As I read the Toledo Blade article written by Jim Tankersley, I had the same response to myself as when I watched Bill Hormann talk about this on WTVG. "Okay...that's a start".
What the article doesn't mention that I think is important is that the years it is going to take before any of these children who meet the other qualifiers is even going to take place.
The math is questioned but not enough, if the numbers touted by Learn and Earn are false (which we already know they are) then simple logic follows that "if" every child qualified for these scholarships once we get beyond the top 5% (2012 I believe) there isn't going to be enough money to follow thru on what Learn and Earn is promising.
Then of course the whole issue of should we have a constitutional amendment that is created basically to help a select number of gambling company owners profit. It's obvious how important it is to them since it's being reported:
As of last week, Learn and Earn had dropped some $1.3 million onto Toledo airwaves. That's more than any single candidate or committee on the fall ballot, and it's close to the $1.7 million that was reserved for Ohio's hot U.S. Senate race.
Learn and Earn spokespeople continue to demonstrate they can't be honest about anything:
"Everybody's covering this thing, warts and all," Mr. Caputo (Learn and Earn spokesman) says. "Just because we don't put it into a very brief ad ... that's not a valid criticism."
Sorry Mr. Caputo, but I'll tell you the same thing I told Todd Hoffman over and over again before he switched over to working for the Ohio Democratic Party...You are being dishonest, you are being misleading and if there was one shining example of why campaign advertising in Ohio needs to be looked at? It would be because of your group.
I should also add, after hearing Linda Chavez Thompson, of the AFL-CIO speak at the UAW Local 12 event for the state candidates about how we need change in Ohio and that it wasn't about turning red or blue it was about doing what was right that I am very disappointed that the AFL-CIO would support Issue 3. It goes against the message that was displayed on the wall behind her as she spoke, "The purpose of the union is to seek the truth and obtain justice".
Keeping Your Belongings Safe Through Storms
-
Years ago almost every house was built with some sort of shutter, whether
designed as storm shutters or for security. Granted, most windows during
those d...
13 years ago
5 comments:
Thanks for this post, Lisa Renee, especially the stuff re: Chavez. I'm appalled that the AFL-CIO is endorsing this and, furthermore, I'm saddened to read in the PD that Eric Fingerhut was at Cleveland City Hall, apparently to endorse Issue 3. I have an email out to him but haven't heard back yet. I have great respect for his intellect and integrity so I'm extremely curious to know how he's come to support OLE.
I try to not be a one issue voter, however I have to honestly say that I am taking a serious look at anyone who comes out in support of Issue 3 and it is something pass or fail that I will remember.
I'm all for voters making an informed choice realizing that I'm not always going to be in the majorty. However, to me, supporting Issue 3 sends the message that you agree with the way they have handled this campaign and no one could say it has been honest or even accurate.
Well, while we're on the topic of honesty and accuracy, let's talk about Governor Taft and his goon squad preventing the release of the Regents' professional staff analysis showing that Issue 3 is in fact a likely solution for Ohio's higher education crisis.
The educators at the Board of Regents found the claims of Issue 3 supporters to be true, while the Taft appointees opted to stay clear of the debate. Until now--those appointees are now dealing with pressure directly from Taft to ignore the educators and pretend the report never happened. The Board may in fact come out against the Issue now under Taft's pressure, despite the support within the Board itself.
By the way, you can read the suppressed report on my coalition's website: http://www.ohiolearnandearn.com/Draft_Analysis.pdf
I said you were being dishonest which you are, and I said you are being misleading which you are. I did not call you a liar. I have to say I have taken umbrage with quite a bit of what Learn and Earn has done thru the course of this campaign.
The information you are putting on your ads is dishonest, and it is misleading. You know as well as I do that the numbers you are reporting as available for college education isn't accurate, and you also know this won't be open to all of Ohio's children, only one's that meet certain standards.
Now, if the opposition comes out with equally as dishonest and misleading information? I'll point it out. As for your comment as to believing Ohio voters are intelligent enough to not fall for a blitz of 30 second ads? I'd suggest that if your organization didn't feel it would work they would not be spending millions to promote an inaccurate message.
I've made my position clear from the very beginning, if gambling is to be made legal in Ohio and if our constitution is going to be changed it should be based on an open, honest, method of communication, not one that skirts the truth and provides as little fact as possible to try to sell something that no matter how you slice it will benefit the owners of those race tracks the most.
Thank you for stopping by to comment, however I also know just like Todd, you are paid to promote this position. I'm not being paid to support either your side or the opposing side. I made the mistakes of falling for the false promises before of how there would be full disclosure that the "branding" would cease and the facts would be presented. I'm still waiting for that to happen, so while I did not and would not call you a liar? I don't take back the statement that the message you are promoting is dishonest and misleading. I'm sure you are a very nice person in real life, however I take issue with the way Learn and Earn has and continues to be promoted.
It sure has gotten quiet in this thread of late.
Why do you suppose that is?
:-]
Post a Comment