Abdul Reporting Melina Kennedy Hired Campaign Manager

Abdul is reporting that Melina Kennedy has hired former Organizing for America State Director Nick Buis to run her mayoral campaign.  We hear Buis recently ran Baron Hill’s campaign so that would give him a 1-1 record in Indiana. 

It looks like Buis spent some time in Iowa for Obama  as a county field organizer in 2007 and some of his Hoosiers for Hill friends nominated him for a grassroots organization award.  Our favorite part:

“Only 45% of the district has cable TV.  Most of the district does not use broadband Internet.  In order to get our message out into the most rural parts of our district he commissioned a Burma Shave sign campaign.”

Sounds like that worked out really well. 

All kidding aside, this seems to be a decent hire and we welcome him the campaign trail.


About Washington Street Politics
Covering policy and politics from end to end of Washington Street in Indianapolis

19 Responses to Abdul Reporting Melina Kennedy Hired Campaign Manager

  1. Mustang Sally says:

    Abdul is wrong. She hired a female.

  2. Yeah? I thought her field organizer was a guy and she had a woman in finance.

    • Mustang Sally says:

      Tom, you will know the name on Friday or Thursday.But I am a little surprised with all of your “inside informaiton” that you would konw that. Keep up the good work,this is going to be these best tool that Melina will have in the election.

      • Again, we aren’t Tom. We don’t have the inside information you keep mentioning, Mustang Sally. Maybe you should fill us in since you seem to know everything.

  3. Cato says:

    Is this what you think the Republicans care about, who Ms. Kennedy hires for her staff? She has to hire someone. Chances are you’ll hate whomever she hires. So, what? I don’t vote based on campaign managers.

    Talk issues. Oh, that’s right. You can’t. You’ve done everything exactly wrong for the past three years.

    Ballard should step aside.

  4. Who said we are writing this for Republicans? We’re writing this for anyone who wants to read it and we’re trying to have a little fun. We don’t hate anyone engaged in the process. We said it was a good hire.

    Starting to think part of the reason folks don’t like Ballard is that he is actually doing things at all. The City has lacked a long term vision and it seems to us he is trying to correct that.

    • Mustang Sally says:

      Please…Tom, Do you really think that we are that stupid?

  5. Now if Ballard can just find someon who knows the first thing about politics…

  6. Cato says:

    P: Who said we are writing this for Republicans?

    P:We’re writing this for anyone who wants to read it and we’re trying to have a little fun.

    P: We don’t hate anyone engaged in the process. We said it was a good hire.

    C: Starting to think part of the reason folks don’t like Ballard is that he is actually doing things at all.

    What an outrageously ludicrous non sequitur.

  7. varangianguard says:

    Here is the short-sightedness of your dismissal of the criticisms, “you must be criticizing because [we] are tackling the tough problems”. There is a complete intellectual disassociation between the perceptions of other vocal political “players” from those held by the significant players inside and near to the administration’s upper echelons.

    It’s obvious what your perception is, but you cannot (or will not) see that another perception is that the Mayor, the Vaughn council, the CIB, et al is giving away the farm (not tackling the farm) to those who know how to successfully “pay to play”. This perception remains valid until it is rebutted. Your rebuttal is simple dismissal. Saying it isn’t true, doesn’t make it untrue, except for those who want to buy into your fallacial argumentation (or more truly, a lack of argumentation). That kind of refutation attempt might have worked well in high school and even college (where the judges often knew less about the subject than did the debaters), but we aren’t in high school anymore (I hope).

    Privatization is not equivalent to “tackling” problems, it is off-loading those problems to entities that are not accountable to the taxpayers, who are the actual payers of those privatization intitiatives. And besides, off-loading problems isn’t solving anything. It is just one more passing of the buck to those who follow in subsequent years (to whom you also don’t have to be accountable to). This admistration is being accountable, but not to those who have given them the charge to do so (the voters), but instead to those who stand to gain from the intitiatives coming down from the 25th floor, either financially or (more likely)politically. The biggest gain is mainly for the administration who gets some “walking around” money to sprinkle on various programs and projects in order to make some political “hay” before the next mayoral election campaign. Woot! Free money (for the Mayor) from the taxpayers.

    The Mayor is just running a shell game with taxpayer assets and monies. It’s clever, but is it really in the long-term best interest of the taxpayers here? The Mayor’s minions shout “yea-ah!”, but more than a few others are convinced otherwise. Obviously, I fall into the latter category in this discussion.

    In the end, it has become quite clear to me why the former Lt. Col. Ballard was never destined for promotion to full colonel. He can promulgate whatever fantasy he likes in his own published pamphlets, but high-level leadership just isn’t in the Mayor’s “game” right now. And, just saying it is just won’t make it true.

  8. I would say the same things goes back to you, varangianguard. Just beacause you think everything is a conspiracy and it is all about “pay to play” politics does not mean it is true. But if that is your perception, there really is no argument that is going to convince you otherwise. You’ve made your decision already.

    You can debate whether or not the policy decisions are the best decisions–and we welcome it. We tend to think the cries about privatization are odd since a few of the controverisal changes haven’t been moving a public service out of the City’s hands to be privatized but really have been changing the outside company conducting the service.

    But do you honestly think addressing the City’s infrastructure issues is not in th best interest of the taxpayers?

    • Paving roads on money derived from a 30 year loan or a 50 year deal is not in the best interest of taxpayers.

      As far as the conspiracy nonsense, that sounds like Abdul’s nonsense. Whenever he doesn’t have a defense, he just suggesting the allegations amount to some sort of conspiracy.

      • It is all speculation and we don’t buy it. Again, the reason you know who lobbies for companies is because the Ballard administration pushed for disclosure. Why would they do that if they are so evil and corrupt?

