Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Brodhead on the record; Jan. 22, 2007
Topic Started: Apr 11 2011, 10:07 AM (1,080 Views)
Quasimodo

An excellent revelation of the character of Richard Brodhead:


Quote:
 
http://dukechronicle.com/article/brodhead-record

Brodhead on the record

By Rob Copeland
January 22, 2007

(snip)

The Chronicle's Rob Copeland: (snip)

Do you have any regrets about your handling of the scandal?

Brodhead:

My principal regret is that the situation ever arose. I wish the party hadn't taken place. If the party had taken place, I wish the accusations had never arisen. I certainly wish that the district attorney had not made the statements that gave everyone such a degree of certainty about the matter. Once the situation existed, it had to be dealt with. I'm really not immune to self-criticism in any way, I believe we've handled this as straightforwardly and honorably as we could have, given the extraordinary nature of the situation and the changing nature of the facts.

C: Do you stand by all of your previous actions? Would you have done anything differently?


B: Let me take you back. You're talking about a series of events that were announced on the fifth of April, when 46 players were said to be under investigation. Every member of the Duke, Durham and national community had heard repeated statements on the certainty that the rape had taken place.... Duke was not free to say, "give us another year until we know the facts for certain."

C: To be fair, you did fire the coach and cancel the season.

B: The first thing we announced was the suspension of the season. Everytime I came near that subject, starting with the first day, I said this was not a presumption of the guilt of the players. It was not a disciplinary measure.... Many people have said to me in retrospect, "When you suspended the sport, that was your judgment of guilt." I say to them, "You are misinformed." It was an inevitability given the situation we were in. But I've tried then and in every other possible occasion to separate those acts from any question of judgment of the team.

[How is saying, "You're misinformed" an answer?]

C: Then why fire men's lacrosse head coach Mike Pressler?


B: When the coach's resignation was announced on April 5, I tried to take great care to indicate that I was not fingering him as responsible for this. What I said was that given the history that we were in the middle of living through, if and when we started the replaying of lacrosse, it couldn't be on the same terms as in the past. We needed to close one chapter and start a new chapter. Changing the coach was just one of the necessities that came along with that. There was no pleasure to be taken in any of these decisions, but I think they were inevitable and it's all very well 10 months later to look back and say, "You should have done things differently."

[How as that NOT a criticism of Pressler, and "fingering him" as responsible?]

C: Knowing what you do now, would you still ask for coach Pressler's resignation?

B: If I were put in the same circumstances again, I would do exactly the same thing.

C: Why did you not hold Athletics Director Joe Alleva responsible for the team as well? Why not ask for the resignations of Larry Moneta, vice president for student affairs, or any of the other administrators who were previously aware of the lacrosse team's issues. Why stop at coach Pressler?

B: The party was a team event. It wasn't just a group of people, it was something convened by the captain of the team. The Pressler resignation was not my attempt to say that he was responsible for the situation. It was simply a resignation of the inevitability that given where we were, we would need to make some differences to go forward with lacrosse.

[Orwellian double-speak?]


C: There are numerous documented instances of fraternities, sororities and other organizations holding parties with underage drinking and strippers. Why not go after them as well, or replace their advisors?

B: You said there are documented cases. I would say that to my knowledge, there are rumored cases. The difference between this and other cases is that this one came to our attention.... It's not my idea of how to run an undergraduate school to have dragnets and police officers to investigate people and trap them in bad behavior.

[So, does he know of other instances of groups hiring strippers? He doesn't say. He doesn't want to know. But about the lacrosse players, he will permit a dragnet, violation of FERPA laws, and Steel will order the Duke police to falsify their records...?]

C: Regarding Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, you've released several statements over the past month about his conduct. Before then, especially before the election in November, why weren't you more outspoken, even when his improprieties were becoming more obvious?

B: I just can't believe I would have done anybody any good if I had made it my business to release a new statement everyday. All of us have spent far too much of our lives responding to yesterday's newspaper. The whole nature of this case is that we've got to get through the reports-and misreports-back into the truth of it.

C: Why didn't you call for Nifong to step down, or for a special prosecutor to replace him?

B: There is absolutely no provision in the state of North Carolina for a special prosecutor to be brought in, except at the request of the DA. Why didn't I join with the defense team and file motions with them? Because it was essential that we not be seen as a partisan player in this, but that we uphold the process that looks out over all parties and renders justice at the last.

(snip)

C: If you were Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty, would you want to come back to a campus where professors have denounced them and where students have held protests against them personally?


B: Everyone on this campus has lived through a great long complicated drama. I'm sure the drama has been far more intense and complicated for them than for any of the rest of us. I don't know what decisions they will ultimately make. And it isn't over yet. There still are serious judgments against them that have not been resolved. At the same time, this is the only university where they're known, this is the place they have friends and this is the place they chose in the first place. I hope they will come back.

[This is Jan. 2007, and he can still say that?]

C: If they came to you and said they could not return to Duke and wanted to transfer, would you do everything in your power to help them find another school?

B: Reputable universities don't admit students because one president called another. I don't know what decisions these students will make.... I will say that I made clear to Coach Pressler that I would speak on his behalf as he looked for positions elsewhere and in fact I did. To the indicted students I say: this University welcomes you to return and respects whatever decision you make.

[IOW, No.]


C: Let's talk about the attention Duke's faculty has received in this case, in particular the members of the so-called "Group of 88." Do you hold the faculty to a higher standard? Should they understand the legal process, and recognize that it's not appropriate to speak about their individual students to the national press?


B: The president of a university has to exercise great care when commenting on the individual utterances of faculty members. Faculty members do not, and should not, speak for my pleasure or my approval. I was careful not to make statements that could make it seem like I was on one person's side rather than another, or to say,"Watch out when you engage in free speech, because the president is watching."... If faculty members talked about those underlying issues, that is their right. Quite a number of people have assured me that the ad said the students were guilty, but if you go back and look, that's not what the ad says. I look forward to the day when we can all look back and draw a box around that whole situation and everything that arose from it, and let's come together as a community, show respect for each other, find ways to engage and listen to people who don't already agree with us.

C: Do you agree with the faculty members who, in letters to national publications and postings online, have asserted that this university has deep racial problems, and who have added that they are not unhappy that the lacrosse allegations came about?


B: Do I agree with what they said? The side I take is in favor of thoughtful dialogue and inclusive debate about these subjects.

C: But there were people calling Duke "the plantation" and comparing Duke students to slaveowners. You've got national media printing these words about the university of which you are president. Why didn't you ever stand up and say, "Regardless of the allegations, it is completely offensive to liken this University to slavery?"

B: Those words go back a long way. I can't tell you how many times I have spoken in defense of this University.... Last April, I spoke to all but one of the groups of visiting students when there were press cameras on campus. The press doesn't cover what I want it to cover. I read in a student newspaper recently something suggesting that I should have stopped the media coverage being so intense last spring. My reply to that is, "Dream on." That's not the way the media works.

[Yet another non-responsive answer.]

C: An advocacy group, Friends of Duke University, recently called for an independent committee to investigate your administration's conduct of the past few months. Will you call for such a committee?

B: When the dust settles, we'll figure out what is right to do.
Last spring, when we set up a number of committees, many of them turned out to be quite helpful to us and to the whole community.

(snip)


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Payback
Member Avatar

I did not know this interview,
This changes everything for me.
Now I am going to start writing little pieces about Brodhead's lack of character.
Just watch, Quasi.
Soon as I catch my breath and recouperate a little from reading this one.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

REPOST, but for newcomers:

Donna Shalala of the University of Miami (by way of contrast) :

Quote:
 

"I want to start by saying that the buck stops here...


"We know that we are recruiting a different kind of student-athlete and it's time for me to say publicly that I believe in them, that I believe they did something awful; but that I want them to continue at the University of Miami. It's time for me to say to the community and to those who have been sending me e-mails that this University will be firm and punish people that do bad things, but we will not throw any student under the bus for instant restoration of our image or our reputation. I will not hang them in a public square. I will not eliminate their participation at the University. I will not take away their scholarships. We will discipline them appropriately. We will set a high standard for them and we will make it clear what our expectations are for them. We will do the same thing for our coaches, for our athletic director, and for any student on this campus whether or not they participate in a sport.

"It's time for the feeding frenzy to stop.

[There was no reason for Brodhead not to have said at least this, and every reason for him to say it]

These students made a stupid, terrible, horrible mistake and they are being punished. They are students and we are an educational institution and we will act like an educational institution, not like a P.R. organization that's trying to spin and to restore an image that we worked so hard to put in place. I'll continue to support our athletic program and I will continue to be firm and fair with the young people that come to the University, whether they are in our laboratories or our classrooms or in our libraries or on our playing fields. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have."[/color]
[/big]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jarms

[Secret copy of reporter's notes with REAL answers - SPOOF ALERT!]


Brodhead on the record
By Rob Copeland
January 22, 2007

(snip)

The Chronicle's Rob Copeland: (snip)

Do you have any regrets about your handling of the scandal?

Brodhead:

Let’s talk about other people, not me. I “regret” that the LAX players are filthy perverts. I “regret” that the DA is a lying scoundrel. Me, I’m perfect.

C: Do you stand by all of your previous actions? Would you have done anything differently?

B: I had to do something fast to take the heat off the University and put it on the folks we really wanted to blame … the LAX players (and BTW did I mention they were filthy perverts?). Duke was not free to say, "give us another year until we know the facts for certain." Heck, we weren’t even free to say, “give us another week until the DNA came back and showed the whore was lying.”

C: To be fair, you did fire the coach and cancel the season.

B: Sometimes firings just happen. No one is really responsible. Pressler immolated by spontaneous combustion.

C: Then why fire men's lacrosse head coach Mike Pressler?

B: Because if the DNA came back negative then we couldn’t very well fire him then, now could we? We were in a rush to get things done (that we really wanted to do, anyway) before we could be criticized for them.

C: Knowing what you do now, would you still ask for coach Pressler's resignation?

B: I’m not going to answer that question (because I really DID know then what I know now – but you can’t ever know that). I’m going to make up my own question: “Would you still fire him as long as you had plausible deniability?" Absolutely yes.

C: Why did you not hold Athletics Director Joe Alleva responsible for the team as well? Why not ask for the resignations of Larry Moneta, vice president for student affairs, or any of the other administrators who were previously aware of the lacrosse team's issues. Why stop at coach Pressler?

B: Because I needed an AD to do the search for the new LAX coach, duh!

C: There are numerous documented instances of fraternities, sororities and other organizations holding parties with underage drinking and strippers. Why not go after them as well, or replace their advisors?

B: {German Accent} I know nothing! I see nothing!

C: Regarding Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, you've released several statements over the past month about his conduct. Before then, especially before the election in November, why weren't you more outspoken, even when his improprieties were becoming more obvious?

B: I just can't believe I would have done anybody any good if I had made it my business to release a new statement everyday.
Nope, if I were a member of any of the LAX players’ families I’d want the President of Duke to shut up the minute the case turned my way. Silence is golden, after all.

C: Why didn't you call for Nifong to step down, or for a special prosecutor to replace him?

B: Why didn't I join with the defense team and file motions with them? Why didn’t I strip naked and run through the streets of Durham shouting “They’re Innocent”? Why don’t I just have a hormonal fit like a 12 year old girl right now? What, you expect a mature answer to that question?

(snip)

C: If you were Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty, would you want to come back to a campus where professors have denounced them and where students have held protests against them personally?

B: {Fingers crossed behind my back.} I hope they will come back. Of course, they’ll be facing a disciplinary hearing the minute they set foot on campus, the perverts!

