Representative Paton Heads to Iraq

Jonathan PatonI was surprised to read via a link on Drudge Report this evening that Representative Jonathan Paton will be heading to Iraq at the end of August (read story). Jonathan has been a friend of mine for about ten years. Together, we have been a part of a handful of young Republican gents who have ventured into Southern Arizona politics. Unlike Jonathan, my bid for public office was not successful.

In 2000, Jonathan made his first attempt to represent the east side of Tucson and Sierra Vista. He narrowly missed being elected but was successful in 2002.

As Jonathan heads off to Iraq so serve his duty as an Army Intelligence Officer, my prayers will be with him. He leaves in the middle of his re-election bid but I am confident that the voters will re-elect him for his tremendous dedication to service. Jonathan has my personal endorsement and in conversations with him he knows I strongly encourage his constituents to cast their vote for him.

May God bless and protect him as he heads to Iraq to serve in the great cause of peace and democracy for the Iraqi people.

Remote campaigning.

     In the absence of heavy polling sometimes you need to look at the little things to find out how a campaign is doing. Candidate forums do not usually win or loose a race but they are a great chance to talk face to face with motivated voters. 

     I brushed off the fact that Steve Huffman missed the Marana Chamber of Commerce forum back on May 18. Not all of Marana is in CD 8 and Steve was busy in the legislature pouring money into his bottomless-pit pet project known as Rio Nuevo. Plus it was May, why build name recognition early in a crowded primary? 

     When I read this article in the Arizona Daily Star I realized his campaign is in trouble. The forum was held in Quail Creek, a master planned retirement community just east of Green Valley. This is well within CD 8 and old people vote in greater numbers than other demographics. Apparently that fact is lost on the Huffman campaign. With 14 days until early balloting starts, Steve missed this forum. The event was sponsored by the Green Valley Republican Club and the Quail Creek Republicans. Not a good group to ignore when you are running for elected office and few of them have heard of you. (Steve served in the legislature about 1 hour drive north of Green Valley / Quail Creek area.) 

     Maybe Steve thinks his jumpy ads will save the day. Good luck! 

Don’t shoot the messenger.

     I know some of the readers of this blog are Munsil supporters so please read the title of this post carefully. 

     Len recently cited the Battleground poll from WSJ/Zogby.  He failed to mention anther recent poll done by Behavior Research Center.  The Zogby poll shows Len doing about as well as Goldwater in a race with Janet. Len was correct to point out that his numbers have moved a lot more than Don’s have. 

     The poll from BRC is more detailed. It shows a huge number of undecided in the Republican Primary (we knew that.) It does show Don doing better than Len against Janet, by about 10 points among likely voters. But both of them receive a drubbing in the general, Don losses 28% to 57%. Len looses 18% to 58%. It is still early; vote by mail is 14 days away, so there is some time. 

     The truly amazing number is how Len is doing in Rural areas and Pima County.  It is bad enough that Munsil trails Don 16% to 22% in Maricopa County. The numbers for Rural are dismal, Don 25%, Len 3%.  Maybe the poll is invalid because Mike Harris is polling 8% of Rural primary voters. The worst number for Len is the * that he received in Pima County. That means he did not get more than 1% of Republicans in Pima County to express an interest in his candidacy. Pima County is certainly not the center of the Republican universe in Arizona but it does contain 14% of the state’s registered Republican. There are many pockets of conservatives in the county and they would be receptive to Len’s message. 

     Add to this the fact that inside sources in the Goldwater campaign say it is just a matter of when Don turns in his $5 forms, not if. Yes Len got his forms in much earlier but as soon as Don’s forms are approved he will get the same check for $453,849. My guess is that not much of it will go toward political consultants and most of it will go directly into advertising, just a guess. 

     Speaking of consultants maybe when Nathan is not busy throwing solid conservatives under the bus he could earn part of his $6,000 a month and get Len’s numbers in Pima County above 1%. I would not recommend that Nathan personally visit Southern Arizona. Colette Rosati has friends outside of Scottsdale and they will never forget what Nathan has done. 

     I don’t have a horse in this race. Both Len and Don would have positives and negatives in their race against Janet. The biggest negative is Janet’s popularity. Never the less no one likes to spend money on consultatnts so they can get an * in a poll. 

Carolyn Allen Expenses

Here’s a link to the last financial report (June 30th) submitted by the Carolyn Allen campaign to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office: http://www.azsos.gov/scripts/cfs_committee.dll/TransDetail?CYCLE=2006&PeriodID=2&FILERID=200693319&ID=D

Voter guides.

