Tuesday, July 06, 2010

Both the Columbian and Thomas Edison verify it: Russell's claim of a college degree is fake.

.
Keep in mind the fact that my interview with the Columbian, DONE IN WRITING, did NOT say some of what is printed here.

But here is the entire entry, unfortunately limited to the not-well-read political blog on the website as opposed to being printed in the newspaper... like it should have been.
Jon Russell's degree

Did Jon Russell, the Washougal city councilor who’s running for an open seat in the 18th Legislative District, misrepresent his academic credentials to precinct committee officers?

Yes, says Kelly Hinton, who leveled the accusation at Russell last week on his Clark County Politics blog.

No, insists Russell. So we checked it out.

Russell allegedly told 18th District precinct committee officers that he had a two-year associate degree from Thomas Edison State College in New Jersey. The college offers degrees through correspondence courses as well as at its bricks-and-mortar campus.

The college confirms that Russell enrolled in courses there, but says it has not granted him a degree.

Russell says he has earned more than the 60 credit hours required for an AA degree. He told The Columbian he has sent for his transcript to prove it.

But he concedes that he never got around to doing the paperwork required to get the actual degree.

When he looked into it last week, he said, he learned he would have to reenroll as a fulltime student in order to apply.

Joe Guzzardo, spokesman for Thomas Edison, confirmed the policy. Not only that, he said, it would cost Russell $630 to apply for the AA degree under the college’s “reenrollment to graduate” policy. Until last March, he said, the cost would have been $2,332 for former students living out of state.

“In order for someone like Mr. Russell to finish, they would have to take advantage of the ‘reenrollment to graduate’ policy,” Guzzardo said.

Russell maintains that he never said he actually had the degree. “I’ve always said I’ve earned my degree,” he told The Columbian. “I’ve never said I obtained my degree.”

Nevertheless, he said Tuesday, “I have submitted a ‘request for graduation’ form with Thomas Edison to have my diploma sent to me.”

Russell says Hinton’s blog “is designed to do nothing more than to tear down my credibility” because Hinton, a former legislative staffer, backs one of Russell’s opponents, Ann Rivers, in the 18th District race. “He is trying to turn over every rock,” Russell said.

Both Hinton and Rivers confirmed that they are business associates in a political consulting firm. Rivers called Hinton “a friend.”

But she said she’s not behind Hinton’s blog attacks. “I don’t need to tear down someone else’s building to make myself look taller,” she said.

Hinton confirmed in an e-mail that he supports Rivers’ candidacy, but he said he began criticizing Russell when he was still a candidate for the 3rd Congressional District seat. Russell dropped out of that race in February and joined a crowded field for the open 18th District position.

Kathie Durbin

Unfortunately for the reader not in the know, this article is factually incorrect in ways that just mystify me.

In my blog or in my email to Durbin, I never alleged that Russell had told the PCO's of the 18th District that he had a degree. I made no note of that whatsoever.

What I told Durbin was this:
The evidence I have provided; that Russell has indicated his wife is a “physician” to the 18th District PCO’s, that he called her a ”doctor” in the Vancouver Business Journal and then changed the story to “family nurse practitioner” after I blogged about it and that Sarah Russell has advertised herself as a doctor at the Columbia River Gorge Medical Clinic in a newspaper owned by the Columbian, if I’m not mistaken, is not something I fabricated.
For whatever the reason, there was no mention of these allegations, which are as much a lie as Russell's fake degree.

And let's review the verbiage Russell was using on his website:
Jon’s experience in politics started as he was working on his degree in political science first at Vincennes University and finished his degree at Thomas Edison State College in Trenton, NJ.
CLEARLY this was meant to deliberately infer that he had completed a BACHELOR'S DEGREE, and NOT an AA.

How Durbin could confuse Russell lying to the PCO's about his degree and lying to the PCO's about his wife is just beyond me.

For those of us actually possessed of 4 year degrees, we recognize the major difference, parsed by Russell, between having more then the number of credits required for an AA degree and actually completing... and receiving... a bachelor's degree.

Russell knows that. Thus his Clintonesque, "it all depends on what the definition of "is," is response:
Russell maintains that he never said he actually had the degree. “I’ve always said I’ve earned my degree,” he told The Columbian. “I’ve never said I obtained my degree.”
Really?

So, this is the kind of representation Russell has to offer? One where we have to parse everything he says to figure it out?

Russell whines that my blog: "... is designed to do nothing more than to tear down my credibility” because Hinton, a former legislative staffer, backs one of Russell’s opponents, Ann Rivers, in the 18th District race. “He is trying to turn over every rock,” Russell said.

Well, the thing about credibility is this: If you don't lie, fabricate or exaggerate, then I've got nothing to write about... do I?

Unfortunately, the paper deliberately left out the FACT that I began nailing Russell's "credibility" as soon as he announced for Congress; instead of verifying that truth, relying alternately on the "I said I began criticizing Russell" when he announced for Congress, thereby deliberately failing to destroy Russell's position that my primary motivation for Jon Russell Watch wasn't my support of Ann Rivers, but instead, my opposition to Russell.

Typical.

And by the way, Jon.... I'm given to understand that you brought your own lies to the attention of the paper (Not that, since they read my blogs several times a day, they didn't know about them anyway) so I wanted to give you a hearty "Well done!"

So, while whoever wrote this has a fact check problem with a narrow-focused view with blinders, leaving out much of the other allegations which directly impact on Russell's increasingly non-existent credibility, this is, I suppose, better than nothing.

Barely. But this is, I suppose, what passes for "journalism" at the lazy C.

Cross posted at Jon Russell Watch.
.

4 comments:

Lew said...

Jon has been cautioned on his style of stepping on people and embellishing his resume', but it seems he doesn't listen.

Get the fork ready, he's done.

How juvenile to try deflecting attention back on those who expose him, much like he told someone recently that my mind was poisoned against him by you and Castillo.

Truth has a way of avoiding contact with Jon.

Gr8mochas said...

This kind of verbal gymnastics doesn't have to be offered by someone who legitimately has what they say they have and usually isn't. What is the difference between earning a degree and getting a degree? In most people's mind, nothing. If you earn a degree, most people assume that you have graduated unless you say, "I have earned the EQUIVALENT of an AA degree" which is perhaps what Mr. Russell should have said, but only if he completed the courses needed for the degree.

To say an individual leaves a Junior College with twice as many credits as are needed for an AA degree really means nothing. You can have 3 times as many credits as are needed for an AA, but #1) if they aren't all in the appropriate courses required for the degree you don't even have the equivalent of the degree and #2) just because they have all those credits doesn't mean they earned anything.

Secondarily, if a person were to earn a Degree (which means completing all the required courses, not just the number of credits) most people would consider that person a fool if they had just left the credits on the table and walked away without receiving the degree in writing. What would be the point of that? If you don't have the written piece of paper, you don't have anything. After earning my Masters, I couldn't have gone to the state and said, I have completed all the classes and earned all my credits, I have earned by degree, now will you give me my license? They would have said, "when was your degree conferred?". If it was never conferred, it is as good as not having one because I wouldn't have one. You can't do anything with just the credits...you have to have the piece of paper that says you completed the credits!

It's like verbal shorthand....we do it in communication every day...anyone in the healthcare business knows this. You say you have the flu rather than saying..I am achy, sniffling, sneezing and have a bad headache. Everyone knows what it means when someone says they are depressed. By the same token, when someone says they earned a degree, people automatically assume that you graduated and have the piece of paper.

So no matter how you look at this particular phrasing, what is the point of saying it unless the person wants other people to think they do have a degree? It is either a very poor choice of words, over and over again, or it is intentionally misleading. Patterns of over-exaggeration should be examined carefully...

It is too bad that political leaders, or wanna be political leaders reduce themselves to this level to obtain a position in government. People in this district have to ask themselves..."Do I want someone representing me who can't even represent himself honestly?" If this guy doesn't even understand that words mean something when you say them, why does he think he has the skill level to represent others with that level of mis-communication? It sounds as if he might need to revisit English 101.

Gr8mochas said...

Over exaggeration ceases to be unintentional when it becomes a pattern.

Even if you leave a school with 3 times the credits needed for a degree if they aren't in the courses needed for the degree, you don't have one. If you don't get the little piece of paper that says Associates Degree, you don't have one. It's pretty simple and most people know that.

Do you really want someone in government who doesn't know that, who has to misrepresent a two year degree? Geez! Think about it!

Lew said...

Jon's verbal dance is all too similar to Nancy Pelosi's October 2009 denial of letting the Bush tax cuts expire would be similar to a tax increase when she said, "it is not a tax increase, it is eliminating a tax decrease that was there."

I took a screen shot of Jon's About Me page in November 2009 where he said, "Jon's experience in politics started as he was working on his degree in political science first at Vincennes University and finally at Thomas Edison College in Trenton N.J."

Compare that to his now saying, "Jon's experience in politics started as he was working on his degree in political science first at Vincennes University and finished his degree at Thomas Edison College in Trenton N.J."

Some have been recently caught playing such word dances, most notably in regards to Military Service as was Connecticut's Blumenthal.

I see Jon's dance as no different.