«   |   »

Probst Won’t Debate Benton

by lewwaters

Tim Probst and Sen. Don Benton

Tim Probst, hoping to unseat 4-time Senator Don Benton has been making a lot of noise, slamming Senator Benton and raising malicious claims, the same tired old malicious claims raised election after election against Senator Benton. Democrats seem to hope that now, boyish faced Probst can make the allegations stick and impress voters in the 17th Legislative District he is the better candidate to represent them.

Issues seem to allude Probst in his usual negative campaigning, not even taking a public stance on the largest issues affecting Southwest Washington, the CRC & Portland, Oregon’s financially plagues light rail being forced into Clark County.

Stepping back and looking reveals what every voter needs to see, that Tim Probst is not who they need for State Senator in the 17th.

Tim shows this now as after all of his negative campaigning, in violation of the very ‘Clean Campaign Pledge’ he made a fuss over his signing, he will not even meet Senator Benton for a live debate, moderated by former 18th Legislative District State Senator, Joe Zarelli to be hosted on Couv.com.

Monday, September 17 saw Linda Carlson, of Couv.com contact both Probst & Senator Benton with an invitation to select a suitable date from a list of dates & time ranging from September 25 to October 3 with the note the debate would be hosted live and then made available throughout the campaign.

Linda received back from Tim Probst’s campaign,

While the invitation to the COUV.com debate is appreciated, Tim will be unable to participate.

Thank you,

Morgan

Morgan McClincy

Campaign Manager

Elect Tim Probst

While Couv.com is portrayed negatively by the Columbian and Democrats, since they do not favor Democrats over Republicans, their history of video debates has shown to be fair and even handed, not edited to favor either candidate. Questions are not loaded, but address issues the Columbian often doesn’t as they favor those issues.

Senator Benton replied,

“It is extremely unfortunate that Probst has refused a debate, especially when all he has given us so far is negative campaign lies. I am available that date on my calendar, so lets just book it. 3:30pm on Thu, 9/27.”

“I do have other times available and would be happy to accommodate Rep. Probst’s schedule, I think this is important for the people to see our differing views. Please ask him if any of the other dates will work for him or does he just not want to participate in a debate at all?”

Senator Benton will readily debate Tim Probst, but the appearance is that Tim does not wish to debate unless in a venue favorable to him over Senator Benton, giving voters a skewed view of candidates.

It is unfortunate that Tim Probst seems to feel his boyish looks qualifies him over Senator Benton, who has faithfully served the 17th District for 16 years. But boyish looks do not inform voters on Probst’s stand on issues. This blog revealed in the past that Probst isn’t open and up front on his stand on large issues and now, he does not want to appear with Senator Benton to give voters a clear view of each, presumably unless the debate is skewed to his favor.

Clearly, Tim Probst is not who the 17th Legislative District deserves.

Posted on September 19, 2012 at 12:01 PM in 17th Legislative District   |  RSS feed |   Reply   |   Trackback URL

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

31 Comments to “Probst Won’t Debate Benton”

    
  1. CZ
    September 19, 2012 at 12:09 PM

    There is only one answer to this….DEBATE HIS EMPTY CHAIR and have a party over it!!!

  2. Dan
    September 19, 2012 at 5:12 PM

    He won’t debate Don because it would look alot like take your child to work day.

  3. Mike Dalesandro
    September 19, 2012 at 9:31 PM

    Senator Benton, it’s unfortunate that your campaign is focused on whining and suing Tim Probst rather than explaining to the voters why you should be re-elected.

  4. carolyncrain
    September 19, 2012 at 9:59 PM

    All I can say is that it appears to me that some of the incumbents are running a little afraid of any debate where-in Senator Zarelli would be the moderator. Moeller won’t accept the offer made either claiming he has already debated with me at the couv. Truth is Wylie declined from that 49th house forum and it was not a debate. So this begs the question why? Is Sen. Zarelli a strong enough insider to be a super scary moderator to anyone who is way too liberal and can’t comprimise? Is this a “my way or the highway” type of mind set from the progressive liberals on the far left? Is it possible that the fact that they define themselves as Progressive Liberals not as Democrats when they are introducing themselves becoming uncomfortable? What are they afraid of?

  5. lewwaters
    September 19, 2012 at 10:05 PM

    Sorry Mike, but Benton has a real record while all Probst has is malicious claims tried before that went nowhere. He is running a smoke & mirrors negative campaign in violation of his much touted signing of the Clean Campaign Pledge.