  9. varangianguard says:

    Ah, and I see that conjuring up the fictional comparison that “(I) think everything is a conspiracy” is meant as a less than subtle dig that my perception is flawed simply because I disagree with your own (learned, in your own opinion) assessment.

    But, for argument’s sake, let’s discuss “infrastructure” improvements. So far, this is almost completely ethereal in nature. In effect, it’s all partisan posturing and improvement by press release. Hardly new, or earth shattering news there.

    Still, I’m all for infrastructure improvements. It’s way past time that partisans of any stripe put down the magic wand of misdirection and lay out what is needed, why it’s needed, and what it might cost. This kind of work is painfully expensive, and worse (at least for partisan politicians) it is something that is taken for granted by the electorate, unless it’s broken. So, there is very little political hay to be made for the potential cost involved (politically speaking).

    My problem is that no one in the administration has committed to any concrete (excuse the usage) proposals as to exactly what is going to be funded, when it is going to be funded, and just how that improvement process is going to be bid out. Whether it was the second Peterson administration, or the current Ballard administration, I don’t see public service as being job one here. I don’t see where the administration is acting as the steward of taxpayer interests. In fact I perceive the opposite being true. I see where the administration leadership (a term I’ll use loosely here) is more interested in their own personal long-term self-interests, the majority of which I can see publicly is mainly political in nature.

    This is the very thing that I perceived to be the case during the second Peterson administration. The leadership (again, a term I am loathe to use here) expended most of their efforts in perpetuating their own employment continuity in or outside of politics, instead of concentrating on the business they were charged with safeguarding for the taxpayers. Sure, it is clear where that administration ended up, but the individuals sure seem to have landed on their feet on the whole.

    For me, it’s a matter of priorities. People who enter politics ought to be doing so in order to provide good stewardship for public assets and the common good. Whether it was former Mayor Peterson, or currently Mayor Ballard, I do no perceive this to be the case. You do. We disagree. But, if you want to have some dialogue, please do try to keep the fourth grade snottiness down to a minimum, mmm-kay?

  10. First off, it is hilarious for folks to complain about our “fourth grade snottiness” when finishing the sentence with “mmm-kay”.

    We’ve actually been pretty polite if you look back through our responses to comments and, frankly, we’ve been under attack. We’ve said it is fine to disagree and moved on to make our point.

    If you check out the city website, a lot of this information you are referencing is there. The proposed projects for 2010 for Rebuild Indy (funded by the Citizens utility transfer) can be found at http://www.indy.gov/eGov/Mayor/Documents/$55%20Million%20Investment%20List.pdf. (By the way, if you have a suggestion for a project, you can submit it on that site too. )

    We really do think the Ballard administration has made every attempt to be transparent. On any of the major things they have done, there is a page on the website with the City’s requests for bids and the responses. There were more than 20 responses on the Citizens transfer alone. They held 60 public forums.

    And for all the concern about who lobbies for what companies, the only reason we know any of that information is because the Ballard administration pushed for ethics reforms and forces lobbyists to register. If the Mayor really was doing all this for his own gain then why on earth would he push for a stricter ethics reform than the State of Indiana did?

  11. The Ballard administration has never seen a conflict of interest that it couldn’t ignore.

  12. varangianguard says:

    Dismissing my perception simply because it doesn’t “fit” your own Weltanschauung is juvenile, or if you prefer, bush league.. My ending my comments with mmm-kay was a nod to someone I rather think you knew fairly well. Further, your usage of the word “folks” is just about as “transparent” as it gets around this town. Frankly, I can only think of one person who favors that word in blogs. If this is just another lame attempt at justification by self-confirmation, then you “guys” have already lost me (not that you care, of course).

    Your idea of being “pretty polite” (notice the self-described qualifier, which leaves “interpretation” room) isn’t. If you want to have a dialogue, you cannot be dismissive of another’s argument simply because you don’t agree with them. Your problem is that “your point” is the only thing that seems to matters here. People criticize actions of people you agree with, so you either fault the critics (for whatever) or deny that a problem exists. Still, it’s your blog, so I suppose that you feel entitled. But, if you want anybody besides those who already agree with you to take this seriously, that kind of behavior isn’t going to be very successful.

    You may have forgotten this, but there were plenty of people in Mayor Peterson’s second administration who felt exactly as you do about the current administration. All I can say about that is, look where that got them.

    If you truly want to be polite and have a dialogue, I’ll play. But, if you are just looking to reduce your dissonance concerning the blogosphere criticism of your friends, utilizing blame and denial, then good luck and have a nice life.

    • Varangianguard, you really have no idea who we are. Like most bloggers, we aren’t well-known or particularly important. You wouldn’t have even heard of any of us if we did tell you our names. And we don’t think you are very polite either so we aren’t too concerned with your opinion on our etiquette.

      We welcome your comments and the debate. For the record, we never said Peterson’s administration was corrupt. We think it was ineffective in general and the current Mayor spent the first two years of his term cleaning up their messes.

  13. Slick says:

    varangianguard sounds like a very angry person. I feel for her.I really dont care who you are as long as you get the story out about the Mayors accomplishments..No Mayor is going tobe perfect,but our Maytor has done a great job in the neighborhoods.We are now getting new sidewalks, new streets and the Mayor is working with the clergy to make sure that the IMPD gets back on track.I cannot believ how many haters there are out there.Dont they remember how bad it was under the Peterson mess.

    Thsi new blog will give those of us who still believe in the Mayor a voice.This is even better than Abduls site.Between the two of you guys I hope that you can talk about the good things the Mayor has done and not listen to the haters like Ogden.That is one very angy man.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: