ve gotten two mailings from Zoeller (a postcard and a folded thing yesterday), and at least four mailings from Costas (including his blockbuster movie “all about me” big bucks snooze fest).
And, Chris, I figured that you were not doing Costas’ mailings; they would have been nicer and more effective if you had.
May 28th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Compliments are always welcome.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:54 am
chris how can I get in touch with you? I have a couple of things I’m curious about…
May 30th, 2008 at 9:02 am
The problem with Jon Costas is that he doesn’t give you straight answers to policy questions or questions about the AG’s office. He won’t even make a clear statement on whether or not he will pursue the Pastrick/East-Chicago corruption cases. He should know about those cases and actions for two reasons, 1) they’re the front-and-center news in Northwest Indiana about the Attorney General’s office and 2) the law firm he is associated with represents the defendents in those cases.