A powerful letter from Jay Bilas (ESPN college basketball analyst, former star men's basketball player at Duke, holder of both undergrad and law degrees from Duke) in the most recent Duke Magazine:
A true leader has the vision and courage to recognize what is right, especially in the face of adversity, and fears not the consequences of unreasonable response. A true leader needs not the benefit of hindsight to make clear the right path. From March 2006 to date, President Brodhead’s mishandling of the challenges presented has proven him incapable of effectively leading Duke into the future.
While President Brodhead can point to a few ineffectually communicated words here and there for a feeble claim that he “emphasized” the protection of the rights of Duke’s students, his claim fails the laugh test. The vast majority of his words and actions, and in many cases his silence, emphasized an aura of guilt of the students and of the university. From the beginning, President Brodhead abdicated his responsibility as Duke’s leader to stand up for fairness and truth. Instead, President Brodhead chose the path of political expediency. He failed to effectively counter factually inaccurate and inappropriate statements about Duke and its students, failed to forcefully speak out against procedural irregularities, and failed to take appropriate action in response to repeated attacks upon the due process rights of Duke’s students. That is unacceptable.
If such failures in leadership are not enough, for the same reasons that President Brodhead forced the resignation of lacrosse coach Mike Pressler—because confidence in his ability to lead had been compromised, and a need to move forward in a new direction—President Brodhead should resign or be dismissed. And, based upon [trustee chair] Bob Steel’s letter of April 11, 2007, in which Mr. Steel stated that the board agreed with the principles President Brodhead established and the actions he took, the resignation of Mr. Steel and any board members that acted in lock step with President Brodhead are also appropriate.
Jay Bilas ‘86, J.D. ‘92
Charlotte, North Carolina
The opening section of the second paragraph is an incisive critique of Brodhead’s after-the-fact claims of upholding the presumption of innocence.
Any chance that Brodhead was a puppet with Steele holding the strings?
As I've said before, one of the great ironies of this case is that Pres. Brodhead, had he boarded the Truth Train from the beginning, would now be being courted for high political office -- minimum: a cabinet post in the next Hillary or Obama administration. Instead, as I have said, he is now looking at the certainty of being fired (or "resigning") within two years. History is not kind to the craven.
btw, no chance of letting us see the comments from yesterday?
You go, Jay Bilas!!
How long do you think it will take for Jay to be interviewed about his position on the ESPN talk shows? I think, at the very least, Mike & Mike ought to get him on the Hotline during the morning show....
Columbia University President Bollinger
President Bollinger of Columbia
I've changed by view on having the Iranian tyrant speak at Columbia. Watch this introduction and you will see leadership.
Dr. Bollinger it turns out has controlled the medium. By the way my college student son sent this to me.
Can any imagine Brodhead doing anything at all similar to this introduction?
I didn't think so...
Outstanding, Mr. Bilas. Unfortunately, I see little evidence that Duke's trustees have the requisite backbones to do the honorable thing and discharge Broadhead, and to resign themselves for enabling his administration and its policies. Paging Hank Brown . . . now that you are winding up your work at CU, you may have another opportunity.
Unfortunately, my impression is that more universities are trying to follow William Chafe's obsolete playbook and promoting diversity for diversity's sake, (only the correct sorts of ethnic and gender diversity, please!) rather than revisiting the problems created by the culture embodied by the G-88.
An articulate, clear and concise letter from one of Duke's better known alums.
I'm not sure this was actually printed in the Duke Magazine as they said they had so many letters that most had to posted to the website. That is unfortunate because most readers of the Duke magazine won't see this outstanding letter.
First paragraph sounds like it was written by Yoda. The rest is OK, although some on here will probably criticize lawyer Bilas for not speaking up sooner.
Excellent letter, Jay.
It's nice to see a fellow alumnus with a pair.
Couldn't agree with you more.
Perhaps we can also rescind Brodhead's directive to gine AAAS full departmental status.
I think we should place all these political-advocacy, lightweight studies into 1 department, called Laughingstock Studies. No budget. Next to the latrine. I hear something . . .
Come on, Wahneema--FLUSH!
As a 1971 graduate of Duke, I am proud of Mr. Bilas' letter and wholeheartedly agree with his position; I am also shocked that the magazine actually printed it.
Short and sweet and to the point.
