Saxton Continues to Dodge The Question: What is Your Plan For The State?

(SALEM) - Now I’m no politician, or reporter, and rarely do I have time to get into the middle of a debate over who should be Oregon’s next Governor, but while hosting a party Tuesday night, 20 of us, all undecided voters, started watching KGW’s Gubernatorial debate between Republican Challenger Ron Saxton and current Oregon Governor Democrat Ted Kulongoski.

One thing sure stood out to all of us, Kulongoski has a clear vision and plan for Oregon’s future, Saxton doesn’t, or if he does, won’t tell us what it is until after the election.

Now while Kulongoski has not been a real winner in most people’s eyes during his first term, Saxton is NO better.

The reporters continually asked Saxton for his plan for the state. He just dodged and bobbed around the question, blaming all of Oregon’s misfortunes on the current Governor and saying that everywhere he goes people want change.

Yes, Ron, they do, but if you can’t give us any ideas on where you are going to take us, then WHY are you any better than Ted?

You say that Oregon has enough money to live within it’s means, yet you have failed to answer any question on how you came to that conclusion, and how you would put more troopers on the road, more money for schools and health care, highways with current funding levels.

You say that the economy is bad and unemployment remains high. True. But if you were elected you said you would privatize some state jobs. So lets say for example you privatize DHS and the winning bidder says they can do the job with 300 less employees.

Ron, you keep saying what if this, and what if that, what about the future and what is your plan?

We praise both men for their stance that if elected they will do more to increase child support enforcement efforts.

Saxton says he will be a better leader than Kulongoski. How? No answer, other than he says he will travel to eastern Oregon more than the current Governor has.

It was like listening to a broken record, Oregon needs change, and a new leader, the last four years have been miserable in this state, and we need change, and I can provide that change.

Saxton even held up a book of some sort saying it was his plan for Oregon, and we could find it on his website. Well we looked twice for it, and guess what, it wasn’t there.

When it’s all said and done and it comes to our votes, we need to know WHAT a Governor plans to do to get this state turned around, not just the phrase “we need change in this state.”

Salem-News.com Top Stories

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

rewilding LA: Matilija Dam History and Ecosystems

One Killed and Two Injured in Shooting Near South Salem High School

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Henry Ruark October 21, 2006 9:30 am (Pacific time)

Freidn-Henry et al: No word-yet re your ID and emailer, so here's one ref. I'd send: "Plenty of Nothing"; Thomas Palley; Princeton U. Press; 1998; ISBN 0-691-04847-9. Subtitled: "The Downsizing of the American Dream and the Case for Structural Keynesanism". Palley is AFL-CIO Public Policy guru, but don't let that discourage you since hs is also world-famed economist.

Henry Ruark October 20, 2006 5:17 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Want to "see with own eyes" and hear with own ears, too ? Go to www.saxtonwatch.com. Nothing like direct experience to assess and evaluate character.

Henry Ruark October 20, 2006 12:58 pm (Pacific time)

Friend Henry: Difference is stark here...I document what I say. That's what cuts the line between b-button and researched and fact-based professional opinion. If you will send ID and emailer to Tim, gladly exchange PDFs on any factual materials you may have, and send mine, including OCPP studies and scads of solid reporting around state and nation on Oregon campaign. OF COURSE it seems one-sided ! How else when one adds up facts for rational approach !!

Henry October 20, 2006 9:29 am (Pacific time)

And of course all of the evasion, obfuscation etc. is all one sided, all Ron Saxton and your side is perfect... you could list the same adjectives for your candidate but of course you would not. Your one-sided approach to this issue is why you will have problems convincing me to change my mind...all I hear in anti Saxton. I want to vote for a candidate, not agaist one. I have listened to your candidate and I am not convinced after 4 years. I may not like the change if and when it happens, but at least I have an open mind about it. Should my candidate not win, I will continue to fight for no tax increases, less government etc. I will not stand for the status quo which you supposedly endorse.

Henry Ruark October 20, 2006 2:17 am (Pacific time)

Alan et al: Additional story-note: Just been reported that Ron Saxton has now developed a sudden distaste for anything flavored "cherry", and ror any further connection to "farmer".

Henry Ruark October 19, 2006 9:58 pm (Pacific time)

Alan et al: Tim now posting Op Ed which should definitely answer your comment completely/ Here's partial-lead; be sure to read completely for other links to further documentation. It has become completely obvious to all concerned --including every Oregon newspaper reader and tv-news viewer-- that Ron Saxton’s gubernatorial campaign has built evasion, obfuscation; distortion, misdirection, canny misstatement; and every other characteristic of media/message-preparation into a memorable demonstration of malign manipulation. Even The OREGONIAN’S own Edit Page columnist recently characterized that Saxton demonstration in these surely-accurate and unavoidably biting words: “...what may be the most dishonest media campaign in Oregon memory.” (“Truth in advertising ?”, David Sarasohn, OREGONIAN Edit Page 10/13 “See also” several Steve Duin columns over the past months).

Henry Ruark October 19, 2006 4:56 pm (Pacific time)

Anon: Missed yours re Measure 48. Have you seen the overwhelming reports from OCPP on which we did stories, and the inclusive damning materials directly from a similar research organization in Colorado ? After 12-yr. trial, Colorado citizens forced suspension of TABOR, birth-brother of 48, from same outlandish rich sponsors. If you have not read these materials, you remain basicall y ignorant; easily remedied if you send Tim emailer so I can PDF them to you -- as we did early on directly to Ron Himself.

Henry Ruark October 19, 2006 4:39 pm (Pacific time)

Alan: Now you are letting belly-button shape your words...feelings ain't justified opinion. Re "balanced" story, ain't no such thing, never was, always controlled by "surround"shaping writer and also editor. "Straight fact" only basis for solid report, since checkable. You have eyewitness account from Tim; you giving him the lie ? Nobody ever said it would come out 100 percent Gov-K, and it should not...plenty of good people believe in Saxton, problem is it is for wrong reasons, due to malign manipulation of fact, as reported in depth in Big O...then the "surround" captured group driven by other reasons than factual. Happens all the time; if you wish documentation can send last year's worth of four professional journals, take your pick of factual discussion within the profession. If that's not enough for you, fact is apparent of psychological reasons having little to do with rational discussion.

Allan October 19, 2006 3:31 pm (Pacific time)

Sorry guys but you are all going back to the reasons why you support one candidate over another...I could care less about those opinions and whether we agree or not. That article was as biased as they come and there are too many coincidences that are hard to believe. If its all true, then great, but no one could recreate the situation again if they tried. That alone leads to my being skeptical. I admit to leaning Saxton, but if I wrote an article like that, completely biased to Saxton, you would be all over me like fleas on a dog. Where is the story about the other side to this issue? Are you telling me there isn't one?Come back after the election. I will guarantee Gov K will not get 100% of the votes.

Anonymous October 19, 2006 2:54 pm (Pacific time)

Wow, the Oregonian endorsed the governor and most of the letters were in support of Ted. There's a shocker, since Portland has a Democratic slant. The point is that both of these guys are not better than the other -- the debate proved that. Any poltician that takes credit for an economic boom is just lying and if Saxton can really find waste, good luck doing something about it. All the Legislators will be in Hawaii. Overall my opinion of state government is low, and I am in support of Measure 48 simply for the fact it will make them do something for a change.

Henry Ruark October 19, 2006 2:26 pm (Pacific time)

Alan: Doing you and group disservice when failed to point out that you generalize results of selected, sharp, involved, interested group to all voters likely to do so in upcoming confrontation...that is elementary error any analyst learns rapidly, or leaves business. This is sharp gang, count on it, well informed since close to publication business, thus special case...but still indicative of general trend now observable widely. Live nd learn, I always say, emphasis on former and latter might happen anyhow, at 88 !!

Henry Ruark October 19, 2006 12:49 pm (Pacific time)

Alan: Did you mention bias ? Seems to me you appear to believe the Saxton fantasies perpetrated in such variety and depth ever since his attack on State workers to "open the show". IF you want other-eyes on this circus, seek out Sarasohn and Duin in OREGONIAN. Do you feel you see things sharper and better than that professional duo ? I did not happen to b e with Carmen and her group, but now you have Tim's word, too...so are you about to give him the lie ? We did, for Saxton, right here in website-print... without bias but brimming with documentation links...and there are some 50 more on my desktop here, too, unused as yet.

Tim King October 19, 2006 12:31 pm (Pacific time)

Allan, I can tell you for a fact that this happened just the way it is laid out. Maybe another group of 20 would have come up with different results, but you just can't get around the way Saxton has handled his campaign so far. I have learned in this life that people from both parties can be very extreme and non flexible, and we have to keep our minds open. If Ron Saxton started painting a clearer picture of his plans and methods maybe minds would change. In the meanwhile, it seems that only diehard Republicans appear to be buying his candidacy as an improvement over what we have.

Allan October 19, 2006 12:27 pm (Pacific time)

Henry, I totally understand where you are coming from. I even understand everything in the article. The bias comes from an informal survey of 60% democrats and 40% republicans and the 100% vote. And on top of it all we are to believe this was just a party of 20 women who happened to watch the debate. Sorry but there is too much for me not to believe. Too much not reported. Then the stories that I read in other papers do not come close to what was reported in this article. And none reported a 100% vote. If we are to believe that, then Gov K is going to get elected by a huge huge margin. My guess is even you do not believe that.

Henry Ruark October 19, 2006 11:32 am (Pacific time)

To all: Allan and Anonymous aare showing the ordinary understanding of stories by those who have never reported. The Carmen-report rings the bell from many similar situations for those of us whow have "been there, done that". IF needed, can send PDF's full of same level and line from national magazines, journals, newspapers, other media...just ID-self and send e-mail address to Tim. Fact is story indicates what may be striking turn-around stronger now that people "see with own eyes" demeanor and dimensions of each candidate.

Allan October 19, 2006 11:28 am (Pacific time)

Amen

Anonymous October 19, 2006 9:05 am (Pacific time)

Uh huh, sure you were all undecided. Kinda hypocritical to demand truthfulness in your column when you don't practice it yourself.

Allan October 18, 2006 10:04 pm (Pacific time)

Lets use some common sense in this...you expect me to believe letters to the editor in one of the most liberal newspapers on the West Coast...did anyone see who they endorsed...it was not Gov K. Anonymous comment was proving my point...most Oregonians are undecided, yet the vote of these ladies was 20-0...tell me again it was not biased. I have waited for leadership for 4 years and have yet to see it...I will take my chances on your unknown as its better than I have seen. For all who have commented...pick 20 random people...I am willing to bet not one of you would get a vote of 20-0 regardless of your choice for Gov. I understand we all have our own opinions, but the comments in that story and the vote was biased, like it or not.

Anonymous October 18, 2006 4:55 pm (Pacific time)

Allan. Wake-Up! Most Oregonians are undecided in this race because neither is better than the other. Even if they say they are going to vote for one or the other, it's not a sure thing yet.

Bruce A October 18, 2006 4:53 pm (Pacific time)

OK Anonymous Then you tell us what Saxton's plan is for Oregon if it is so clear to you! Other than he is going to priviatize state jobs, meaning people are going to lose their jobs, and his illegal alien stance that they should all be thrown out of the state, say good-bye to Oregon AG, becuase we all know good an well that there isn't one American, no matter how broke they are, that is going to go and pick berries, they'd rather go stand on a street corner or freeway off ramp looking for cash. Also Kulongoski wasn't much better in the debate than Saxton, but he has a vision and a plan, Saxton wants to get elected first then spring his plan on all of us. What if you don't like it, then what? Then you are you going to blame? Oh right Gov K.

Henry Ruark October 18, 2006 4:37 pm (Pacific time)

Allan: Check OREGONIAN report Tuesday a.m. re Letters...score was about 350 Gov-K to 4-Saxton re Big O endorsement. Given sample size, easy to accept Carmen's facts; given total stories re Saxton duplicity in Big O, impossible to question his approach, actions, behaviors, or attitudes. If you wish to make huge "leap in faith" - that's your privilege.

Anonymous October 18, 2006 4:27 pm (Pacific time)

You said, "Kulongoski has a clear vision and plan for Oregon’s future, Saxton doesn’t" You must have been watching this in the bathroom mirror as its 100% the opposite. Sorry folks, Teddy is Toast!!

Allan October 18, 2006 3:32 pm (Pacific time)

I find the story unbelievable and very biased. I do not believe they were 20 undecided voters. My guess would be 20 leaning democrats at the very least. When was the last time there was a debate by anyone, anywhere, where the vote was 100% in agreement. That alone leads me to disbelieve the story. Can I find the next 20 undecided voters?

Louise October 18, 2006 1:33 pm (Pacific time)

Good job Carmen -- If I would have been there it would have been 21 votes for Kulongoski!!

Matt Johnson October 18, 2006 9:43 am (Pacific time)

Fresh perspective, honest and non-assuming, very interesting piece, good work.

Anonymous October 18, 2006 7:56 am (Pacific time)

Great job Carmen.

Henry Ruark October 18, 2006 1:25 am (Pacific time)

Carmen et al: Appreciate your solid look-and-learn approach to debate, and fair-comment shared fully and openly with actual results from real people. That's value of democratic dialog, and reminiscent of Federalist papers when Colonialisms are removed. Thank you and others for honest, open appraisal. The pattern you detect and describe is one imposed in each of the key national races, purchased by those piles of corporate cash.

Bonnie October 18, 2006 12:47 am (Pacific time)

Good job Carmen! Thanks for sharing your info, compelling and thought-provoking. You go girl!

[Return to Top]