This entry was posted on January 14, 2008 at 11:58 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Ultimately, the senate faculty expressed their concern about Lang’s trustworthiness and his ability. They decided that neither were worthy of their support - or the capital of the univerity’s reputation.
“Yes, yes that was a clever and biting retort. Now how about putting some of that righteous indignation to work on these damned ear mites. And while your at it, take your opposable thumbs (such a waste on you people) to the TV remote - Meerkat Manor is about to start.”
we were, the local charleston queers, the only ones thinking that these pictures of Blankenship and Justice Maynard are a bit…. sugary? the champagne flutes, the yacht, the French Rivera. oh come on!
I bet you a dollar on a dime that Justice Larry Starcher somehow leaked those photos of Maynard and Blankenship. This is Starcher’s way of going out with a bang.
“Lang, who met with Faculty Senate leaders Tuesday afternoon, said he will accept their recommendation that three outsiders be appointed to the panel investigating the executive MBA awarded to Mylan Inc. official Heather Bresch.
It’s now up to the Faculty Senate to produce a list of names.”
I hope they have that list ready, this does NOT need to drag out.
You see, Harvard and WVU are comparable institutions. Except for the have an esteemed historian as their president and WVU has a political hack. But the law schools are basically the same quality. Don’t forget that!
I don’t know - WVU law doesn’t crack the top 100 on 4 or 5 different ranking systems I just glanced at. They did tie for 170th place (out of 185) for LSAT scores, right up there with Oklahoma City University and Nova Southeastern University.
Thank god many of our elected officials went to WVU Law.
The memo below was sent to the sponsors of the motion adopted by the WVU Faculty Senate on Monday.
From: Parviz Famouri Tuesday - January 15, 2008 11:35 PM
To: WVU Science Chairs,
Congratulations on your passed motion that persuaded the Senate. I am sorry to say that you were played by our regional rival Pittsburg.
We, as the WVU Faculty Senate, have worked strenuously for many years in order to establish the Senate as where the buck stops on academic matters and integrity. We were making many strives. With this sensitive issue and given the opportunity to ultimately show the world that the WVU faculty is in charge of its academic programs and integrity, this motion managed to portray that we are not capable. That we, the Faculty Senate, need outsiders to step in and tell the Senate what our own could say.
I totally understand why the Senate didn’t want anyone from the HEPC. The mind boggling part is that the other three proposed members should be from outside, yet again discrediting WVU Faculty Senate.
The legacy of this story is that despite the past, the WVU Faculty Senate
members are incapable of impartial judgment and have no freedom. This will be the ultimate message that will come out of this story.
1. Someone ask Parviz if he was on the “search committee” for the President of WVU.
2. The “ultimate message” from Parviz is that he learned how to email from Craig Walker.
3. If the WVU faculty was “in charge of its academic programs,” why didn’t the 47-5 vote matter back in April?
I am left wondering if Parviz is going to lead a “freedom” charge or take Garrison’s bitch-tits out of his mouth.
Quick search on WVU website….Parviz and Nutter are colleagues work in same department (Lane Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering)….go figure…..sheeesshhh
Rumors here in Morgantown say that Lastinger is big time friend of Garrison’s brother in law….Mike Slaven….French history prof at IUP or Cal State University of Pa….
Lastinger is not the bad guy in this and doesn’t deserve the above comments. Keep focused at the top, they want you to think that some clerk or faculty toad screwed up (and even if they did) rather than an “fix it” directive from the top and a blind eye from the chief academic officer.
That language on my part (and many others) is precisely why there had to be external representation on the panel. It still may never be known for sure.
Putting out others to deflect the criticism always makes sense. I would love to see a U.S. Attorney swoop into the situation. From the smell alone, we have a scheme to defraud and fraud on behalf of Mylan (Get her a MBA; hold out that she does one while knowing untrue), fraud on behalf of Bresch (no MBA), fraud and falsification of public records on behalf of Garrison (See Craig Walker email and Stewart Hall meetings), and I don’t think I have room for Manchin. I sure hope no money went from Mylan to Heather to Dad.
