Nathan Sproul accused of running dirty push-poll on behalf of Munsil.

Machiavelli.jpg      Hot AZ It Gets is reporting on an e-mail they received detailing allegations that Len Munsil ran an undisclosed push-poll against Don Goldwater in the beginning of August.

     The most damaging part of the accusation is the Munsil campaign’s payment of $2,439 to The Summit Consulting Group on 8-17-06 for “auto dial campaign message.” Summit reportedly conducted the August push poll attacking Goldwater. The fact that Len Munsil employs Sproul and paid his company more than $39,000 does not help either. Nathan’s reputation precedes him.


Comments

  1. RINOspotter says

    IF Sproul is guilty of these accusations and is as crooked as he sounds, maybe he’s really working (for someone?) to torpedo Munsil’s campaign from the inside? Munsil has got to be wishing he had never brought Sproul on.

    And there was that earlier rather bizarre public endorsement of Carolyn Allen by Sproul?
    Why? What motivated that?

  2. OK, Now it’s getting ridiculous.

  3. District 8 Goldwater supporter says

    Now you knew I couldn’t resist a post….a couple of days ago I said that I thought Constantine might be the one who was behind the well placed push poll regarding Len’s family.

    It really doesn’t matter which one of the three it is, Constantine, Chris Baker or Nathan. Google any of the three and….and Dirty politics pops up.

    Hmmmmm the kind of politics one might learn at the “Christian” coalition.

  4. Keep in mind that I was the Vice-Chairman of the Southern Arizona Christian Coalition up until right before things really hit the fan with Tom Grabinsky and and the Baptist Foundation. That’s when everyone bailed out and the organization has never been the same since…

  5. I am a conservative Republican who has not decided how to vote in the gubernatorial primary, but I am leaning Goldwater, because of the border issue, and because I actually was an object of the anti-Goldwater push poll.

    It did indeed have five questions. The first was innocent enough: who do I support for the Republican nomination for governor? Each and every remaining question was actually an attack on Goldwater. Not surprisingly, the same four lines of attack later appeared in Munsil literature.

    I asked who was paying for the call, and the person refused to answer, other than to say that Summit was doing the poll. As I suspect ed then, and as I know now, the lack of disclosure is illegal.

    Now when I hear the Munsil campaign complaining that this recent push-poll is illegal since the funder is not identified, my stomach turns.

    With Munsil both covering up his push poll and acting all sanctimous about this recent one against him, is there any wonder that his very recent interest in border security is a sham???

  6. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Don’t forget that first Munsil hired Nathan to run the Marriage Amendment, which he’s still doing… Hope this doesn’t hurt that… We need it to pass!

    Wow, District 8 Goldwater has really got a strange fascination with Sproul, Baker and Constantine… Why am I getting the feeling that if you opened up his/her closet you’d see newspaper clippings of those three all over the walls… Close ups of the eyes and stuff… Kind of creepy…

  7. Push polls are held right before an election, are targeted towards many people, and are intended to cause a large-scale turn of voters.

    Judging by the fact that this was done in late July/early August, and couldn’t have been too many people, if no one heard of it until now.

    I am sure Goldwater was not behind the push poll on Munsil, it was likely a homosexual group. And it sounds like Munsil’s poll was a message tester, if it was done that early. Accusing a candidate of having an illegimate child is a very different thing than testing statements about a candidate’s record, I must point out.

    Let’s remember the main goal. I support Munsil, but the fact is Janet must go, at all costs. Wild accusations help no one here, which is why Janet is on the 9th floor chuckling right now

  8. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Actually Josh, I don’t know what they’re teaching you at Munsil for Governor, but push polls aren’t restricted to right before an election. They can be used anytime for a variety of reasons. And while you didn’t hear of it, plenty of other people did… And testing statements about a candidate’s record when those statements are lies is either a push poll or a campaign trying to decide which lie will be most effective… Which do you suppose Summit was doing for Munsil’s campaign?

    As for getting Janet, I wholeheartedly agree. But since Munsil was the first to go negative (I’m not even talking about the lies, just the negative stuff), you might send him an email and ask him to stop. As a supporter of his, you might have better luck getting him to listen…

    Thanks for your testimony Witness… I too was leaning Munsil, but his mailer turned me to Goldwater…

  9. STS,
    Your comment on Dist.8 Goldwater gave me a good laugh – and it’s incisive – there does seem to be conspiracy-theorist paranoia there.

