Skip to comments.Duke president Broadhead's Role in the Non-Rape Scandal
Posted on 06/30/2007 12:02:54 PM PDT by rickdylan
An article in the Duke Chronicle today spells out Duke president Richard Broadhead's role in the shabby affair we have been witnessing and provides a glimpse of the rationale for Duke's rush to settle several of the potential legal cases which were involved.
At this point I would warn kids off thinking about attending Duke.
Here is my real question. If your last name is Broadhead, why would you name your kid Richard?
And why isn’t Brodhead fired?
You would be astounded by the drop in applications for incoming freshmen.
Once this was not true. It is today.
It appears his parents were psychic.
Good. And it should stay that way until he is fired or resigns.
Yeah ... wanna' chew it off?
Due to the reaction this fiasco will cause at Duke, something similar is probably less likely to happen at Duke in the future than at just about any other college in the country.
Similarly, it is safer to fly now than it was on 9/10. Not because of government security measures, but because the passengers no longer have the illusion of safety and so will not allow a hijacking to occur.
I heard that the kids and the coaches settled separately for undisclosed amounts.
That's the University. I wonder if the liability of the "Duke 88" faculty is included, or they were acting on their own. They ought to be separately liable, IMHO.
At the very least I would have insisted that the "gang of 88" be fired. Except for the one of the 88 who recanted and apologized. That one I would keep.
I heard that DOOK has already paid big bucks to the players.
“American academia is a morass of mediocrity.”
Certainly true, but no surprise. Liberals run almost all of academia and they see mediocrity as the ultimate social construct.
I hope you are right.
I want to know why Broadhead and the “88” aren’t made to come out publicly and grovel before the American people?
There's no way in Hell I'd send my 18 or 19 year old kid into that environment. Duke University showed its true colors during this sordid affair.
The entire University either through action or inaction demonstrated its outright hostility to the American principle of the presumption of innocence, not to mention the idea of basic human decency.
Nope. Maybe if the Board of Regents, or whoever really runs that asylum, went through it with an extremely new broom starting with Brodhead and the Gang of 88 I might consider it.
Until then, I hope the place goes broke from lack of students and legal defense fees.
I'd love to see what's happened to alumni donations. I'll bet they're down to a trickle.
I suspect it's the quality more than the quantity of applications they need to worry about. The people wanting to major in Albanian and Bushman studies will still be there. Early admissions were down over 20% a while back and those were the kids who had to make an immediate decision. It's likely that a whole lot of the kids with more time to think about it will end up elsewhere.
Thanks for posting this.
Oh, here we go again. I am so f'ing tired of people thinking that if you have money, you're a bad person. As I sit here, I try to weigh the good things that rich people do (e.g., charities, create jobs, capital formation, etc.) for me and society against what the poor people do for me (e.g., nothing but drain my taxes away). And please, don't lecture me on lack of opportunity, discrimination, blah, blah, blah. I simply know too many minorities who have made it--indeed, made it big--to put any credence to those old hackneyed arguments that Jesse and Al like to trot out.
Sorry, guys, in this day if you're poor, it's pretty much your own fault. If you had worked harder in school, studied, and applied yourself, you wouldn't be a drain on society today. I realize there are legitimate exceptions (e.g., poor health, etc.) but those are relatively few. Personally, I'd like to see us adopt the German system where, if you receive public assistance, you work for it sweeping streets, cleaning out gov't buildings, or all of the other jobs that illegals are currently doing.
The Duke president's comments are a reversion to old minority arguments that no longer apply and I'm extremely tired of people who offer these tired, phony arguments to explain away problems. Now that the truth has been exposed in this case, I wonder if we will see retractions from Broadhead, Jesse, and Al for the lies and false accusations made by Crystal and her cohort in crime, Nifong. As to the Duke 88, they should lose their tenure at the very least.
I don’t know. Maybe:
A. because it is liberal/feminist/communist crap hole full of elitist little shits from the north?
B. because it sucks?
A and B?
I agree that the gov't has not done anything to make us safer...it simply too easy to gain access to the tarmac as a member of the cleaning crew, food service, or baggage handlers. However, I disagree with the statement that it's safer to fly now than before 9/11 due to anticipated actions by passengers. There has been very little to suggest that passengers will assume the same actions we saw on United 93. Indeed, surveys suggest that most Americans think they are safer now than before...a stupid conclusion.
If they were psychic and honest, they would have changed their last names to Head.
You are positing a stabilizing negative feedback mechanism. Positive feedback is also possible e.g., Duke will become a magnet for likeminded mushheads and sink even faster into the abyss.
When you think about it, it’s mainly the wealthy who can protect enough of their money for the possibility of donating meaningful amounts of it to good causes (as opposed to the evil causes the government uses the money it takes from the rest of us for) to at least exist.
