RAB: Bill Todd's campaign can't be trusted about "Pay to Say" scandal (and then admits he consulted for the campaign)

Matt Naugle blows a gasket and says that Bill Todd's campaign doesn't know what it was saying in admitting that Naugle was a consultant early in the campaign.  From both sides of Naugle's mouth:

" I think it is quite difficult to consider me a former consultant for the Todd campaign. A Todd campaign employee may have said otherwise when he was illegally recorded by BSB, but all I really did was sit in on a couple of meetings. I have never met that campaign employee, and he probably had no idea what I did or didn't do for the campaign."

Does anyone believe that Naugle can sit through a campaign meeting and not say a word?  Hey, Matty, you know what you call a political operative who attends strategy meetings of a campaign?  That's right, a consultant.  And I wonder if the rest of the conservative blogsphere thinks it's completely irrelevant that you've turned RAB into a Todd astroturf blog just like you did for Blackwell given your early relationship with that campaign.  I bet they don't.

"All I really did was sit in on a couple of meetings."  Isn't that like the verbatim defense used in the Iran-Contra scandal?

Naugle also thinks he could do more to defeat Coleman at RAB.  So, there you have it, he made the conscious decision not to go official with the campaign, but instead use RAB as the mouthpiece for the Todd campaign.  And I think it's just adorable how you really think Bill Todd has a snowball's chance in hell.  It's almost as charming as your hero worshipping of Ken Blackwell as the GOP's next great candidate (again?)

Then there's this nugget:

 BSB may never cry to their readers about the Patriot Act and wire taps without being total hypocrites. Nor can the Ohio Democrat Party oppose wire taps of terrorists, but support wire taps of campaign employees.

Naugle, god, I'm so sick of explaining simple definitions to you.  There's a huge difference between a warrantless government wiretap when neither party knows is being listened to or recorded and a perfectly legal recording of a telephone conference when one of the parties is knowledgeable and consents to the recording.  Linda Tripp ring a bell?  And, of course, Naugle forgets that the reverse of his argument applied against him is equally as (in)valid.

And, the new Naugle classic:

"RAB isn't radical."

This from the same RAB administrator who has claimed that having sex or physically abusing your own pet should be your constitutionally protected property right, Jim Crow and discrimination laws should be declared an unconstitutional infringement of private property rights, the 13th and 14th Amendments be damned, and of course, voting rights should be tied to wealth with the more affluent members of society have more voting power than poor people. 

And, of course, when you have people like Scott Pullins applaud your ethics, get the freakin' hint.

Matty, you still haven't responded to one key allegation from us.  Did you, or did you not, post on RAB as "jamesrhodes" during the Blackwell campaign?  How hard is that?  Of course, if you can't see yourself as a consultant despite shooting video and sitting in on meetings for a campaign, maybe that question seems like quantum physics to you.