This blog and UPI clearly point to each and every instance in which Brodhead had an opportunity to lead and failed to do so. At every critical juncture he chose to simply follow the mob rule of the faculty and abdicate his duty to lead. He is an intelligent man; it is without doubt that, upon reflection, he can recall each of those moments where he could have stood firm for due process, the presumption of innocence, fundamental fairness and simple human decency and did not. I suspect that he now shudders from the memory of each of those loss opportunities to be a leader. As an intelligent man, he knows that history will not be kind to him.
Fortunately he is ONLY the president of an elite university and not an emergency room doctor, a military officer, a first responder or anything else that absolutely and always requires true leadership, courage, insight and integrity.
I remember you so well.
What a great guy!
I hope that Jay Bilas communicates this position to another former Duke basketball player ... Rick Wagoner, Trinity '75 ... who is also a current BOT member. I'd be surprised if the two had not been introduced in the past.
I also think its about time that someone start giving recognition to the hard work that NCAA athletes at Duke put into not only their sports, but also their educations. This is not to belittle any other extra-curricular pursuits, ... but team athletics teaches one a great deal about hard work, commitment, discipline, fairness and life. Oh, and yes, teamwork.
Recall the faculty dufus who proposed that lacrosse at Duke be demoted to a club sport status. This is just one of at least 88 reasons to say ...
Wow. Now that's speaking truth to power! I always hated Duke basketball, except for Jay Bilas. Always fair and intelligent. What a stud in every sense of the word. (Except that one sense, I mean, I don't know anything about that).
I just posted (Duke grad). You did not mention that Jay is a basketball analyst for ESPN, and played on Duke's basketball team for 4 years.
Jay Bilas is not exactly an alum without standing. He is one of the most visible Duke alums, and he has not been a loose cannon during this affair.
Now that Bilas has spoken, I wonder who will speak out next.
Finally, a voice of reason, judgment, clarity, and candor. And from a former Duke "jock" as well. Too bad Bilas isn't the Duke President or on the BOT. They could use him about now.
He is right but it will take a wrecking ball to get them out of Duke.
Along with Steel and Broadhead I think the resignation of Mr. Alleva would be highly appropriate as well.
I got my Duke mag yesterday and didn't see that, but it's possible I overlooked it (but not terribly possible, since I thought I'd read everything about the lacrosse topic that I saw in the issue). Is it only on the web page?
Regardless, it's a great letter! I wish more well-known alums would follow in his footsteps. As ardent as I am in my views about Brodhead, I don't think I'm one of the VIP-type alums that they're worried about.
Peggy Harper '74
Yes, it's only on the web.
Eighteen months later - Where was Bilas when ESPN was crucifying the team and defendents on a regular basis for over a year. Is Lester not with ESPN?
Munson is currently with ESPN--but for the duration of the lacrosse case, he was with cnnsi.com.
I think our friend Mr Brodhead is in a prison of his own making.
If our military were as competent as our college administrators, today Saddam Hussein would be meeting Osama bin Laden in the White House.
Kudos to Jay...great ball player, commentator, and now leader. Thank you for saying, as a highly visible Duke grad, what so many have failed to.
Now, who bells the cat? How is the obvious and necessary change to be made, or do we just "move forward" as the guilty seem to desire?
ES Duke 1990
Someone like Grant Hill needs to speak out.
He always had a sterling reputation and was much more of a panoramic personality.
So to speak.
(But will he?)
Gawd! How refreshing to hear stuff like this after being assaulted by the crap issuing from Broadhead and Steel these many months. Do you suppose anybody who counts is paying attention? I doubt it.
I agree, with respect to the first paragraph.
More than being written by Yoda, it tends to read contradictory to itself. I mean, he basically says that people who act on instinct instead of waiting for more solid ground make good leaders.
Its inclusion in a letter concerning this particular case, one where much of the damage was done by people who rushed to judge, is awkward.
Overall, I liked the firmness and the tone. No beating around the bush. Way to go, Jay...Even if you and Dickie V DO think that everything Duke does on a basketball court is a thing of beauty.
Off Topic - Munson is being ripped by football.com for his writing in the Vick case. Is there any hope that Lester has finally exposed himself to the public?
Jay, get the party started!!!
The Bilas letter is truly outstanding, but it also reveals the problem here: Steel et. al. are the only ones who can fire Brodhead, but the process would have to start with Steel firing himself. Since Steel is an official of the Bush Administration (undersecretary of the Treasury) I have a hard time believing that he would accept responsibility for his actions and do the right thing.
Oops, according to the gang of 88 this is supposed to be a right wing website! I sure hope KC doesn't delete my comment for political reasons...
I believe someone mentioned this article earlier, but there was not much discussion. Like Brodhead's actions beginning in March 2006, he exhibited strikingly (and eeriely) similar behavior in this incident at Yale
Brodhead's Earlier Rush to Judgment
Defenders of Brodhead are often quoted as saying things like "he's an intelligent man," or "he's a truly nice guy." Perhaps. But he is a failure as a leader and, based on the facts of his performance in this incident at Yale, Brodhead's failure of leadership might have been predicted.
Dang, Bilas hasn't played basketball at Duke for 20+ years but he can still take it to the hole. Talk about in your face!
Sad thing is Brodhead didn't even have to lead, if he had just said "we are not in the law enforcement business, we are in the education business, we will honor our contracts with our customers, continue with our business and let the legal system take care of their business" he could have just ridden out this mess. No season had to be cancelled, no coach had to be fired and he could have asked the faculty to abide by the handbook.
In other words, just do his job. He would have looked more like a leader that way, than by what he did or didn't do.
Re: yesterday's posts, I think they were taken off as they kind of got out of hand, name calling, not productive and sinking to a level that they didn't need to sink to. I had quit reading it.
Not surprised they were removed.
Just my opinion.
President Richard Brodhead's claims fail the smell test, too.
You are a gentleman - obviously - so you can't be so intemperate to offer such scathing satirical images as we can. That having been said: perhaps the reason Duke's President fails both the laugh test and the smell test is because he has the skulking presence and aura of Gollum.
Some might call him "sensitive" and "poetic," but only in the Smeagol-sense. In that image, and in only that image, one has to have a little sympathy.
Otherwise, here is a man of many weaknesses who would not stand up to the petty tyrannies of subordinates.
You are an articulate and interesting sportscaster and even more interesting, articulate, and accurate journalist. Please don't apply at the H-S or NY Slimes. You have waaaaayy too much class for either of those rags.
Please use your influence and encourage others of influence to pressure the BOT to rid itself of the scourge that infects it now. You are infinitely more qualified to lead a university such as Duke than any of the so-called administrators currently holding positions there.
It's time to clean house if you want your alma mater to maintain it's place in the world of education. There has been a major slide in the past 18 months and NONE of it was caused by the LAX team. Step up to the plate, er, free throw line and make the game winning shot!
Where was Jay Bilas 6 months, 12 months, and 17 months ago? The players were essentially exonerated in December with the disclosure of the DNA results and declared innocent by the State Attorney General in April. What the delay in speaking out?
It's nice for him to speak up but why now?
To rr hamilton and other curious individuals
You are not missing much in yesterday's posts. There was a lively discussion of the wisdom, to put it nicely, of Columbia inviting a controversial speaker. Lots of talk about freedom of speech and all.
There was also a discussion of Professors Holloway and Baker and how they both had been touched, in different ways, by the crime of rape. Some felt that parts of the discussion were out of line.
Some of the information was new to me and I personally found it odd that people who had been touched by that crime would become so outspoken about a crime that never occurred and stay outspoken long after it was shown to be a hoax.
The above is not a complete summary since I wasn't there until the end but maybe the above information will help ease your mind.
I think this statement by Bilas will make a difference. He is well known and respected in many circles.
Lets see if others follow his lead. That is the test.
Also, I am absolutely sure that he would not have written this statement without consulting with a wide circle of advisors that would include Coach K and other well connected alumni.
I also received my copy of Duke Magazine yesterday. Not only was Jay Bilas' letter not published, but a rather negative review of Mike Pressler's book was. When I was phoned last week about giving to the Annual Fund I told the student that I was withholding my contribution this year because of the behavior of Richard Brodhead and many of Duke's senior administration. Although he actually apologized for the President, my guess is that Brodhead will neither resign nor be forced to.
Yes . . . .
To me the third paragraph says it all -- if Pressler had to go so that they could move forward, how much more so does Broadhead need to go... He presided over Duke last year so well that Duke had to publicly acknowledge settling three potential lawsuits. In all three cases, the terms of the settlement were confidential, but the wrongdoing which led to the settlements was quite public. In all three cases, a true leader would have stepped forward to handle things appropriately long before the wronged had to resort to threats of lawsuits. In none of the three cases did Duke do the right thing until they got a call from the lawyers.
The letter of Mr. Bilas says it perfectly. I hope that Brodhead and Steel read it.
But they won't.
Nice to see the Duke heavy hitters coming out of the wood work - now, after eighteen months. The Law School, now Jay Bilas, who know, maybe Brodhead will write a scathing letter to the Chronicle, claiming "I told you so!" Please, the ship has sailed, there are those guilty of commission and omission.
This is my first posting on KC's excellent blog. As a Duke alum. from the early 80's, it has been very disappointing for me to see the slide down the slippery slope of Political Correctness of what used to be a great University.
As KC has pointed out, unfortunately the Bilas letter is only on the website at dukemagazine.duke.edu.
The print edition has a note that says "Because of the large volume of correspondance on lacrosse, we have posted additional letters on the magazine's website."
But if you compare the print edition to the web edition, there are _only three_ additional letters on the website, of which Bilas' is the first non-printed letter. Surely they could have found room for Bilas' letter in the print edition. Of course, the lead-off letter in the print edition was from Lubiano ...
KC, the folks at Duke Mag. could learn a lot from you & Stuart. Your book is great stuff. Thanks for all you've done to expose and document the issues both in Durham and at Duke.
Bilas' letter was not posted in my Duke Magazine. Thanks for surfacing this on the website, KC. I intend to send it to a few of my "groupthink" alum friends of Brodhead. Between Brodhead, Steel, the BOT, and the G of 88, it brings to mind the keen academics portrayed in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.
Count me among the alums who want to thank Jay for his articulate and affecting letter. Duke gets no more of my money while Brodhead is at the helm. New leadership is needed.
Can we purge the moral and intellectual rot while we are at it? Start with Holloway and Lubiano and Curtis.
Jay, if you agree to become Duke president, I'll triple my previous donation level. (At that point I might even qualify for basketball tickets.)
Duke Alum 80
The same edition of Duke Magazine has a short note about a review of Brodhead's performance as President. It includes an email address for submitting comments as well as the names of the people on the review panel. I tossed my copy yesterday, so don't have the page number. Hopefully someone will post the text.
While I don't condone the actions (or failures) of Brodhead, Bilas was largely absent during this entire hoax. He now has the sanctity of hindsight. There is no risk to him to finally jump out of the bushes. It would have been far more impressive if he had weighed in when the case was obviously in collapse over a year ago...
KC> Thanks you again for continuing to shine the light. I hope Mr. Bilas continues his quest. I don't really care about Duke, but it would be great if Mr.Broadhead , Mr.Aleva and leaders of the G88 were given the same treatment as Coach Pressler.As per Mr. Bilas's letter.
The students of Duke deserve no less, they are still in danger for mistreatment because the main players are still in their postions of authority and power.
"What's good for the goose is good for the gander". Bilas points out that for the same reasons Pressler was fired so to should Broadhead be dismissed. Checkmate !!
Now if the rest of the Duke Alumni were so brave....
As a Duke Dad I wholeheartedly endorse Jay Bilas's comments. B&S need to go!
Here is another great lawyer who would be a great addition to Duke or Durham DA's office:
HEMPSTEAD,NY--A disbarred lawyer convicted of aiding terrorists will be teaching at an upcoming law school ethics conference. Lynne Stewart, who was found guilty of conspiring with terrorist Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, will be speaking October 16 at Hofstra Law School’s “Legal Ethics: Lawyering on the Edge,” in Hempstead, New York. The speaking engagement comes only a year after Stewart was sentenced to twenty-eight months in prison on charges of conspiracy and providing material support to terrorists. Prosecutors alleged that Stewart had passed on messages to Abdel Rahman’s radical Muslim followers, authorizing a resumption of terrorist operations against the Egyptian
Nicely written, but probably useless. More's the pity. Duke could right its ship, but it is not going to.
4:05 & 4:53
Very well stated; Mr Brodhead knows what a person of character would've done at every fork in the road he came to, and he went the other way. And everybody else knows it.
Mr. Bilas' letter is a thing of beauty. Amen, amen, and amen.