Ethics has become the secular approach to teaching right and wrong, and the name “God” is never mentioned in a college text as a basis for conduct when ethics is taught.
There are definition from Webster and then there are those implied concepts that carry a mood or feeling with them and transcend what the literal definition means. Ethics is the concept of right and wrong in the absence of God. Even the most secularist concede the need for norms of behavior and this is also the case in business, politics, accounting, human relationships, and education.
Do a Find (under the edit tab) for the word God in Wikipedia under the term ethics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics Zero hits.
Do the same thing for under the description of morality:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality Several hits.
Duke is a mirror into Americas, and even the Western worlds soul. From Clintons most ethical administration ever to the common and even acceptable business practices in this country or interpersonal relationships and marriage. People always talk about the things they dont have, and there is a reason why in most MBA programs we teach ethics as part of nearly every class. We talk about right and wrong behavior, but we dont even know what it is! The problem with knowing right and wrong can best be exemplified with a typical undergraduate text in cultural anthology at an American university.
Basically the entire textbook can be summarized in two statements.
1. Behavior has to be judged through the social filters and norms of that society.
2. Applying ones own moral standards to judge others makes one jingoistic and narrow minded.
What modern ethics essentially teaches is what one of my professors told me in a class: it is a matter of pride and accomplishment to have ethics What this really means is that we look at the performance and the bottom line and accept that which brings the highest yield as ethical. I proceeded to tell him that the Nazis while implementing their final solution were highly effective and efficient! He didnt like that. How does this tie into Duke? The leadership at Duke behaved in a way they saw as minimizing the damage to them firstly and to their school secondly. It was a political decision, and in their mind probably even ethical.
What you end up with is a way of thinking that sees no wrong in any behavior except if the “mob” comes to consensus that it’s wrong. Nietzsche referred to this as the herd. What you end up with is a version of “mob rule”. It is a life without morals and principals. Morals usually refer to a divine source and deal in absolutes. Morals normally entail a concept of principals that are not for sale, bargaining or compromise. Ethics are hollow and the term itself is meaningless essentially.
In this Duke case the mob in the coliseum put their thumbs up (actually it would be down but Hollywood has revered this and it has become accepted this way) and chose to let those innocent lacrosse players go. The leadership at Duke will follow suit. Politically when the issue first arose however, the leadership acted in a way that was to save their skin. Where were their principals? Had some media outlets not picked up on this story and ran with it the way they did, what would the ethical leadership at Duke have done? Had all the media been negative would they have stood by their students they knew were only accused and most likely innocent or thrown them under the bus? As I said, in the absence of principals which require morals, it just boils down to version of mob rule, and there essentially is no right and wrong anymore.
The important thing is that they have an ethics department!
White males, anyway.
But then, it might be good for them to discover early whart an endangered species we have become.
My guess is that he wasn't given that name, he earned it...
The political correctness and cowardice displayed by Brodhead is not in the slightest unique to Duke or at all unusual. Brodhead was, after all, at Yale for 32 years before coming to Duke.
And it’s not confined to so-called elite schools. It permeates nearly all of the American university system.
>> Here is my real question. If your last name is Broadhead, why would you name your kid Richard?
The Duke settlement was, I understand, a “global” one. The millions that the University paid out cover its bad-mouth professors as well — sad to say.
John / Billybob
I figure half the problem Duke has is rogue elements of the admin and faculty which need getting rid of. The other half is the city of Durham itself. Those losers voted Fong back into office in November of last year with 95% of the black vote, after the whole world knew how phony the whole thing was. Duke has to move; I wouldn’t send a kid to ANY school in or near Durham NC.
Just remember that it was illegal for a member of the flying public to interfere with a hijacking in progress on the morning of September 11, 2001.
Now, however, kicking in the face of a suspected hijacker will be met with polite or enthusiastic applause from your fellow passengers.
Hey! You sound like some sort of zealot!...
Just an ever-expanding "Big Book of Laws" which races to outlaw just about everything you can think of.
EXCELLENT post, Red6.
This one is certainly not the best response but is short and to the point:
Before He Dicks YOU...
I went to college with a guy named Richard Hertz. Obviously he did NOT go by the common nickname for Richard.
You don't have alink to this story, do you? I haven't heard that and would be interested in reading more about it.
LOL. Very true!
I’m afraid that’s my understanding as well.
Agreed. Unfortunately, I suspect it is fairly representative of American colleges as a whole.
The last I heard he had run away with his guitar :-)
He has a hearing the 26th for which he must be present.
It’s called consequences. Duke needs to suffer the consequences of their actions.
Yippee! He is still my prime suspect, the rest were a bunch of dupes