    But your most recent comment reflects an attitude more typical of liberals than conservatives – that you would withdraw your support from a candidate because of “going negative” on an opponent, regardless of the truth in the “negativity.” In the case of Munsil’s mailer, this “going negative” was completely factual and relevant. Len’s campaign would be irresponsible NOT to point out the contrasts between the two candidates.

    Don Goldwater did not claim to be pro-life until he decided to enter a race for governor in which a pro-abortion Republican wouldn’t stand a chance – anyone with an ounce of street-smarts should be suspicious of that. He has no documented history of fighting for pro-family issues, while Len has been doing so consistently since he was a college kid. Talk is cheap; let Goldwater prove himself – spend some time in the trenches for the pro-life cause – and then run for high office. This “Hey I’ve decided I’m pro-life, now make me Governor” stuff doesn’t cut it.

    Be true to your moniker, Truth Squad – value the truth above niceness. It’s the amoral left who recognizes no wrong except pointing out wrong; and it’s Len Munsil who has the proven track record of standing against them.

  10. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Thanks Gary… Actually, it wasn’t the pro-life stuff. I think Len’s got it wrong about Don on that, but he’s got reason to believe he is right, so he can play it that way politically and I wouldn’t drop him for that. You might be surprised that what cut it for me was his referring to Don as “Janet Napolitano’s Director of Special Events”. I forget which thread on here is was, but we really hashed through the issue. My opinion is that you can only twist the truth so far before it becomes a lie. I know Len and I think that in his heart of hearts he knew it was a lie and he didn’t want to do it. But whether it was ambition or just taking bad advice, he did it and he is responsible for it.

    Don wasn’t appointed by Janet and didn’t answer to Janet. Len’s comment is akin to making every state employee in the State Treasurer’s office “Janet Napolitano’s accountant”. It implies an alliance and personal relationship where there is none. It creates a deliberately false impression to turn voters against Don. It does not deal with issues, positions, agendas, or any legitimate campaign matter. He made up a job that didn’t exist and then said that Don was paid to do that job.

    Some people haven’t thought it was a big deal, others have said “that’s just politics”. Still, for others and for me, it mattered. Would it have been surprising to see some typical politician play fast and loose with the truth like that? Nope, and we might not have even held it against them. But the attraction of a candidate like Len, or Trent Franks, or very few others, is the sense that they are better than the rest. Once they prove to you that they are not, you might as well vote for the guy who is actually going to secure the border!

    Thanks for the post!

  11. Gary Nelson says

    STS, your post is well-done – you make a point I cannot help but agree with, then finish off with a challenge I can’t resist – “the guy who is actually going to secure the border.”

    I believe you are falling for the fallacy that the one who talks the toughest is the most effective fighter – one which Don, Pearce, and others hope to entrap many conservatives with.
    This includes tough talk about forcing cities to enforce immigration law. As a 27 year veteran of local law enforcement in this state, I can tell you that’s not going to happen, becasue it is a practical impossibility. The Munsil-Montgomery plan recognizes this, and provides for collaboration with law enforcement in planning and implementation, while Goldwater’s plan advocates forcing local police to do the state’s bidding. As many bureaucrats have learned the hard way, it is unwise to try to bully the police. And as every conservative should know, this level of state interference in local operations is contrary to our commitment to local control and rarely produces good results.

  12. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    In the interests of harmony, and wanting to avoid any harm befalling me (lest I be accused of bullying the police to my detriment – it sounded scary the way you wrote it), I shall respectfully agree to disagree. While you may quibble with one part of Don’s plan (using local law enforcement to enforce those laws), a real border fence, the elimination of public benefits, full implementation of Prop 200, and real penalties for employers who knowingly employee illegal aliens will go a very long way towards curing the problem… We might not even have to ask the local police to do their job if we can make it possible for the Border Patrol to successfully do theirs…! Then we’d all be happy!

    As for Pearce and entrapment, I really don’t know of anyone more knowledgeable on this issue in the state than Russell. Perhaps Tancredo at the national level, but I wouldn’t portray Russell as just talking tough to entrap conservatives. He passionately believes what he says and backs it up with real references, data, and quotes… If he thinks Don’s plan is best, I’m going to trust him…

    I think what we’ve seen with Napolitano, Richardson, Perry and all the rest, is that the notion that the states will just talk with the feds and “work things out” is fantasy. The feds are going to be driven to doing something because the people are fed up. If they take too long, the people are going to elect people at the state level to fix the problem.

    Glad you were up to the challenge though! I knew you would be. 😉

  13. Gary Nelson says

    STS, I’m sorry if I frightened you…surely not my intent. The only danger any elected official trying to bully LE is in is of frustration – lots of it.

    And also with all due respect, I must say that your characterization of Russell Pearce as one of the most knowledgeable about immigration proves my point: You have been taken in by his endless bloviating and bogus statistics. Pearce has made numerous ridiculous assertions about this issue, including that illegals have “cost $133 billion in job losses” and “80% of violent crime involves illegal aliens.”(From his post in The Arizona Conservative, which I rebutted in the same blog). To anyone with even a passing acquaintance with sound research on these issues, these statements are ludicrous on their face. We are at basically full employment at this time (roughly 4.6% unemployed), in spite of the millions of undocs working here. The crime stat is so ridiculous it hardly merits comment; suffice it to say no credible law enforcement source has ever stated any such thing. I believe Russell knows better – but he also knows many voters will simply swallow this nonsense whole instead of thinking critically. And yes, he is passionate on the issue, but that may be the problem – emotion often clouds the rational mind. Someone with a big personal axe to grind is the last person whose judgment you want to trust on a complex issue. Pearce’s endorsement of your guy is just one more indicator that Munsil is the man!

    Speaking of scary – Russell & company’s angst against immigrants is reminiscent of other elected officials in history (a German Chancellor comes to mind) who have used minority groups as scapegoats…passion of this kind is a dangerous force.

    If you want sound research on this issue, check out the Pew Research Center or Heritage Foundation.

    I appreciate the respectful dialogue STS, especially considering I don’t even have a cool blog name…maybe I’ll have to think one up.

  14. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Get a cool name, before we pick one for you… Never a good thing when that happens…

    Not scared anymore, thanks for clearing it up.

    BUT! The distinction between legal immigrants (who I, Don, Russell, et al love) and ILLEGAL aliens is paramount. Casual comparisons between Russell Pearce and Adolf Hitler is beneath you and an awful reflex. Looking at the crime statistics, the stats on the overcrowding in our schools, the hospitals shutting their emergency rooms along the border rather than go bankrupt, etc. makes it clear that this is a real problem. We even know who is causing it.

    Secure the border, get rid of the criminals.
    THEN, get a real guest worker program and everyone, from Russell to me to Don to everyone will be fine with that. We have needs, they want jobs, but the system as it exists right now represents an actual real threat to our nation, our laws, etc… If even 5-10% of those who come across do so with bad intentions, that is around 1.5 MILLION bad people. You’ve got the law endorcement background. What price does society pay (financial, emotional, personal) for the actions of 1.5 Million criminals? Let’s call them lazy criminals, only 10 crimes per year. That’s 15 Million crimes per year. If we each only get hit once, that’s 5% of the country a victim every year…

    Nope, gotta secure the border and get the criminals out…

    Your German chancellor would have disagreed with us…

  15. Gary Nelson says

    Hey now, isn’t it a blogger’s right to choose his own handle? Be patient w/me brothers!

    Let me clarify please – I did not mean to imply that Rep. Pearce is anything like Hitler as an individual. I greatly respect and appreciate Russell for his principled stands on many issues, as well as his service in the police profession.

    What I do maintain is that the kind of angry rhetoric and demonization of a people group Pearce and other hardliners engage in is exactly what was directed at the Jews and other minorities in pre-Nazi Germany. We must be very cautious not to stir up this kind of sentiment -it is dangerous and obfuscates the real issues. Much of the broad-brush generalizations Russell, Tancredo, et al have used against the illegal immigrant population is simply untrue and unfair, and they must be confronted. No good cause is ever served by deception or slander.

    Conversely, I really appreciate your reasonable estimate of how many undocs are actually criminals – and I agree we need to get rid of them. Just as the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants is important, the distinction between aliens who are actually dangerous criminals and the vast majority who are only guilty of unlawful entry/remaining is also critical. Most indocumented people are decent, hard-working folks who jumped the fence because they were desperate to make a better life for themselves and their families. I daresay most of us would do the same thing if we had been in their situation.

    Everyone but the lunatic left agrees also that we must secure the border, and get the criminal aliens out (or in custody), as you said. Bill Montgomery is a seasoned prosecutor who knows how to actually do this, and his criminal alien prosecution unit concept has great potential for success. Again, please note that the Munsil-Montgomery plan provides for professional law enforcement input and collaboration. It’s a plan that might actually work.

Leave a Reply