C: If they came to you and said they could not return to Duke and wanted to transfer, would you do everything in your power to help them find another school?

B: No, are you freakin’ KIDDING me!

C: Let's talk about the attention Duke's faculty has received in this case, in particular the members of the so-called "Group of 88." Do you hold the faculty to a higher standard? Should they understand the legal process, and recognize that it's not appropriate to speak about their individual students to the national press?

B: No, I’ve forgotten that the listening ad thing ever happened and, if I had the blinkey thing from Men in Black I’d make darn well sure that you did too!

C: Do you agree with the faculty members who, in letters to national publications and postings online, have asserted that this university has deep racial problems, and who have added that they are not unhappy that the lacrosse allegations came about?

B: I think we should have a campus-wide debate about whether our white students actually hate black folk or simply act as if they hate black folk because they don’t know any better. Then the whites can then defend themselves and prove themselves stupid instead of hateful. I promise to keep and open mind.

C: But there were people calling Duke "the plantation" and comparing Duke students to slaveowners. You've got national media printing these words about the university of which you are president. Why didn't you ever stand up and say, "Regardless of the allegations, it is completely offensive to liken this University to slavery?"

B: Those words scare the heck out of me. I’m doing everything I can to stop them from calling us names. Everything! Make them stop! Make them stop!!!

C: An advocacy group, Friends of Duke University, recently called for an independent committee to investigate your administration's conduct of the past few months. Will you call for such a committee?

B: When the dust settles, we'll figure out what is right to do. I’m in favor of doing nothing.

(snip)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bill Anderson
Member Avatar

jarms
Apr 11 2011, 01:18 PM
[Secret copy of reporter's notes with REAL answers - SPOOF ALERT!]


Brodhead on the record
By Rob Copeland
January 22, 2007

(snip)

The Chronicle's Rob Copeland: (snip)

Do you have any regrets about your handling of the scandal?

Brodhead:

Let’s talk about other people, not me. I “regret” that the LAX players are filthy perverts. I “regret” that the DA is a lying scoundrel. Me, I’m perfect.

C: Do you stand by all of your previous actions? Would you have done anything differently?

B: I had to do something fast to take the heat off the University and put it on the folks we really wanted to blame … the LAX players (and BTW did I mention they were filthy perverts?). Duke was not free to say, "give us another year until we know the facts for certain." Heck, we weren’t even free to say, “give us another week until the DNA came back and showed the whore was lying.”

C: To be fair, you did fire the coach and cancel the season.

B: Sometimes firings just happen. No one is really responsible. Pressler immolated by spontaneous combustion.

C: Then why fire men's lacrosse head coach Mike Pressler?

B: Because if the DNA came back negative then we couldn’t very well fire him then, now could we? We were in a rush to get things done (that we really wanted to do, anyway) before we could be criticized for them.

C: Knowing what you do now, would you still ask for coach Pressler's resignation?

B: I’m not going to answer that question (because I really DID know then what I know now – but you can’t ever know that). I’m going to make up my own question: “Would you still fire him as long as you had plausible deniability?" Absolutely yes.

C: Why did you not hold Athletics Director Joe Alleva responsible for the team as well? Why not ask for the resignations of Larry Moneta, vice president for student affairs, or any of the other administrators who were previously aware of the lacrosse team's issues. Why stop at coach Pressler?

B: Because I needed an AD to do the search for the new LAX coach, duh!

C: There are numerous documented instances of fraternities, sororities and other organizations holding parties with underage drinking and strippers. Why not go after them as well, or replace their advisors?

B: {German Accent} I know nothing! I see nothing!

C: Regarding Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, you've released several statements over the past month about his conduct. Before then, especially before the election in November, why weren't you more outspoken, even when his improprieties were becoming more obvious?

B: I just can't believe I would have done anybody any good if I had made it my business to release a new statement everyday.
Nope, if I were a member of any of the LAX players’ families I’d want the President of Duke to shut up the minute the case turned my way. Silence is golden, after all.

