Here’s a Question

Will Ricci makes an interesting comment to my post on Mr. Crowley’s self expression:

… I think it’s a golden opportunity for those of us who are actually concerned about our state’s below average educational quality to show what the other side (those who don’t care if kids fail, as long as their check clears) really thinks about taxpayers and the children they use as pawns. He can be our new poster boy / duck!

Those few prime billboards on I-95 outside Providence run just under $10,000 for a month. Bus stops and other billboards are much less. How much would Anchor Rising readers be willing to throw in to make sure that Mr. Crowley’s message to Tivertonians is conveyed to all Rhode Islanders?
And perhaps more importantly: Any of our lawyer readers have a notion of whose permission we would need to use the photo for such a purpose?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Greg
Greg
13 years ago

I’ll gladly contribute $100. As for the photograph, it’s owned by the photographer. Let the lawyers argue the rest.

Jake4ri
Jake4ri
13 years ago

I’ll contribute what I can!
Greg’s right. The photo belongs to the photographer. It’s news worthy and depicts Crowley’s public feelings through his gesture and he evidently is in view of the public with witnesses. Not really much different than shooting a naked Brittney Spears which did not need her permission. As celebraties, of which Crowley I am sure thinks he is one, are news worthy subjects and can not expect privacy, especially in view of the public.

Monique
Editor
13 years ago

I’m in for $100.
Looking forward to getting some legal input on the promulgation of this picture. Technically, Crowley is not a public person in the way that an elected official or, say, Paris Hilton is. Therefore, it is possible that his permission would also be required.
Though after hearing about some of his exploits, it certainly would be interesting if the matter went to trial.
“You attended the debate wearing the face of … who, Mr. Crowley? And is it true that this was not a singular instance? Did you not expect, Mr. Crowley, that a certain notoriety would accrue to such behavior?”

mikey
mikey
13 years ago

Put me down for a c-note.
Then we can get a picture of love’em & leave’em Jerzyk and the kids in the barrio he doesn’t have.

Will
13 years ago

Of course, if we don’t want to offend public sensibilities, we can always cover his finger with a symbol or something … maybe a duckie? I wonder if that billboard which Sue Stenhouse used to use with “Our Most Recent Product” on it is available. What’s Rhode Island’s main product? Craptacular public education! Maybe a cheaper alternative in the interim might be setting up a website, ala patricklynchsucks.com or patrickkennedysucks.com. Hal Mayer used to make those great. However, he now happily lives in Idaho. Patsy strikes me as a person with a short fuse, so it just might be enough to get under his skin. The thing that always seems to get lost in these arguments are that teachers in Rhode Island are already well paid. They make far in excess of the median income for the state, get public pensions, 3 months vacation, and 6 hour workdays, and what do we have to show for it? Instead of always talking about levels of pay increases, we should be talking about reducing the number of teachers, making sure that they are proficient in the subjects they teach, and switching to merit based pay — like every other job on earth. If any private sector business dumped as much good money after bad as we do in our edukayshunel system as we do here, they wouldn’t be in business for very long. The only reason why this scam has been able to go on for as long as it has is that the public sector unions feed off of the public treasury, which they seem to perceive as infinite; not from privately derived funds. It’s not infinite, we-re massively in debt, and it’s about time they learn that lesson. I would very much be in favor of Tom Wigand’s idea re… Read more »

michael
michael
13 years ago

Here we go… Public sector unions consist of people. Tax paying, hard working people with friends and loved ones who are not public sector union members. Our special interests are ourselves, just as it should be. Anybody with a healthy self-image and a desire to better themselves and their family shares the same philosophy. Our very livlihood depends on the health and solvency of our employer, the municipality we work for. I’m not “picking the pockets” of my children who work in the private sector, nor am I “feeding from the trough” provided by my neighbors. I’m not “stealing” from my parents, who paid taxes all their lives. I’m trading my sweat and knowledge for compensation, just like everybody else. Take a look around you. Society is crumbling. The education system is being fed children whose thirst for knowledge no longer exists. Blaming our educational systems failure soley on the teachers is giving the other half of the equation an unfair break. I guess it’s never the fault of the people who refuse to learn, or refuse to make education a priority in their household. The way the system works, without a union, or some sort of orginization, public sector jobs would be filled with minimum wage earners with no benefits at all. Imagine the chaos that would ensue. Quality people are needed to run the government services we pay for. Getting rid of the government is not the answer. I don’t have the answer, just an opinion now and then. For now, I’ll pay 9 1/2 percent of my pay to fund my retirement, a municipal pension, just as public employees pay their social security. I chose a proffession that allows me to collect half of my pay after 20 years of service. I won’t apologize for it, nor… Read more »

Will
13 years ago

Sure, unions consist of people — and they derive their pay and benefits from a much larger group of people who don’t receive those same benefits. I believe that is inherently disordered. There’s nothing wrong with healthy self-image, but I have a problem when the servant gets better treatment than the master. Who’s working for who? Virtually no one in the private sector gets a defined benefit pension anymore, because the market simply no longer supports it. Public sector employees receive money from the public treasury and they pay a portion of that back in taxes. Therefore, in purely economic terms, they are a net drain. While I admire the work of people such as corrections officers, police, firemen, and EMS workers (great job on the book, by the way), that doesn’t grant them a carte blanche to exact tribute from the public at a time when they can’t afford it. In a truly free market, people are paid exactly what their employment is worth. I want people to be paid fairly. I certainly don’t mind that people in potentially dangerous professions, such as I mentioned above, get paid better than say, a teacher, since their pay is commensurate with the risks involved. Risk inherently would demand more money, because it’s a risk. People with greater skills would receive greater pay. I understand that in the private sector, corporate interests can occasionally overreach, and so can unions which may represent some or all of their employees. However, there is a huge difference between the public and private sectors. In the private sector, if unions demand too much, companies fail. If companies are too cheap, they won’t retain employees. When given a choice, people are free to choose. I have no problem at all with private sector unions, so long as… Read more »

Mike Cappelli
Mike Cappelli
13 years ago

Will,
These union hacks have been brainwashed. Notice how they all say the same thing, with the same perverted logic. It is central planning and central thinking. Just like socialists.

Andrew
Editor
13 years ago

Michael, Let me respond to two aspects of your comment… 1. Justin was very clear that he was aware of the “moment of stupidity” for at least several days before he posted it. He only decided to post after the local union president (Mullen, not Crowley) made a statement saying that what goes on on public property between a public official and the head of a public employees union has no business being reported to the public. Apparently, those of us not in a union or on the school committee or in the administration are to be kept in the dark about what’s going on, until everything has been decided. Contrast that response to the response to the controversy that your own local was recently involved in. After Local 799 caused a bit of a stir with a protest plan that some considered inflammatory, the union stepped back just a bit from its original plan, then stood out in front of the public to take on all comers and clarify the issues. That’s not the way of the union in Tiverton, which seems to be saying that criticism of its actions, no matter how counterproductive, is out-of-bounds, and is more interested in isolating and beating down the public officials who make the decisions, rather than in explaining its case to the public and making progress towards an accommodation that works for everyone. That is a legitimate source of public frustration. 2. What you say about parental involvement is why many of us hardline soft, cuddly conservatives advocate for changes in the structure of education that would allow parents and students greater control of their education. We believe the government should be reducing rather than erecting barriers that help citizens make the best choices for their families. As Julia Steiny wrote… Read more »

EMT
EMT
13 years ago

“There’s nothing wrong with healthy self-image, but I have a problem when the servant gets better treatment than the master.”
And therein lies the problem. You think you’re better than the people who’ve dedicated their lives to your safety and well-being. Your elitism is dripping all over my screen.

Monique
Editor
13 years ago

lol

Ragin' Rhode Islander
Ragin' Rhode Islander
13 years ago

Crowley is a poster child – it all begins with the diploma mill colleges of education – and he’s an “activist” of their ilk. He probably started out as one of those clowns that we all used to see when we were in college, parading around in a black beret, Che t-shirt and pining for the 1960’s so he too could finally have his right of passage for radical macho in large “demonstrations” and “marches.”
“Most of the critics of the academy are conservatives or libertarians, but even the left-of-center E.D. Hirsch argues in ‘The Schools We Need and Why We Don’t Have Them’ that academics in schools of education have harmed young people by promoting progressive dogma rather than examining what works in real classrooms.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/07/AR2007120701618.html

Show your support for Anchor Rising with a 25-cent-per-day subscription.