Ok, fair enough about lastinger, someone said those connections to Garrison’s bro in law, are “rumors.” So, I’ll retract that he’s on the take.
But, I still think there was something funny about the way Lastinger handled the Garrison selection last year, and his wierd reticence on voting against Garrison’s appointment.
Oh, and ignore Famouri. Here’s the scoop on that guy during the search committee’s work…..
“I think it’s unacceptable to coerce the board of governors in their decision,” said Parviz Famouri, a search committee member and chairman of WVU’s Faculty Senate. “This letter might try to do that.”
Famouri said he helped persuade the search committee to require a “good understanding of academics” from each candidate. But he also believes that the role of a university president has evolved over time.
In his view, presidents now look outward and focus on raising funds, with provosts and vice presidents handling internal affairs and overseeing academic details.
“I’m personally insulted,” said Famouri, a professor of computer science, electrical engineering and mineral resources engineering.”
I’m personally insulted this guy is telling us “move along, nothing to see here.” And, if he’s all fucking sure the “new breed” of presidents are those who “look outward,” I just point him to this (one of HK’s faves)…
Michael Lastinger Saturday - April 14, 2007 11:53 AM
Subject :Re 4/11 Faculty Senate Special Meeting
There was one abstention in the final vote. Nobody perhaps noticed that, but it’s a technicality.
The Board’s voice vote was clear and overwhelming. I did not vote for Garrison, true. There was also a motion of unity and communication that followed and that passed unanimously. A sincere move on the part of the Board. All that happened in public.
As you’ll notice, here I’m responding at once to many, many messages I’ve received after the meeting today.
To those who thank me for a dissenting vote, and to those who wish I could have done more (me among them), all I can say is that I deserve neither so much credit nor quite that much blame.
My path in this was most times clear and easy to follow. There’s nothing special about that, except that such sense of ease is often itself the path to error.
My comfort there has been the many voices, divergent among themselves, that helped me choose steps along the way. If I had heard only one message, I would surely have been lost, so I thank all of you who have taken the time to speak across dimensions.
Now I’ll try to say what I can without violating the standards of executive session discussions.
Today in the Board of Governors, none of my expressions of concern, which reflected to a high degree the senate vote from Wednesday, were ignored by anyone on the Board.
On the contrary, I can assure you everyone listened very carefully. Yet, as the long morning wore on, it became clearer and clearer that Michael Garrison has deep and wide support among many constituencies.
Even Board members who shared my, and even other, reservations could not ignore that.
In informal expressions of preference, it was clear that Garrison had broad support and that this support was based on different members’ different assessments of what would be best for WVU.
There was a clear sentiment among many that this candidate can do things both within and outside this state that will bring new levels of support to our university. We all saw the suggestions of this in the public forums.
The results of that promise will have to be proved, but the majority of the Board was convinced. If you took notes during our meetings, you will see that the results of our decision will be measured pretty directly and in good time.
At the end of this, I am convinced that Mike Garrison will absolutely do his best to fulfill his engagement. I’m not sure it will be easy for him or for us, but I do know he thinks he can. The Board thinks so too, and so for no other reason than their love of this university.
One proof of that is the hours Board members put in during ordinary times. This year has not been ordinary, and none of those hours are visible to most. Last Wednesday both Steve Farmer and Tom Dover rearranged appointments in other parts of the state to be in Morgantown to listen to the senate debate, and I can assure you they listened.
That was on top of their day jobs and on top of their already heavy work for the WVU Board. Steve Goodwin has simply given his whole life to this project all year long. Doug Leech, last year’s chair, and Robert Wells, chair elect, have done the same.
Hank Barnette (’the real deal’ no matter what blog you read) is a pillar of integrity, wisdom, and experience. That’s a simple fact. These are some more familiar figures on the Board, but each of them has made a similar commitment.