C: Why didn't you call for Nifong to step down, or for a special prosecutor to replace him?

B: Why didn't I join with the defense team and file motions with them? Why didn’t I strip naked and run through the streets of Durham shouting “They’re Innocent”? Why don’t I just have a hormonal fit like a 12 year old girl right now? What, you expect a mature answer to that question?

(snip)

C: If you were Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty, would you want to come back to a campus where professors have denounced them and where students have held protests against them personally?

B: {Fingers crossed behind my back.} I hope they will come back. Of course, they’ll be facing a disciplinary hearing the minute they set foot on campus, the perverts!

C: If they came to you and said they could not return to Duke and wanted to transfer, would you do everything in your power to help them find another school?

B: No, are you freakin’ KIDDING me!

C: Let's talk about the attention Duke's faculty has received in this case, in particular the members of the so-called "Group of 88." Do you hold the faculty to a higher standard? Should they understand the legal process, and recognize that it's not appropriate to speak about their individual students to the national press?

B: No, I’ve forgotten that the listening ad thing ever happened and, if I had the blinkey thing from Men in Black I’d make darn well sure that you did too!

C: Do you agree with the faculty members who, in letters to national publications and postings online, have asserted that this university has deep racial problems, and who have added that they are not unhappy that the lacrosse allegations came about?

B: I think we should have a campus-wide debate about whether our white students actually hate black folk or simply act as if they hate black folk because they don’t know any better. Then the whites can then defend themselves and prove themselves stupid instead of hateful. I promise to keep and open mind.

C: But there were people calling Duke "the plantation" and comparing Duke students to slaveowners. You've got national media printing these words about the university of which you are president. Why didn't you ever stand up and say, "Regardless of the allegations, it is completely offensive to liken this University to slavery?"

B: Those words scare the heck out of me. I’m doing everything I can to stop them from calling us names. Everything! Make them stop! Make them stop!!!

C: An advocacy group, Friends of Duke University, recently called for an independent committee to investigate your administration's conduct of the past few months. Will you call for such a committee?

B: When the dust settles, we'll figure out what is right to do. I’m in favor of doing nothing.

(snip)
:jump: :jump: :jump:

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

:bill:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sceptical

Here is a wonderful commentary on the Brodhead interview by John-in-Carolina:

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2007/01/chronicles-brodhead-interview-my-take.html

Quote:
 
snip

As he has for months, Brodhead offered his “it was all so confusing” excuse for his obvious mishandling of events last March and since. Here’s today’s version of “it was all …”

"Once the situation existed, it had to be dealt with. I'm really not immune to self-criticism in any way, I believe we've handled this as straightforwardly and honorably as we could have, given the extraordinary nature of the situation and the changing nature of the facts."

Brodhead may not be immune to self-criticism but I sure couldn’t find what I thought was genuine and serious self-criticism in any of his responses.

Certainly there was nothing, for instance, like an admission that he should have met on Mar. 25 with the parents of the lacrosse players who were on campus that day.

Or that he should have spoken out on May 18 when racists threatened Reade Seligmann, first as he walked to the Durham County Courthouse ("Justice will be done, Rapist."); and then again inside the courtroom with the threats this time including death threats ("Dead man walking.")

Of course, it may just be that Brodhead doesn't think he should have met with the parents or spoken out to condemn those threatening Seligmann and to support and comfort him and his family.

A hat tip to Reporter Copeland. He had prepared for the interview but was up against someone who’s very adept at dodging questions.

If there’s a “next time” Chronicle interview with Brodhead, here are a few of the questions Brodhead should have answered many months ago. I’ve put them in the form they’d be asked in a face-to-face interview.

You knew, President Brodhead, before the story broke on Mar. 24 that the lacrosse captains had been exceptionally cooperative with Durham Police investigators. You knew the “wall of solidarity” report in the Mar. 25 Raleigh News & Observer and other media was false.

Later that day when you issued your statement supporting the cancellation of the lacrosse games, it said physical coercion and sexual assault had no place at Duke but it said nothing about the players’ cooperation.

Why did you decide to make no mention of their cooperation?

Why did you decide to instead say:
I urge everyone to cooperate to the fullest with the police inquiry while we wait to learn the truth.

AD Alleva also knew of the players' cooperation with police. But his Mar. 25 statement, like yours, makes no mention of their cooperation.

Did you and Alleva coordinate your statements? Did you jointly agree to make no mention of the players' cooperation? Or was it simply coincidental that both your statements omitted mention of the players’ cooperation?

Were your and Alleva's Mar. 25 statements reviewed prior to release by any trustees or senior administrators who were aware of the players' cooperation?

If the statements were reviewed by such people, did one or more of them raise the issue and/or recommend including in yours, Alleva's or both your statements mention of the players' cooperation?

If yes, why wasn’t that done?

By Mar. 29 "Vigilante" posters targeting the players and demanding they abandon what the posters falsely claimed was a refusal to cooperate with police were circulating and posted on campus.

You didn't at the time condemn the "Vigilante" poster or speak out against those circulating and posting it. Why not?

You still haven’t condemned the poster or spoken out against those who circulated and posted it. Why not?

On Apr. 5 you issued a statement in which you said:
I urge everyone to cooperate to the fullest with the police inquiry while we wait to learn the truth.

Since you knew by then even more than you knew on Mar. 25 about all the cooperation the players’ had provided police; and since you had seen them falsely and dangerously targeted for remaining silent, why did you decide not to mention their cooperation in your Apr. 5 statement?

snip

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
[Secret copy of reporter's notes with REAL answers - SPOOF ALERT!]


Brodhead on the record
By Rob Copeland
January 22, 2007

(snip)

The Chronicle's Rob Copeland: (snip)

Do you have any regrets about your handling of the scandal?

Brodhead:




And now, secret video, revealed her for the first time,

of the interview (inspired by Retired LEO and Jarms )

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/11738688/king-brodhead


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

Quote:
 
I believe we've handled this as straightforwardly and honorably as we could have, given the extraordinary nature of the situation and the changing nature of the facts.


So, Brodhead didn't misspeak on 60 Minutes?

Here we are, on a different day, and he says the same thing about the facts kept changing.

Aside from the issue that "the FACTS kept changing" is a nonsensical statement,
what exactly is Brodhead referring to? The boys' story NEVER changed, so what
is he referring to?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sceptical

Brodhead throughout the fiasco had certain "talking points." These included "the facts kept changing," even if the rape charges are false "whatever they did was bad enough," and the later one about Nifong being so certain there was a rape so doubts about a rape call into question his whole case.

I wonder how much of a role John Burness played in shaping these talking points. Were there e-mails or written documents listing talking points? Some interesting questions for the discovery and depositions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jarms

I think we can all agree that it's a good thing that Brodhead, Steel and Burness will have their day in court to prove their innocence. Only a trial can resolve these issues, right? And if there's a problem with the trial, it can all be sorted out on appeal.

Of course, don't be surprised if Duke files for summary judgment immediately after discovery is complete. After all, "bring on the trial, we trust the system" is a lot easier a position to advance if someone ELSE is the defendant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

Brodhead talked nice, sort of. But the spokesman for Duke, Burness, contradicted a lot of stuff brodhead was saying in that interview. As far as I can see its WHAT I SAY IS NOT WHAT I DO syndrome at Duke. We saw it then, we saw it witht he other rape and the strip show. We see it with the biochemistry scandal. And we see it with the potti crisis and with Duke China.

Where did brodhead learn all this disception.... hmmmm musta been at Yale.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Walt-in-Durham

Richard Broadhead: The facts kept changing, that problem justified my actions and in-actions...blah blah blah...

No Dick, the facts did not change, new information emerged. But, you knew that the tenants had given the police statements. That is what is called cooperation. Yet when the allegation was made that there was a "wall of silence, you did not set the record straight with a fact that was known to you. Each time new information came to light, sometimes you knew of it in advance, sometimes you were surprised. An English literature professor should know something about inquiry. An English literature professor should know that it takes time to develop an understanding. Yet, you did not apply the tools of your chosen scholarly endeavor when it came to the greatest test of your career.

You could have been the strong leader and said something like what Donna Shalala did at Miami. "Stop the media circus." You could have counseled restraint. Knowing that the tenants and team captains had cooperated you could have made that public. But, you did not. You are, after Nifong, the biggest loser in the fiasco. He sacrificed his profession, his income, his good name to a false accusation. But, you did little better. Your income and profession have not been sacrificed, yet. But, to the extent you had a reputation as a scholar and leader, that is gone. You will not preside elsewhere. You will not be considered for an impressive government commission job. (Think the difference between Erskine Bowles and Richard Broadhead.) You will not be taking a leading roll in politics. (Think Woodrow Wilson, S. I. Hayakawa and Terry Sanford.) No, your sniveling, cowardly response has drawn a close to your career advancement. Duke is already planning your departure. Don't let the door hit you in the back on the way out.

Walt-in-Durham
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
You will not be considered for an impressive government commission job. (Think the difference between Erskine Bowles and Richard Broadhead.) You will not be taking a leading roll in politics. (Think Woodrow Wilson, S. I. Hayakawa and Terry Sanford.) No, your sniveling, cowardly response has drawn a close to your career advancement. Duke is already planning your departure. Don't let the door hit you in the back on the way out.


A problem is that Brodhead can also drag down Robert K. Steel; they sink together.

(I've always been curious about Steel's remark the BOT backed Brodhead every step of the way,
and that therefore whoever criticizes Brodhead has to criticize the entire BOT. Was
that a kind of guarantee to Brodhead that he wouldn't be left alone to dangle in the wind?)


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

Quasimodo
Apr 12 2011, 07:43 AM
Quote:
 
You will not be considered for an impressive government commission job. (Think the difference between Erskine Bowles and Richard Broadhead.) You will not be taking a leading roll in politics. (Think Woodrow Wilson, S. I. Hayakawa and Terry Sanford.) No, your sniveling, cowardly response has drawn a close to your career advancement. Duke is already planning your departure. Don't let the door hit you in the back on the way out.


A problem is that Brodhead can also drag down Robert K. Steel; they sink together.

(I've always been curious about Steel's remark the BOT backed Brodhead every step of the way,
and that therefore whoever criticizes Brodhead has to criticize the entire BOT. Was
that a kind of guarantee to Brodhead that he wouldn't be left alone to dangle in the wind?)


Of course it was a guarantee. Steel hired brodhead, probably over the objections of a few other BOT. Brodhead was and IS steel reputation and legacy at Duke.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Payback
Member Avatar

MikeZPU
Apr 12 2011, 12:13 AM
Quote:
 
I believe we've handled this as straightforwardly and honorably as we could have, given the extraordinary nature of the situation and the changing nature of the facts.


So, Brodhead didn't misspeak on 60 Minutes?

Here we are, on a different day, and he says the same thing about the facts kept changing.

Aside from the issue that "the FACTS kept changing" is a nonsensical statement,
what exactly is Brodhead referring to? The boys' story NEVER changed, so what
is he referring to?
You got it, Mike. There are no facts, there is no truth. Brodhead as a product of Charles Feidelson's Yale. In my blog for February is the rough draft of the Intro to THE NEW MELVILLE LOG where I give a history of the transition from scholarship to criticism at Yale in 1953, before Brodhead's time but the start of the reign of Feidelson, which lasted through Brodhead's first decades at Yale. Brodhead is a mindless product of mindless training. Here's a link.

http://fragmentsfromawritingdesk.blogspot.com/2011/02/rough-draft-of-introduction-to-new.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply