Carl Seel comes through

Click to enlarge


Carl Seel’s second mailer hit the mailboxes of District 6 voters about the same time they were receiving their early ballots in the mail. With an endorsement from Rep. Pearce for his stance on illegal immigration, running as a team with strong incumbent Rep. Sam Crump, and an expose on phony Republican Tony Bouie, who has been chalking up powerful endorsements from Rep. John Shadegg and others, Seel may just be able to pull off a win this time.


Comments

  1. I am out of ideas for pseudonyms says

    Unless Crump helped pay for this, it’s an expressed advocacy piece paid for by candidate A to help elect candidate B. That’s illegal, and I hope Clean Elections has something to say about it. It says it was paid for by Seel, not Crump.

  2. Kerrie R. says

    I received a call from Rep. Clark stating Seel is a liar. He also stated that Seel distorted Clark’s record/positions last election. Has clean elections been contacted about this? This sounds serious, Pseudonyms.

  3. Pseudonym, Kerrie,
    It is even worse. Sam Crump, an honorable man and one whom I support financially in his political endeavor has been linked by a fiscally derelict to an even worse character, a wife beater.
    (We now have that as a bonafide fact in form of a copy of an official court record just published courtesy espresso pundit and something widely distributed in Mesa.)
    Sam Crump told me, quite some time ago, he will be running on his own good name and strength only. I talked to him just now and he assured me he has not given permission to Mr. Seel to connect to him in a form and fashion as is indicated in Seel’s mailer.
    That confirms what Representative Clark stated.
    Seel is desperately trying to hitch his lame horse to another wagon.

  4. Desperate move by a desperate candidate. Crump should do the right thing here and condemn Seel for implying an endorsement he doesn’t have.

  5. I spoke with Rep. Crump at District 6 meeting. In front of others, Sam told me he ws NOT endorsing or running with Carl Seel. Sam Crump is running on his own. This feeble attempt by Mr. Seel is a move of desperation. Later today, another ‘bombshell’ will be out. Stay Tuned!

  6. Wow, the Seel haters are out in force this morning! Wasn’t it just a couple of days ago that Horst was bragging about a door hanger that linked Bouie and Crump, even though Crump has publicly stated that he does not want Bouie to win? Hypocrites all!

  7. Y’all really don’t understand Clean Election rules, do you… There’s nothing in this piece that hasn’t happened 100 times before. I think you’ve got the aluminum foil wrapped a bit too tight.

  8. Yep – that John Shadegg, he’s a real liberal to endorse Tony Bouie. Or maybe he looked at the choices and realized that Bouie who was not only an All-American Football Player at the University of Arizona, but also has a Masters from UA and an MBA from ASU was a better choice than a carpetbagging wanna-be politician from California who can’t even hold a job long enough to pay his mortgage.

  9. Or maybe Tim, you don’t realize. The mailer I got about Bouie and Crump said it was paid for by 3 different organizations. The mailer I got from Seel was paid for by Seel. It told the voters to cast TWO votes — for Seel and Crump. Has anyone looked to see if Seel claims his mailer was an IE for Crump — not allowed anyway.

  10. Kerrie,
    I am on my way to the Clean Election Office. I will get me a copy of the rules. Sam has assured me now for the second time he is running just by himself and he has not given permission to Seel for Seel to link himself to Sam Crump.
    I will study the rules and if I need to, we will seek an official opinion on the matter, even if we have to go to court.

  11. Howard Levine says

    I just talked to Sam Crump. He told me that while he is not endorsing Carl Seel, his is voting for him. He also said that Tony Bouie would not be a reliable conservative vote in the legislature.

  12. nightcrawler says

    Geez Horst,

    You must really dislike Seel. You have very aggresive in this matter. Not like you. What did he do to you ?

  13. Bob in DV says

    HOUSTON! We have a problem.

    I just peeked at the CCEC’s record of contributors to Sam Crump’s 2008 Campaign.

    Looks like Bouie has some company in taking handouts from the LeVeckes & McCain supporters.

    Crump is NOT the conservative he pretends to be, since he turned in the names of these donors himself. Sam is the treasurer and campaign director of his own campaign, so there is no one else to blame a typo on.

    January 3, 2008:

    $100.00 from Carl LeVecke, COO LeVecke & Co
    $200.00 from Jason LeVecke, CEO LeVecke & Co

    January 4, 2008:

    $100.00 from Margaret LeVecke, Marketing Director LeVecke & Co

    November 20, 2007

    $390.00 from Mark Miller, VP Hensley Distribuing – Cindy McCain’s family Co.

    November 11, 2007

    $390.00 from Stan Barnes, President Copper State Consulting – Behind Payloans 400%APR and FOR Proposition 200.

    November 9, 2007

    $390.00 from Doug Yonko, VP Hensley Distributing – Cindy McCain’s family Co.

  14. Bob,

    Come on, arent’ you being a little tough on Sam, he took the donations for OTHER reasons.

    So I guess we can expect Seel to put a hit on Crump now?

  15. Perpetual Slow Motion says

    It’s an IE issue. Seel did the same thing in his Clean Elections statement in the guide we all just got in the mail. You just cannot spend money to influence the outcome of an election unless you report it as such. Nice guys sometimes break the law. David Smith was one of them and look what CCEC did to him after he won.

  16. Bob in DV says

    Tom,

    What a great point you bring up.

    If, the Seel supporters are truly followers of a strict code of “One Way Only….My Way or the Highway” conservatism, then they have no choice to revoke their endorsement of Crump. Immediately.

    1 + 1 = 2

    Crump + LeVecke $$$ = A Pro-Illegal Crump!!!

    2 + 2 = 4

    Crump + LeVecke $$$ = An Open Border Crump!!

    4 + 4 = 8

    Crump + LeVecke $$$ = An Amnesty Crump !!!

    8 + 8 = 16

    Crump + LeVecke $$$ = Bouie + LeVecke $$$

    The math does work.

  17. O.J. Simpson says

    Carl Seel, endorsed by a wife beater. He has my vote

  18. Tony Bouie, endorsed by a man who hot tubs with naked teens and defends child predators. And unlike an accusation that is refuted by the wife herself, Horst’s buddy is in prison.

    Do you guys really want to play this game? Because I can already see what the mailers and TV commercials would look like!

  19. Elmer Fudd says

    An accusation refuted by the wife now that was first made by her in a legal document signed under oath. One of her statements is a lie. The question is which one.

  20. Boy, I hope that some of you so called Republicans who are active sympathizers for the illegal aliens have some energy left after the Primary to at least give tacit support for our Republican candidates. However, history says that the liberals in the Party like Jeffy, Horst, Betsy, Jane, etc. vote democrat in the general if they do not have the votes to win the Primary. It is a recurring theme every two years.

  21. John Q,

    I think that instead of being called “so called Republicans who are active sympathizers for the illegal aliens”, you should spread the word that we are, indeed, something else. You’re way off base.

    Next time, try calling us “Republicans who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid and laugh at those who do.”

  22. I need some education here. What position on illegal immigration gets the “good housekeeping seal” of approval? Is a candidate required to pledge to round up and deport every single illegal alien that is living in Arizona? Is there any distinction to be made at all between those that come here illegally to do more illegal things, and those who come here, and attempt to assimilate and succeed in a legal way? If we treat all such individuals as deportable scum, what incentive do any of them have to behave in a manner that comports with the rules of civil society? And how should these efforts to rid our community of illegals be balanced against the rights of latino citizens of this country who will be asked to show their identity card, their social security card, or will be pulled over when they pass through a “sweep zone”. Or what about businesses who must confront the dichotomy of employer sanctions if they hire illegal aliens, versus federal anti-discrimination laws, in which they cannot discriminate in hiring based on race, gender or creed? Can’t some flexibility or path be sought that addresses these dualities without attracting the scorn of “plank and platform” R’s?

    I want our immigration laws enforced, our border sealed from illegal crossings, and criminals incarcerated and deported. But in the context of the political races, how far must a candidate pledge to go in order to avoid being tarred by the “open borders” brush?

    I understand that political discourse is not subtle. But lawmaking is, and I want lawmakers who believe strongly in what they believe, but have the capacity to execute on their beliefs and are not seeking election only to give themselves a stage to aggrandize their own political profile.

Leave a Reply