    Funny thing about that lawsuit too, apparently it concerns Tim as he made sure to send word on it our to the media, trying to validate his malicious claims that the Washington State Wire already showed specious.

    Perhaps Tim should be who be explaining to voters his qualifications instead of sitting back and depending on Argo Strategies in Seattle to front attacks.

    Tim might start by letting voters know his stand on important issues and not ducking them.

  7. Debbie Peterson
    September 20, 2012 at 12:32 AM

    Maybe the following will help clarify this for you, Mike.
    I have had occasions to go up to Olympia and have observed Don Benton on the Senate floor. He is impressive. His depth and breadth of knowledge makes him the “Go to” guy in Olympia. When the Democrat Senate couldn’t get their own budget out of the ways and means committee, it was Don Benton who reached across the aisle, worked with three fiscally responsible Democrats and got a budget through. That is why the Democrats hate him so much. He did what the Democrats couldn’t. His bills to protect children are unmatched. The real story here is that Tim Probst doesn’t have a record to run on. In September, up through the 12th – Tim Probst did not receive one local contribution. That is significant. This is because Tim’s answers and Representative votes are determined by whether or not it will get him re-elected, not whether or not it lines up with his or his district’s values. As I said before, he has no record to run. His constituents get that – and that’s why there is no local support.

  8. Larry Patella
    September 20, 2012 at 3:22 PM

    I don’t know about the rest of you folks, but if I was Senator Don Benton, I would go ahead with the debate and put an “Empty Chair” where the young and ill informed Timmy would be if he was ready to represent the people. Speaking of Timmy, I know another Timmy, the one who was “Against Bridge Tolls Before He Was For Them”

    Larry Patella

  9. Mike Dalesandro
    September 20, 2012 at 8:30 PM

    Benton is way off message….he is spun. The polls must be coming back with some scary numbers.

  10. lewwaters
    September 20, 2012 at 10:33 PM

    LOL, you keep believing that Mike 😉

  11. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 9:03 AM

    Clarification: won’t debate at Couv.com. No candidate that opposes a Madore supported candidate should ever lend any validity to that venue. Period.

  12. Craig Sayre
    September 21, 2012 at 9:22 AM

    I emailed Tim asking if he would be willing to debate Senator Benton on couv.com, a Columbian video, or CCTV. So far, he hasn’t responded.

    I supported Rep Probst in the last election and would have supported him in the House race this time. I like Tim and I think he’s done a pretty good job as our representative, but for some reason he chose to go up against Sen. Benton whom I also support. I asked Rep Probst to debate Sen Benton in a venue that I’d have access to (the above list). I hope he will debate him. I let Tim know that I’m leaning towards Senator Benton because, as I indicated, I think he’s done a good job for the 17th, but I haven’t made my final decision yet.

    As far as “no candidate that opposes a Madore supported candidate” not appearing on couv.com – I truly hope those candidates aren’t really that ignorant. That would be like saying a Republican candidate should never appear on a Columbian video as it would ‘lend any validity to that venue’. Ignorant. Period.

  13. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 10:33 AM

    Not even apples and oranges, Craig. Madore’s behaviour, including lying about managing Couv.com, manipulating interviews in progress through an ear piece on the interviewer, and ambushing candidates after their interview is inappropriare. To even consider that a venue owned and operated by an extreme right wing conservative candidate might be even the least bit objective is ignorant. Period.

  14. Craig Sayre
    September 21, 2012 at 11:12 AM

    If those allegations are true, then you must think it equally inappropriate the way Brancaccio ambushed Madore?

  15. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM

    When did that happen, Craig? Oh, that would be never. Documenting public behaviour is not an ambush, Mr. Sayre.

  16. lewwaters
    September 21, 2012 at 2:44 PM

    Ah yes, good old Greg Owens, still smarting from having his clock cleaned over the baseball scam, here to spew more bovine scatology.

    What little Greggie does not realize, or he does and intentionally misrepresents it, is that although Madore owns Couv.com, he hires people to manage it. But little things like facts allude Greg.

    He applauds any conservative treated ill by the Columbian and cries like a baby if liberals do not get a pass.

    Greg Owens, a true legend in his own mind.

    And, don’t forget, he is the “token Republican” at this work, who backs RINO’s and Democrats, mostly Democrats.

    Pfffttttt.

  17. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 2:52 PM

    Before attempting to defend someone, Lew, perhaps you should check their public statements on the issue. It really makes you look foolish when you don’t.

  18. lewwaters
    September 21, 2012 at 2:58 PM

    Perhaps you should sit down with someone before you hate them, Greg.

    You’ve been invited and refused each time.

    You only impress yourself while the rest of us get a good laugh off of you.

  19. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 3:19 PM

    Again, Lew, hate is your word. Opposing someone politically doesn’t denote hatred. I certainly do not hate David Madore, but I will do what I can to stop his further corruption of our communities.

  20. Craig Sayre
    September 21, 2012 at 3:51 PM

    Greg – view the tape. It’s easy to find on The Columbian web site. The question regarding Mielke was clearly out of context with the rest of the interview. It was meant to be a ‘gotcha’ question, but it failed.

  21. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 4:01 PM

    An additional question kn an interview is not an ambush, Craig. Madore wasn’t even supposed to be in the building because he lied when he stated publicly he wasn’t involved in the interviews. When, in fact, he was directing them through an ear piece on Victoria Taft. Then, afterward, he tried to corner Moeller. Moeller was smart enough, though, to leave Madore in the corner holding his privates. That, Mr. Sayre, is an ambush.

  22. Craig Sayre
    September 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM

    You have an interesting way of interpreting things Greg. As far as the rest of your post, I have no idea of what you’re talking about, nor am I interested in 3rd party ‘hearsay’.

  23. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 4:43 PM

    Of course you aren’t. Why bother with the truth when it isn’t convenient. But then, you won’t follow up on it, because some truths just aren’t helpful, are they, Craig?

  24. Craig Sayre
    September 21, 2012 at 4:51 PM

    I’m sorry Greg, but what don’t you understand about the term ‘hearsay’? If you have evidence I will review it. You haven’t offered any evidence to anything you’ve posted here. I’m guessing that leaving ‘Madore in the corner holding his privates’ is a euphemism, so I won’t ask for the video clip, but what about the rest of it? Where’s the evidence backing up your claims in your 10:33 post?

  25. lewwaters
    September 21, 2012 at 5:26 PM

    No Greg, hate is your unfounded actions against someone you never sat down with.

    You spew your claims and never back them up, never document, never provide links, just more hate.

    You were spewing it even before David Madore announced his candidacy.

    Oppose whoever you want, but try being factual and honest, for a change.

  26. lewwaters
    September 21, 2012 at 5:30 PM

    “he was directing them through an ear piece on Victoria Taft.”

    Provide proof or back pedal, Greg.

    Funny, you’ve never met either Madore or Taft, you weren’t there, you won’t accept invites, you won’t go to U.S. Digital or Couv.com, online of their studio and now, then you make wild claims.

    Prove your claims or they will be regarded as baseless, just like 99% of the rest of your hateful rhetoric.

  27. Greg Owens
    September 21, 2012 at 11:07 PM

    Very simple you two…ask them yourselves. Why aren’t you willing to do that? I am not going to get someone fired over political stuff.

  28. Craig Sayre
    September 22, 2012 at 7:45 AM

    Greg – you seriously expect people to run down unfounded rumours they read on the Internet? Rumours whose source is a diehard partisan? Not likely.

  29. Craig Sayre
    September 22, 2012 at 7:51 AM

    Anyway, Lew’s post is regarding a debate between Probst and Benton. And Probst still hasn’t answered the question I asked him several days ago.

    I suspect Lou Brancaccio’s smear in today’s “Press Talk” was designed to take the pressure off Tim. I don’t think it will work Lou. Obviously you’ve been reading Lew’s blog again – bad habit to break isn’t it?

  30. Greg Owens
    September 22, 2012 at 9:09 AM

    Not unfounded, Craig. See, this is the problem with you and Lew. You fight for and defend your gods even when the information has already been addressed by them. It really makes you look foolish.

    As far as the debate is concerned, there are venues being discussed, and it really isn’t up to you to decide for either of the candidates what those venues should be.

    And again, anyone who thinks that a venue that is owned and operated by an extreme right wing conservative candidate can be the slightest bit objective just doesn’t have all their wits about them.

  31. lewwaters
    September 22, 2012 at 5:36 PM

    No Greg, it is incumbent upon you to prove your allegations, or we regulate them to garbage can where they actually belong.

    You are notorious for your unfounded allegations and smears and when challenged, tell people to go look them up for themselves.

    That is why you are a joke. How can anyone take anything you say serious when you never source or document anything?

    I think an old book says something about bearing false witness. Maybe you should check it out.

    

Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

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

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: