Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Mugging the Public II

Official Ohio Learn and Earn Blog » Ohio Learn and Earn Committee Response to Ohio Council of Churches Statements--There's a lot of this "mugging the public" going around these days, this time by Ohio Earn and Learn. I'm glad Gloria and I didn't sign the petition in the first place, because I certainly would not have known the name of the young man who approached me at the West Side Market and told me he was getting $1 for each signature, and he said he did believe in what he was pushing, because now he could go to college. He was in his mid-teens. He had been conned, and he was unwittingly trying to con me.

Just because they have this blogsite listed in their sidebar on Ohio Earn and Learn does not constitute my endorsing their specious arguments--I don't. They never asked permission. They assume too much, in many, many ways, and they need to be taken to task. This is a massive con.

We have to start talking about responsibility and truth in political matters, just the same as we require full and honest disclosure when it comes to things like contracts and finances, and we need to exact penalties on liars and public-relations con men and perhaps even bar them from the business of speaking to the public on matters where the public would put their trust in what is spoken.

The Ohio Earn and Learners are selling their fellow citizens down the river. They need to be regulated. They need to be sanctioned. They need to be held to a minimal standard of truth.


  1. Tim-

    I am a bit surprised; as you seemed to be happy that Gloria's blog was on my blogroll when we met at Meet the Bloggers. I typically publish a blogroll on all of my blogs. I had a similar list on the Hackett blog. My link to you is not meant to be seen as your endorsement of Ohio Learn and Earn anymore than it is an endorsement of your blog by OLE. It's just a simple hat-tip to the blogs I read. I can certainly remove the link if you would like.

    On the question of taking responsibility for truth, I think this works both ways. Fieldworks, our petitioning company, does not pay per signature nor do they employ anyone under 18 years old. Thus your statements cannot be true.

    I actually think our campaign has been more open to the blogosphere than many previous campaigns. My first task when I started this job was to hold a Meet the Bloggers event. Since then, I have made myself widely available to questions and criticisms. If you disagree with my views, that is fine. But I am not being untruthful by stating my side of the issue.

    If you have questions, ask them. Make your argument and we can debate. However, calling people “con men” never furthers any type of intellectual discourse.


  2. Todd, I wasn't happy at all that Gloria's blog was on the "OLE"! blogroll, especially without anyone's asking her permission or even having a prior relationship of mutual respect. We waited to see whether such an atmosphere of mutual respect might develop. From my point of view, the way you guys are running the OLE! campaign make the cultivation of any mutual respect well nigh impossible, so you can remove the reference to TIM FERRIS right now, and I'll let Gloria speak for herself, if she wants to make a point of it.

    On Fieldworks, I'd submit that my statements are true, and that the petition-solicitation company is not in control of its operation.

    Finally, there's not much point debating you guys either; I think our attorney friend Roger Bundy has already made a sufficient case for your being twisters or distorters of the truth, or for your being uninformed yourselves as to the basic framing of the proposed amendment. There are sins of commission (lying and being untruthful intentionally) and omission (failing to discern or being wilfully ignoranct); Todd, any way you cut it, you guys are falling short of the mark when it comes to full disclosure, delivered in a balanced and easily understodd format. That is the big point, and there's nothing to gain in arguing the smaller points. There's no chance for "intellectual discourse" with people who don't hold to the verbiage and spirit of the basic amendment. For some reason, the story of B'rer Rabbit and the Tar Baby seems to have some application here for me. I must go review it.