     The Clean Elections voter guide has been arriving in mailboxes this week.  My observations are as follows. 

     Mike Harris is a fool for not sending a picture and statement.  This campaign is doomed for other reasons besides this but missing out on the pamphlet is a huge mistake. 

     One of the main issues in District 8 Senate Republican primary is abortion and neither candidate will use the word.  Allen give a hint when she mentions that she worked with the National Organization of WomenRosati only says that she earned the Friend of the Family award. 

     Despite his changing status as a candidate Russ Jones has a nice photo and statement. 

     The Democrats have no chance of winning in District 26 and Charlene Pesquieva’s lack of a photo and statement will not help. 

     Toni Hellon says she represents Saddlebrooke in Pinal County but at a recent forum criticized Al Melvin because he was from Pinal County and implied that he would not be able to represent Pima County.  I’ve got news for you Toni.  If you can represent Pinal Al is more than capable of representing Pima County as well as all of his district. 

     Hellon goes on to list campaigns that she has worked on: Bob Walkup, Jim Kolbe, Jane Hull, and John McCain.  With a list like that of moderate/liberal Republicans I guess that she has written off the conservative vote. 

     The conservative candidate for District 26 Senate, Al Melvin, gets right to the point with his opening sentence “For too long we have been electing Republicans who campaign as Republicans and then go to Phoenix and vote like Democrats.”  Very clearly stated as well as TRUE. 

     More on the house races later. 

A Response from Judith Connell

I received a response from Judith Connell which I will gladly post in entirety in the spirit of fairness. I will also apologize to Judy for impugning her pro-life values.

I do need to express my continued extreme frustration and disappointment with endorsements by pro-life / pro-family leaders (present and former) of candidates who oppose any efforts to protect life and the family.

Here is Judith’s reply:

Shane;

On first read of your blog of Wednesday, July 19th, my instinct was to dismiss the many errors, omissions and inaccuracies; however, after you apologized for the same offense regarding Nathan Sproul in your Thursday, July 20th blog, it is necessary to set you and the record straight.

First, I served Arizona Right to Life because of principles, convictions and values, which I hold dear.  In more than 23 years of involvement in the political arena, no one has ever questioned my credibility as a pro-life conservative.  For you to have done so makes you look foolish.

Did I take the abuse of Dr. Brian Finkel while picketing his office for weeks for money?

Did I run for the legislature against a pro-abortion candidate who won and was later convicted in AZ Scam for money?

Was money the driving factor that led me to manage one of Congressman Trent Franks’ earlier legislative campaigns?

Certainly I could continue to enumerate, but surely you must get the picture.  I’ve lived my principles. Money could never purchase them.  I have proven time and again my convictions regarding the pro-life situation. 

You hold my relationship and endorsement with Senator Carolyn Allen up as proof that my whole life’s work is invalid, and you are wrong young man; quite wrong.

I first met Sen. Allen when she and I served on a Governor’s Task Force on Teen Pregnancy Prevention.  It was there we found common ground.  We shared the conviction that preventing teen pregnancy went a long way toward preventing abortions.

It is precisely because I was willing to reach across the divide and work with an elected official who is pro-choice that progress is made.  The door was opened and we could find common ground because I was willing to listen.  Since I left that position, noticeably the door has once again closed.  Nothing has been accomplished.  Just as my wise Grandmother told me, “You attract more bees with honey than vinegar.”  You might want to give that some thought.  No one has made an effort to solicit Sen. Allen’s input and not an inch of ground has been gained.  When we approach those who are pro-choice, as is Sen. Allen, with an all or nothing mentality, we end up making no progress.

You seem confused as to my status at Arizona Right to Life.  I was Legislative Director for nearly 3 years, and Executive Director for six months, a vacant position I reluctantly filled for then Chairman, Laurie Tetzlaff.  I went back to lobbying for RTL as soon as the legislative session began and they found a new E.D.

Since you did not contact me before you wrote your original blog, perhaps this information will help you create the next one.  You made public many accusations.  Many of them have been answered. 

Since the entire tirade was based on my endorsement of Senator Allen, perhaps you might want to look at other pro-life elected officials and members of the community who are also supporting Carolyn’s candidacy over that of her pro-life opponent.  You might want to consider their endorsement, as well as mine, is based on the fact that Senator Allen is reasoned, well-rounded, and has a proven track record of representing all her constituents, not simply those who share her opinion on single issues.  She has mastered the big tent philosophy… something we should all strive for.

You owe your readers an apology and an explanation for the things you wrote about me.  They know my life’s work, and do not welcome your exaggerations, but if you are to be credible in your position, you need to print truth and facts.  You may well hold your own opinion on anything, but you are not free to smear a life-long soldier in this pro-life march while under the banner of Arizona Right to Life.

Judy Connell

Coleman Dahm & Associates
A PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMPANY

 

Blowhard blows it.

     See this story at ThinkRight Arizona blog for the latest on Pima County.

Did Carolyn Allen really say that?

I was digging through some transcripts of Horizon, KAET’s political show, and stumbled across this very interesting line of thought from the Senator in legislative district 8. I wonder how the East Valley Republicans feel about this.

This is especially relevant after the East Valley Tribune ran an article in which Representative Colette Rosati asserted that Carolyn Allen was closely aligned with Governor Napolitano. Here’s the proof from a 2005 interview – 17 months safely away from the 2006 Primary Election. In context, Allen was bemoaning the state budget:

These are kamikaze missions. There are people who are willing to stay through June and into July. I wonder how the public will feel if we shut down the government because these people are determined. This is not about the money, it’s about the policy. They don’t want her to have anything that she wants. They don’t — she wants Kindergarten, and I believe most of the public wants kindergarten, without vouchers attached to it. She wants the medical school. It’s $7 million. We just saw the amount of money that has come in. It was predicted that it would be about $37 million. It’s over $100 million, and next months the revenues. And it’s going to come even higher. If they cannot give us $7 million for the beginning of this medical school, it’s all political and it’s all about a bunch of people, in my opinion, that belong to the flat earth society. They basically meet in the house, but we have a little subset over here in the senate, and they are prepared to stay down here and they think they can run the same budget up over and over until she signs it. This woman does not bully, and these people are on a fool’s errand.

And they wonder why I keep saying that this woman does not have the temperament to serve in public office.

Clean Elections Debates are online!

For all those hardcore political junkies here’s a great link. Now anyone can watch the Clean Elections debate in the comfort of their own home. Here’s the link:

http://cleanelections.serveraz.com/

Dems launch frivolous complaint against Len Munsil

Howard Fischer, the roving reporter always looking for an opportunity to journalistically trash a conservative, wrote a story on Thursday in conjunction with Democrats trying to drum up negative publicity. Dems erroneously allege that Len Munsil spent more of his seed money than he had on hand in the bank.

Fischer writes:

He said finance reports filed by Munsil showed the campaign had spent virtually all the money it had by late April. And Munsil didn’t get his public financing until May 5.The reports also show the campaign had paid consultant Vernon Parker’s company $2,000 in March and $2,500 in May, but nothing in April. And consultant Nathan Sproul got $5,400 in February, $5,000 in March, $1,000 in April and $6,000 in May.

Waid ’ s complaint said that suggests two possibilities: The consultants gave away services in April when Munsil was out of money, which would be an illegal in-kind contribution, or they performed services in April knowing they would be paid when public financing came through in May. That, however, would violate laws prohibiting candidates from incurring debt when they don’t have money.

Sproul and Parker didn’t respond to questions about billing practices. 

 

Good grief! Did it ever dawn on the Dems or Howie that maybe no services were performed in April?

This reminds me of the old axiom I heard during the 1992 Democratic National Convention in which they characterized right-wing conservative Christians as people sitting around worrying and complaining that someone out there was having a good time. The one difference is that this time it’s the Democrats sitting around complaining that Len Munsil’s campaign is spending money it doesn’t have.

Did it ever dawn on them that maybe Len Munsil was out working the grassroots without the services of a consultant? Did they stop to think that maybe Nathan Sproul was dedicated during the month of April to getting the Protect Marriage Amendment on the ballot.

You know, it is possible to go out and campaign without spending a whole lot of money. All you have to do is ask Don Goldwater.

The issue here is that Democrats are looking for a story to go after the leading candidate for Governor. They figure why not file a “shot in the dark” complaint against Len Munsil and get some press from it. Howard Fischer is always available.

This is simply another case of Democrats looking to grow a story with willing media.

C’mon Howie, the next time Dems come to you, ask them for a little proof before you put pen to paper.  

P.S. – The last time I checked the Clean Elections Commission did not have any legal jurisdiction over how a company handles its books. I would have done the same thing that Nathan Sprould did except said, “It’s none of your business.”

P.P.S. – One final note. Ask anyone who knows Len Munsil and they will tell you that he is one of the most by-the-book men you will ever meet.