KC Footbal,com has a denunciation of Lester on their blog. It concerns his writing and opinions of the Vick case. They have "given up on Munson." So have a lot of us.
broadrot and steelrust cant stop the alumni from speaking out...
this will not end until they are history...
maybe they can join the durham/nc naacp which allegedly financed the bus trip the out of state parasites who try to mob rule jena..just like duke itself allegedly paid for the newspaper ad...
why the fbi isnt investigating the group of 88 for doing the same thing the crazy white supremacists are doing show how bankrupt the feds are
Out with Brodhead. Go get Bollinger!!! He at least has moral courage!
Of course, the lead-off letter in the print edition [of the Duke Magazine] was from Lubiano ...
Enquiring minds want to know!!!
It is noteworthy that the commentary here almost universally condemns President Brodhead's failure of leadership. This blog is but one of numerous venues of commentary on the Duke Lacrosse Burning. Others most surely exist and a reasonable inference is that these other venues find Brodhead's failure of leadership equally egregious.
This man has abetted not only the castration of the concept of innocent until proven guilty, he has abetted the subtle and, at times, not-so-subtle promotion of scholarship and academic appointments that betray the fundamental notions of American justice and values. How can a modern American university president support the work of someone who, if outisde the academy, would most surely be viewed as seditious if not treasonous. To alter a well-known adage, someone's cooke should be goosed.
Brodhead and his ilk are a threat to western civilization. With the benefit of five hundred years hence, history will judge the longevity of the American experiment by reference to the effects of Brodheadian scholarship and pursuits.
Now is the time to stop it. It includes the '88.
No offense, but I don't need the "true leader" speech. I know what a true leader is: why Brodhead is still at Duke has nothing to do with leadership -- it's the same reason that Larry Summers is gone from Harvard.
In a large corporation the removal of Brodhead would imply the removal of the "Brodhead Team", i.e., "Team 88." And we all know what the reoval of 88 radical, tenured bullshit artists would signal:A MAJOR POWER SHIFT IN ACADEME THAT THE LEFT WOULD RESIST
TO THE DEATH.
Absolutely incredibly beautiful piece from a man admired and respected by everyone. That the feckless stumblebum is still in place is mind boggling. Would be nice if the f.s., steele, aleva and the 88 airheads disappeared tomorrow...that would go a long way toward restoring some degree of respectability and honor to the university. But alas, like losing your virginity, you cannot get it back again. What a pity.
Several comments here have criticized Jay for not speaking out earlier. Such criticism is misplaced. As a Duke alum and former basketball player (I was a teammate of Jay's for two years), I gave President Brodhead the benefit of the doubt as he navigated the turbulent waters of the lacrosse fiasco while waiting patiently for him to do the right thing with the benefit of hindsight and stand up for his own students. Unfortunately, I am still waiting, and my patience is exhausted. I haven't spoken with Jay about the lacrosse case or his letter to the Duke Magazine, but I suspect that he, likewise, was waiting and hoping for President Brodhead to come clean before speaking out.
President Brodhead and John Burness have defended the 88's unprofessional, slanderous attacks on their own students as a garden variety exercise of "academic freedom". I'm not sure what was "academic" in the faculty's personal, ideologically driven attacks on the lacrosse team; but for the sake of argument, assuming that such slander is immunized by the principles of "academic freedom" (the quick settlement with the Duke three would suggest otherwise), then why hasn't President Brodhead exercised HIS academic freedom to come to the defense of the smeared lacrosse team now that the facts are clear and the players are undeniably innocent. President Brodhead certainly had no difficulty exercising that "right" in his April 5th, 2006 screed in which he threw the team under the bus.
I hope that more alums who feel the same as Jay does will speak out now that it is clear that Brodhead no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt.
I don't know if, when, or where Mr. Bilas could have spoken more effectively. I notice when he did say something, he attempted to direct it to the "Duke Community." Since whoever is in charge didn't think his opinion merited inclusion in the print edition I think he may be showing far more respect for Duke than Duke is showing him.
One useful well known Duke guy.
Right. Let a former LAX player get you guys all rowdy. What ARE you trying to achieve? I thought blood ritual went out of fashion in the 1890s. But, I guess KC isn't an expert on that...
Can't you just move on? Don't you have lives?
It strikes me as odd..... that so many are hailing the leadership and courage of those who come NOW - to champion the Lacrosse 3 and to pile on Brodhead and the 88 jerks.
I guess in Academia -- it's not important when one acts...
Had this been a military ambush, rather than a racist ambush -- these Johnny Come Lately "rescuers" would find nothing to rescue but a number of corpses.
I'd be more impressed if these "hot dog" Alumni were vocal in their opposition to the shenanigans of Brodhead and the lunatic 88 -- while the fight was ongoing and the outcome unknown...
Frankly, I'm not impressed by this postponed "run to the sound of guns".
JM in San Jose
Better late than never. Mr. Bilas may be the tipping point.
You have early adopters and then for what ever reason later stage adopters. For those who are upset wait and see who comes out of the woodwork after Brodhead is retired.
To use the words of the progressive media... Mr. Bilas's comments add gravitas to the discussion and will shine brighter light on Duke's many failures to alumni who have not paid any attention to the hoax.
I do think it odd he left out Alleva, Moneta, and Dean Sue; especially Alleva.
I agree that Brodhead must resign or be fired.
Right. Let a former LAX player get you guys all rowdy. What ARE you trying to achieve? I thought blood ritual went out of fashion in the 1890s. But, I guess KC isn't an expert on that...
Can't you just move on? Don't you have lives?
9/26/07 2:48 AM
It's not we who are clinging to the past, it's Duke. How can we "move on" as long as the demonstrated dryrot remains at Duke?
A Duke law professor told me last Spring that Duke allowed the 88 and others to trash the school and the laxers "only because if Duke acted more forthrightly, some in Durham would see that as interfering in the criminal justice process". In other words, he said, Duke was protecting the indicted laxers by (pretending to!) support attacks on them. As counterintuitive as all that sounds, now the laxers don't need such "protection", right? So now Duke can "move on" the 88 and the other Duke wrongdoers.
Many of us are like richard ford '84, supra, who said, "I gave President Brodhead the benefit of the doubt as he navigated the turbulent waters of the lacrosse fiasco while waiting patiently" for Duke to "move on" the 88 and hold them accountable.
So, as long as Brodhead and the 88 remain at Duke, as long as AAS remains a new "department", as long as Paula McClain remains in power at the Faculty Council, how can you say it's us who aren't "moving on"?
"How can a modern American university president support the work of someone who, if outisde the academy, would most surely be viewed as seditious if not treasonous."
See Columbia, University of Colorado....
How could they not? It's part of the job description.
"It strikes me as odd..... that so many are hailing the leadership and courage of those who come NOW - to champion the Lacrosse 3 and to pile on Brodhead and the 88 jerks."
You take what you can get.
By normal standards they may be pathetic weasels. But by the standards of a modern "elite" university's faculty they're moral giants.
Another devastating blow to the Hierarchy of the Holy Academic Trinity. It is amazing what can be accomplished when people quit taking sides just because of the races of the parties, and instead commit to doing the right thing regardless. How much credibility/face would Mike Nifong, the Hard Left, 88, AAAS Department and the NAACP have saved doing that?
Imagine what good could be done for our country and world if once-useful places like Dook, Columbia and Yale were purged of the knee-jerk, race-baiting Group-Nonthinkers, and instead competence and merit were restored to the top of the hiring and promotion criteria.
Sadly, with the Hard Left firmly entrenched at the top of these Ivory Towers, it is people like KC who will get blacklisted, Larry Sumners who will get run out of town on the rail for an unsanctioned conclusion based on empircal evidence, while Houston [F]aker is lauded as "the leading light."
"How can a modern American university president support the work of someone who, if outisde the academy, would most surely be viewed as seditious if not treasonous."
"Lynne Stewart, who was found guilty of conspiring with terrorist Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, will be speaking October 16 at Hofstra Law School's 'Legal Ethics: Lawyering on the Edge,' in Hempstead, New York."
8:17 Since when has KC Johnson been blacklisted? People may not like him or his bow-tied toadie Ralph Luker, but they don't blacklist 'em. They ignore 'em. It's different.
What is the hard left that 8:17 refers to? Is it to be distinguished from a soft left? A medium left?
And what is the Hierachy of the Holy Academic Trinity? That sounds religious to me...Is it Jesuit? ;-p
I haven't figured out how Columbia and Yale got added to your anti-Duke rant, but I'm sure there's a reason. I've never heard of anyone at Columbia accused of Group think. And they do think. Of course, if you want to go dump on Nobel Prize winners (not all in sciences), I'm sure Columbia and Yale (and Berkeley; where's Berkeley in your rant?!) are great places to start.
Do everyone a favor and send your kids--if we are unfortunate enough for you to have any--to Bob Jones U. PLEAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
You guys quote Nadine Stroessen enough when it comes to KC Johnson's book. See what she says, Ralph Phelan, about free speech. Why not listen to Lynne Stewart? I don't agree with her, but I'd love to hear what she had to say. Did you throw away the key when you locked up your mind?
To the 9.07:
Two years ago, Columbia had a major controversy regarding the conduct of the mealac (Middle East Studies) Department. Groupthink was a central critique. You might disagree with that critique, but it seems hard to argue that the critique wasn't made.
To the 9.09:
The argument could be rephrased, "Why not listen to David Duke?" But, of course, it's very unlikely Hofstra would ever invite David Duke to speak (and for good reason).
Universities have limited space and time--they can't invite everyone to speak. Although this matter is not really a concern of mine, it seems to me perfectly legitimate to, at least, question the criteria used by some universities in selecting the speakers that come to campus.
ralph phelan @ 8:42
And to think ... if this same ethic had existed at the time of our country's founding ... Benedict Arnold could have made the introduction to General Washington's farewell speech at Fraunces Tavern.
This is stunning. Instead of a firing squad, a dais and a microphone. Just stunning.
Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman wants to kill me. Lynne Stewart wants to help. She's welcome on campus, not as a specimen of evil, but as someone whose opinion on "ethics" will add value to a panel discussion.
Larry Summers quoted well-documented research that while the average intelligence of women is the same as that of men, the standard deviation is smaller, and speculated on the implications for relative numbers of extreme outliers. He's not welcome on campus.
This is not a "free flow of ideas."
This is publicly funded bias, bigotry and self-destruction.
"Although this matter is not really a concern of mine...."
I think it's causally related to the PC orthodoxy, group-think and cultish behavior that led to the faculty's contribution to the Duke Lacrosse Burning.
You sound like a reasonably intelligent person and under normal conditions, listening to the thoughts of a serial killer might also be interesting. But these are not normal conditions, nor are they normal times.
Western civilization, democracy and religious freedom are under attack by a foe that is determined and quite willing (and able) to outwait the drive-through-window patience of the American electorate. And it is exactly that electorate that most certainly does not share the intellectual capacity to parse the nuance of heretical and seditious thought.
So why should anyone who has already been convicted of giving aid and comfort to the enemy be allowed to speak in any forum other than a prison lunchroom?
"What ARE you trying to achieve? ... Can't you just move on? Don't you have lives?"
Why would it be acceptable, let alone desirable, let alone natural, to "move on" when the job isn't done? The job, in this case, being making sure that everyone knows the truth about what really happened -- who the real wrongdoers were.
One would think -- if one was well-informed and reasonable -- that this was already done, thanks to the investigation of Attorney General of North Carolina Roy Cooper, his subsequent declaration of innocence, and the disbarment and criminal conviction of Mike Nifong. But read these words in the News & Observer from former City Council member Sandy Ogburn less than a week ago:
"All we know right now [about the evidence] is what the defense attorneys have parsed out — oh, as well as their million-dollar PR campaign."
The job isn't done.
Had the LAX players been guilty of the things they were accused of, most of us here would have supported their trial and conviction. The dominant theme here is "taking responsibility for one's words and actions". The dominant theme of the left is "denying responsibility for one's words and actions." That is why crying little weenies like you want to MoveOn.
There won't be any moving on until the crying weenies own up to their irresponsibility.
Bilas did speak up much earlier. Before making unfounded accusations, get your Google on. Look for PANELS he appeared on, look for MAGAZINES he provided interviews to, etc.
I think Jay's comments are a day late and a dollar short. This may be where the Duke Alumni start to take back the school but I doubt it.
Don't count on Grant Hill to speak next because his mother is a member of the Board of (Mis)Trustees. BTW, check out Jay's movie "I Come In Peace" with Dolph Lundgren. hehe.
Glad to read that Mrs Hill is on the board. I always saw them as a crowd of rich white men.
Mrs. Hill IS a rich white man. Of course, it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
inman, obviously sober as a judge, writes @ 3:29 PM:
"Mrs. Hill IS a rich white man. Of course, it depends on what the meaning of "is" is."
BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Absolutely brilliant, Tom!
The article about the review of Brodhead mentioned by the poster at 9/25/07 8:52 PM, is contained in the "Gazette" section of Duke Magazine, and is available at the following URL:
Note that the review committee is being run by former NC House rep. Dan Blue of Raleigh, who I would expect would be sympathetic to the PC culture, and certainly would be a member of the "Durham Committee" if he lived in Durham. Not that that should stop Duke alums (myself included) from writing about Brodhead's (lack of) performance.
Posting My Email Exchange with President Broadhead
Dear President Broadhead,
Thank you for your response. You certainly have the right to your own views as well. But your email below is not a very compelling response to the issue I raised. Am I to believe that Duke faculty are prone to reacting to hysteria with inflammatory accusations rather than with calm and reason? Is this the kind of Faculty Duke attracts? I sincerely hope not.
The explanation that these faculty were trying to respond to the sensitivities of women and African Americans is patently absurd. What about the civil liberties of the accused? I think it is safe to say that had the accused been a woman or African American and the accuser a white male, these same faculty would have written a full page article in the New York Times in SUPPORT of the ACCUSED....for the same reason you noted, which in my opinion is patently racist.
If these faculty had any integrity they would issue an apology to the Duke lacrosse players, who they irrationally slandered based on their own distorted agenda. Race and gender has absolutely nothing to do with this. Sadly they seem to lack this integrity. It is indeed a reflection on Duke.
It is a hallmark of maturity to be able to admit when one is wrong. These faculty were wrong and they are too jaded or too proud to admit it. They certainly have a right to their opinion. But they don't have the right to use their position as Duke faculty as a cover for a personal political agenda.
It is unfortunate that no one at Duke has confronted these faculty more forcefully concerning their hypocrisy and lack of integrity. It is disturbing that our finest institutions of higher learning are increasingly becoming temples for the worship of political correctness.
From: President [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 1:37 PM
To: Peter Glynn
Subject: Re: FW: From The Economist Sept 13th print edition
Dear Mr. Glynn,
Thank you for writing and sharing your thoughts with me.
If you’ll recall, in the early days of this painful episode, the District Attorney made numerous public statements that he was certain that some Duke students had raped a student from North Carolina Central University.
In the ensuing hysteria of that moment, some Duke faculty members were concerned about students who were afraid and upset, particularly women and African Americans. To show their support for those students, they placed an ad in the student newspaper. I agree that the ad was ill-judged, and I question the manner in which the faculty members expressed their concern.
But I do not question their right to express their opinion.
I hope you will continue to support and love this university as we emerge from these challenging times. I feel certain better days are ahead.
With all best wishes,
Thank you for sharing that exchange.
Memo to file, re: Dick: you less.
Dear President Brodhead,
If you'll recall, in the early days of this painful episode, you, Richard Brodhead, made certain statements that fanned the flames of hysteria ..."...whatever [you] did was bad enough." Of note is that you did this on the same day that the ad appeared in the Chronicle. Your comments in the open letter do not read as a statement supporting 'innocent until proven guilty'. You further acknowledged in your 60 Minutes interview that you were being urged to make the statements you made and that the facts were changing every day. You buckled under to the pressure of those faculty members who you say cared about their students by, in effect, inciting others to adverse action -- action that could have placed your students in harm's way. About the only thing you did that was right and just is,...well you didn't invite the New Black Panthers to lunch to chat about the situation. At least I don't think you did. Perhaps I'm wrong.
Well, facts never change. Facts are absolute. Only perception of facts can differ and it's clear that your perception of facts is distorted by a political and social philosophy that allowed you to believe the worst about some of your best.
I'm quite confident that you were much more comfortable as an administrator when facts would fade with the passage of time. Newspapers got old and the memories faded, just like the paper on which the news was written.
So, do you like the internet and its never-out-of-sight cache of instant memories?
Dick Brodhead before he d---'s you.
Broadhead should resign. I predict we will see this soon. I hope the Board gets a grip when choosing a successor.
Amazing. I have been writing letters to Brodhead for 13 months telling him to resign. I thought I was a lone wolf howling in the wilderness. It is uplifting to see how many others see Brodhead for what he is: a coward who only seeks to be on the correct side of the "politically correct" fence. Steele apparently has been calling the shots from the beginning.
I will never give another dime to my alma mater (Class of 1966) until Brodhead, Steele, Alleva and the "Gang of 88" are gone.
Problem is: they don't really care about alumni anymore, they are so awash in money our voices mean nothing.
Post a Comment