For our immediate state of mind, no matter how distressed some of us may be, that distress cannot be helpful now.
In Nietzschean terms, whatever we feel at this moment, we could ask ourselves:
“Did you ever say Yes to one joy? Oh my friends you must say yes to all woe as well.”
So spoke Zarathustra, and as much as any words, those words give me, perhaps not exactly comfort, but at least the will to move on.
Several of you suggest the moderate path of reflection and affirmation.
I think you are very right, Judith and Lisa in the following questions (whether a special meeting or a regular one is another question). We’ve moved clearly over the past couple of years to a consent agenda for regular business, allowing for substantial discussions like this on the standard agenda — that came largely from the BOG decision under Doug Leech to move to a consent agenda there — we got that from the Board, some not noticing the connection when our work in both senate and board is more routine.
We’ve not been so distant as some would say, but we’ve not been so visibly connected, either. Our work together could be more openly articulated.
In any case, here’s a constructive idea from today’s senate emails, kudos to Judith Sedgeman — and to the Board today, where some of these points were discussed explicitly (I copy BOG chair and next chair on this, knowing they really care):
“I would favor a special meeting. Among those issues that seem important are:
1. How can the faculty have a stronger voice on and a more meaningful dialogue with the BOG?
2. How much influence can we have over the selection of the Provost who will serve with the next president?
3. How can we affect the composition and conduct of future search committees so that this kind of situation will not recur?
4. How can we provide effective and meaningful academic input into the president’s decision-making about issues that are critical to the academic future of the institution?”
For the skeptical, in addition to its real and practical exertion of duties, the faculty senate has been keenly aware of these questions of role and communication.
Last year the executive committee appointed a special committee whose charge was to examine the relations among the senate, the BOG, and the state Advisory Council of Faculty.
That committee worked hard but could not really have anticipated the current circumstances.
Its work from then and now going forward may be a basis for our next steps in the work to make the faculty voice clearer in the many venues where we need to be heard.
Please remember also the motion on open communications that the Board passed unanimously today.
I agree that some of the panel should be filled by WVU people if for no other reason than expedience. A board of all outsiders would have to familiarize themselves with WVU’s inner workings (the legitimate ones, that is) and trudge through finding the appropriate people to talk with. Faculty could help do away with that bother and keep this thing from dragging out. Plus, a totally external board could be met with closed doors whereas WVU faculty might help in gaining access to people and records.
That said, it is important to find the appropriate faculty members. Obviously tools like Famouri should not be considered, nor should rogues like Kevin Outterson (who I like, but he’s definitely contrary). Faculty, for the most part, are detached from the administration and certainly feel no pressure (again, in most cases) to see things in their favor. If WVU’s faculty senate is anything like Pitt’s, they represent a wholly independent faction that can grant or derail the administration’s progress on certain matters. They know this and wield that power accordingly.
Then again, Pitt is a world-class research center and WVU is the world’s largest beer pong game. Not to be snide, but notwithstanding Heathergate, I’d say the words “West Virginia University” are enough to devalue a degree. But I digress…
WVU prof: No record of Bresch in class
Thursday, January 17, 2008
By Len Boselovic and Patricia Sabatini, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
A professor who taught one of the six classes added to Mylan executive Heather Bresch’s West Virginia University transcript in October said today she has no record of Ms. Bresch being in the class.
School officials made the revisions when they retroactively awarded an M.B.A. degree to Ms. Bresch, daughter of West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin and longtime friend and former business associate of WVU President Mike Garrison.
The professor was not contacted before university officials, reconstructing Ms. Bresch’s academic history based on incomplete records, awarded Ms. Bresch the degree nearly a decade after she left the program. Before the revisions, the university’s official records showed she was 22 credits short of earning the degree.
“The decision to add people to the class list that were never in the class disturbs me greatly. It offends academic freedom,” the professor told the Post-Gazette.
Ms. Bresch, who insists she earned the degree in 1998, was named chief operating officer of the Cecil generic drug maker in October. Her boss, Mylan Chairman Milan Puskar, is WVU’s largest benefactor.
Mylan did not return several phone calls today seeking comment.
This week, the university revised the composition of a panel appointed by Provost Gerald Lang to investigate the circumstances around the decision to award the master’s degree in business administration. Mr. Lang agreed to the faculty senate’s request to replace a high-ranking executive from the state Higher Education Policy Commission with three people not connected with WVU or state government. Those panel members have not yet been selected.
The investigation was launched after a Dec. 21 story by the Post-Gazette raised questions about how the university went about granting the degree even though university records showed Ms. Bresch had completed only about half of the credits required.
The revisions to her transcript included adding six classes, with grades, and changing two classes that were marked “incomplete” to show letter grades. The changes were worth 22 credits in the 48-credit program.
Following the Dec. 21 story, Mylan issued a statement supporting Ms. Bresch.
“Mylan stands behind the integrity of its longtime employee and senior executive Heather Bresch. Ms. Bresch is a highly qualified and well respected industry leader with an exemplary track record of success, established throughout her 15-year career with the company,” the statement read.
——————————————————————————–
More details in tomorrow’s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
First published on January 17, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Mountain Daddy is on top of things as usual with his rendezvous-gate comment — “I bet you a dollar on a dime that Justice Larry Starcher somehow leaked those photos of Maynard and Blankenship.”
Since this story broke, Justice Starcher has sent a memo to the Supreme Court’s administrator and instructed that all physical files and computer files containing this evidence be preserved. See: http://www.wvgazette.com/section/News/2008011525
This memo is outstanding for several reasons. First, Starcher used the term “inappropriate contacts” in the memo. Also, the fact that he even sent the memo, when it is already court policy to preserve this stuff, was clearly done to bring more attention to the matter. Methinks Justice Starcher may be soon vindicated as more of Big Bad Don’s machinations are finally dragged into the sunshine.
Now, if only the media will give half as much ink to this very serious issue as this forum gives to Garrison and Bresch, we’ll get some progress toward some semblance of Truth.
I have it on good authority that Starcher told the Martin Luther King Jr. Committee not to allow Maynard to speak at the MLK bell ringing ceremony. It is customary for the chief justice to speak. Starcher is on the committee.
Starcher told the committee that Maynard was a racist and that he didn’t value civil rights - and that he, Starcher, would not participate if the committee let Maynard participate.
I don’t know what the committee will do - but, that sounds like something Starcher would say and do.
While Joe is not as clever as Hillary and Bill…he really wants to emulate their behavior. All of you can expect a protect Heather - defend my baby campaign…beginning about now.
Hey, I don’t blame him. Fathers’ defending their children is as natural as rain.
She lied, though. Nevertheless, I understand his behavior.
Hippie Killer Says:
“Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it Spike?”
It’s payback to Don, too. A month after the rendezvous, he filed a lawsuit over the policy that gives justices the authority to choose to recuse themselves from cases. At the time, Big D was targeting Larry Starcher, vocal critic of Don and his pet justice, Brent Benjamin. But that same policy is what allows Maynard to choose whether to stay on the Massey Energy case or not.
Agreed Daddy….I would protect my lil girl with my all. It’s just that from knowing the players and the culture here I harbor this almost Malthusian view about the whole thing…..I want to see the whole thing just blow up.
JWB: I meant laughable in the pathos of the whole situation. I am rooting for Sbabtini, et al…and honestly feel sorry that they had to print a sort of retraction. But it’s evident to me the PPG has no intentions of letting up.
Mountain Daddy, Starcher wouldn’t be “participating” in the MLK bell event anyway, except as an audience member. Only the top dogs (Gov, Senate Pres, House Speaker, Chief J) get to talk.
The question is whether Starcher will be at the awards ceremony Saturday to give out the Living the Dream awards. Chief or no, he’s very involved in that, while the other politicos are nowhere to be found.
There is one element to this story that nobody has touched on. And it is a vitally integral plot point in this whole sordid soap opera. It speaks to motive. Let’s see - what vice usually attends sordid tales of money, power, politics and corruption? It’s buzzing all over the statehouse…..
I think the photo thing is funny bc (1) they were probably taken with a digital camera (2) by one of Spike or Blankenship’s “companions” who (3) probably got dumped sometime thereafter and (4) is a little pissed.
The potential that someone may have cheated to get a major college degree from a university, the prospect of perhaps a not so prudent jurist being bought by a companion who has brought a case before him, and the downright venomous theft of documents as one stole away to greener pastures have one cumulative result.
The result of each of these recent headlines may be public embarrassment
and or some legal ramifications for the perps but reading about these escapades in toto in the national media brings some measure of cultural guilt by association on all of us….
MSN: complicity because we allow it!! But “we” are a contradictory people….over my lifetime we have always seemed to appreciate the benevolent tsar…hating the sin, but forgiving the sinner. Screw it!! Public embarassment be damed…transparency,integrity,accountability…somebody translate it into French so it has some marketing potential.
It’s not just with RRod, MicroJo, Boss Hawg….look at the legislature…casino employees sponsoring gambling bills (and I have nothing against gambling)….grr…i don’t even want to get started. But your point is a good one.
Maybe we need a new state seal: Jessica Lynch on the obverse; Lynndie England on the reverse…since we seemingly don’t want leaders but rather flawed heros..
A voice of reason and journalistic integrity emerges from Charleston Gazette after a month of an anemic and pathetic response to the “MBA Mystery” scandal:
“However this farce was born, Garrison has the ability and authority to clean it up without waiting all year for an investigative panel. He should lay it all open before the public, acknowledge mistakes, discipline any wrongdoers, fire someone if necessary and pull WVU out of this destructive rut.”
“The body that accredits WVU — that assures students, employers and taxpayers that the university meets a certain level of generally accepted standards and competency — has said WVU isn’t the first school to be in this fix. An accrediting agency doesn’t get too concerned unless there’s reason to believe a school has a habit of manufacturing degrees.
But WVU doesn’t have to jeopardize its accreditation to be discredited.”
“And the longer WVU draws this out, the more harm it does.
Do we really want to spend all of 2008 talking about how corrupt WVU is? Better to fix it and move on. Otherwise, this farce will overshadow every basketball game, commencement, the start of fall football practice, homecoming, just as it stole some of the attention from the Mountaineers’ spectacular Fiesta Bowl win.”
“WVU’s attention should be on drawing more West Virginians into the life-changing experience of higher education, attracting competitive research grants and finding ways to apply the knowledge generated at the state’s university to improving the lives of the people it serves.”
“This situation would be resolved if people entrusted with the treasure that is West Virginia University would simply do the right things for the right reasons. An apology would help, too.
Mike Garrison has the ability to cut this wound open and clean it out. The sooner he does so, the better for everyone. Just do it.”
Miller is absolutely correct that Garrison could have, should have and still has the authority to resolve this immediately —- which he could have done in October or later in December when the Post-Gazette published its first article.
Garrison didn’t need to pass this extraordinarily important issue off to “the academic unit” or to an investigative committee. He simply had to call in to one meeting all of those who knew what transpired — and get to the bottom of what happened in short order.
He is supposed to be a lawyer for God’s sake who must have at least the fundamental skills of cross-examination possessed by even mediocre attorneys.
However, there is a fundamental flaw in Miler’s analysis, which she should have addressed.
That is the strong possibility that Garrison knew from the start exactly what was going on.
After all, on Friday, October 12, the day after the first Post-Gazette inquiry on Thursday October 11, there was a meeting right down the hall from Garrison’s office on the matter of Bresch’s MBA. In attendance was Garrison’s Chief of Staff Craig Walker, Provost Lang, Associate Business school Dean Cy Cogar, and former eMBA program director Paul Speaker and WVU general Counsel Alex Macia.
Is it reasonable to believe that an issue of possible dishonesty by the Governor’s daughter (who is also a top official of the company headed by WVU’s single biggest donor) was not discussed by those who were quickly summoned to an emergency meeting held within steps of Garrison’s office?
Moreover, on Saturday October 13, an e-mail from Business school Dean Sears to walker reveals he was not in attendance at the Friday meeting? However, in that Saturday afternoon e-mail Sears told Walker he and Cogar were ready to assist in any way.
Apparently Sears (who in a TV interview claimed total responsibility for the investigation and retroactive degree awarded to Sears) worked fast — because early on the afternoon on Monday October 15, WVU sent the Post-Gazette a statement informing that the records had been checked, an error found, an the conclusion reached that Bresch had earned the MBA in 1998.
Are we to believe that the official statement of Monday afternoon was not something reported in advance to the President of the University?
Are we to believe on that Monday Garrison, when informed of the conclusion Bresch actually had earned the degree, did not ask for any specifics — such as — why the screw-up? and, how did you reach such a conclusion over the weekend (without Sears being involved)?
Are we to believe that Garrison did not immediately pick up the phone that October Monday afternoon and call his friend Heather, or donor Puskar and the Governor to explain to them why and how Bresch’s grades and degree had failed to be reported to the Office of Admissions and Records?
Dawn Miller writes:
“[Garrison] should lay it all open before the public, acknowledge mistakes, discipline any wrongdoers, fire someone if necessary and pull WVU out of this destructive rut.”
Of course, such authoritative action would be impossible if Garrison from the very beginning was in on the corrupt decision to award the degree to Bresch with out adequate evidence to support the action.
If Garrison acquiesced in the decision made over the weekend of October 13-14 to grant the degree before any investigation occurred, then that would explain the false representation by Provost Lang and Dean Sears that a one to two week investigation preceded the conclusion and decision that Bresch had earned the degree.
And — it would explain the otherwise inexplicable failure of President Garrison to quickly sit all the actors in the drama down in his office (for goodness sakes they include his close associates and his close friend Macia — all of whom should be expected to tell him the truth) and get to the bottom of what happened without the need for a long, drawn out controversial investigation.
If President Garrison does not follow Miller’s extraordinarily sound advice, then it won’t be difficult to understand what underlies the drama that has kept WVU’s reputation twisting in the wind for more than a month.
Would the truth require Garrison to discipline or fire himself?
Greed is not the problem inasmuchas that has always been a motive for the actions.
The problem there is no one or group with any moral authority and capabiltiy of putting an end to the flat out corruption that dictates this state’s existence.
The last time a governor tried he ended up a drunk taxi driver in Chicago.
Anyone else concerned that the Daily Mail reports the presently-two-member panel is proceeding with interviews? One one hand you don’t want to hold things up, on the other you hope the new members get there before “all the work is done.”
If only somebody could somehow find a way to file suit (fraud?) then depositions taken under oath would go a long way to cleaning the sewers currently occupied by WVU administration. Most involved right now view this as worst case a disciplinary issue that could result in job loss and they are of course trying to protect their income and way of life. If everyone also were to realize that time in jail is a consequence of what they say then you will see a lot more progress being made and a lot less revisionist history.
In my view Garrison was aware of and involved in this from the moment the PPG called. How else to reconcile his legal background with his academic management and handling of this case? Any university president NOT involved in a similar situation would immediately move to correct the record and maintain the reputation of the university for which they work and represent. As Dawn Miller states Garrison “has the ability and authority to clean it up without waiting all year for an investigative panel.” At this point his inactions say more than his actions and he has already demonstrated that he is unfit to be a leader by allowing this to go on as long as it has without taking active involvement in the resolution of Ms. Bresch’s degree.
Don’t kid yourself: anyone involved who faces discipline would lie. The story’s so convoluted right now that ten or eleven depos would muddy the facts further and leave participants enough room to lie rather plausibly. Prepping these folks would be cake. “Tell your story, the way you remember it,” would be code for “Say whatever. We can clean it up later.”
Anyone seen the latest? First the PPG reported that a prof who taught one of the disputed classes stated Bresch’s name (then Kirby) did not appear on her class list. then apparently the prof found her personally prepared list and the name was on it and the PPG has revised the story. Evidently, the “official” WVU records and this prof’s list vary. The prof also says the list did no indicate she actually completed and passed the course.
Maybe it is a big deal that Rodriguez shredded his papers?
This afternoon’s Daily Mail story referenced above in this thread contains important comments by the new “independent” chair of the MBA investigation committee:
Regarding the university backing off its claims that Bresch met degree requirements in 1998, Nutter said,
“I don’t know what their attitudes are. I’ve talked to Lang, but specifically about procedure and how to get the committee going. I haven’t talked to (WVU President Mike) Garrison, and I probably will not.”
The panel has, however, begun interviewing faculty and administration at the business school about Bresch and the degree.
So —- Professor Nutter and his colleague Michael Lasinger are so independent that they are starting the investigation and doing interviews before consulting with the other three members of the panel or, in fact, before the majority of the panel was chosen.
No sitting down with all members of the panel.
No deciding how to approach the investigation.
No discussion of whom to interview and in what sequence.
No discussion concerning whether and/or how to record each interview.
No discussion of how to deal with interviewees who may request anonymity out of concern for their jobs.
No discussion of what documents to request.
—- Just a few of the many issues a truly independent and competent investigative panel would thoroughly discuss and explore before undertaking an extraordinarily important investigation.
And then there is the truly astounding Nutter comment:
I haven’t talked to (WVU President Mike) Garrison, and I probably will not.”
Not interview Garrison?
Defenders of the WVU Administration such as former Faculty Senate Chair Foumori wonder why objective critics don’t trust an “in-house” investigation?
Recall that:
Days before he was appointed, Professor Nutter gave his views on the MBA matter to the daily Mail.
Nutter told the DM:
“If indeed there was a degree awarded when the person completed only half the courses, I am indeed livid and heads should roll. I seriously doubt however that this occurred as it has been reported,” Professor Nutter told the Daily Mail on Dec. 27
Apparently the WVU Administration liked what Nutter told the Daily Mail.
However, neither Lang nor the “cohort” in the President’s had to wait for the DM to publish the story to learn his view—
because Nutter cc’d Lang when he sent his email comments to reporter Jake Stump
The Post-Gazette reported what happened next:
• Gerald Lang to Virginia Kleist
Nine minutes later, Provost Gerald Lang forwards a copy of Mr. Nutter’s comments to the paper to Virginia Kleist, a faculty senate leader who subsequently recommended that Mr. Nutter investigate the decision.
• Gerald Lang to Roy Nutter
One minute after e-mailing Ms. Kleist, Mr. Lang sends an e-mail back to Mr. Nutter, whom he eventually named as an investigator. There is no message to Mr. Nutter on the e-mail, just a copy of Mr. Nutter’s comments to the newspaper.
• Mike Garrison to Bill Case, Gerald Lang, Craig Walker
Two hours later, University President Mike Garrison sends a copy of Mr. Nutter’s comments to his chief of staff, the provost and his communications aide.
In spite of this Faculty Senate members were willing to compromise and accept Provost Lang’s hand-picked selections Nutter and Lasinger to stay on the Panel.
Now, we learn that Nutter has told the daily Mail today that he probably won’t talk to garrison during the investigation.
Not talk to — indeed —- closely question President Garrison!
Let’s revisit the post above concerning dawn Miller’s oped today and Garrison’s failure to act immediately to get to the bottom of a scandal that is destroying WVU’s reputation:
There is the strong possibility that Garrison knew from the start exactly what was going on.
After all, on Friday, October 12, the day after the first Post-Gazette inquiry on Thursday October 11, there was a meeting right down the hall from Garrison’s office on the matter of Bresch’s MBA.
In attendance was Garrison’s Chief of Staff Craig Walker, Provost Lang, Associate Business school Dean Cy Cogar, and former eMBA program director Paul Speaker and WVU general Counsel Alex Macia.
Is it reasonable to believe that an issue of possible dishonesty by the Governor’s daughter (who is also a top official of the company headed by WVU’s single biggest donor) was not discussed by those who were quickly summoned to an emergency meeting held within steps of Garrison’s office?
Moreover, on Saturday October 13, an e-mail from Business school Dean Sears to walker reveals he was not in attendance at the Friday meeting? However, in that Saturday afternoon e-mail Sears told Walker he and Cogar were ready to assist in any way.
Apparently Sears (who claimed total responsibility for the investigation and retroactive degree awarded to Sears) worked fast because early on the afternoon on Monday October 15, WVU sent the Post-Gazette a statement informing that the records had been checked, an error found, an the conclusion reached that Bresch had earned the MBA in 1998.
Are we to believe that the official statement of Monday morning was not something reported in advance to the President of the University?
Are we to believe on that Monday Garrison, when informed of the conclusion Bresch actually had earned the degree, did not ask for any specifics — such as — why the screw-up? and, how did you reach such a conclusion over the weekend (without Sears being involved)?
Are we to believe that Garrison did not immediately pick up the phone that October Monday afternoon and call his friend Heather, donor Puskar and the Governor to explain to them why and how Bresch’s grades and degree had failed to be reported to the Office of Admissions and Records?
Dawn Miller writes:
“[Garrison] should lay it all open before the public, acknowledge mistakes, discipline any wrongdoers, fire someone if necessary and pull WVU out of this destructive rut.”
Of course, such authoritative action would be impossible if Garrison from the very beginning was in on the corrupt decision to award the degree to Bresch though there was not adequate evidence to support the action.
If Garrison acquiesced in both the decision made over the weekend of October 13-14 to grant the degree before any investigation occurred, then that would explain the false representation by Provost Lang and Dean Sears that a one to two week investigation preceded the decision that Bresch had earned the degree.
And — it would explain the otherwise inexplicable failure of President Garrison to quickly sit all the actors in the drama down in his office
(for goodness sakes they include his close associates and his close friend Macia — all of whom should be expected to tell him the truth)
and get to the bottom of what happened without the need for a long, drawn out controversial investigation.
So, Nutter doesn’t think he will talk with Garrison . . .
Time to pull the plug on Professors Nutter and Lasinger and bring in truly independent investigators. Investigators qualified to carry out a thorough and profession inquiry without oversight of the WVU Administration—
investigators who will not need to share the findings at any point during the investigation with the people in the President’s office who must, based on the available evidence, be targets of the investigators.
Very provocative Common Sense Says. You have obviously gone to school on this issue and have studied the timeline and were able to make reasonable assumptions based on the facts. I nominate you for the panel. In fact this entire blog, or at least focused parts, should be required reading for new panel members. There are pearls of wisdom and advice inside. Perhaps someone should take the initiative to lay out exactly what and how the panel should undertake this investigation. It’s obvious that they can’t do it on their own. Another concern is that the two member panel gets out ahead of the investigation and steers new panel members away from others that have already been contacted. Or they take the opportunity to influence (read intimidate) critical persons in the process.
This is moving beyond something that can be handled by the Monongalia County Solid Waste Authority to someone who should be wearing a HAZMAT suit.
the saga DOES include sex. before heather got her big promotion she used to “clerck” in a lot of time with Mike P at his sleazy meat market Rat Pack lounge in the bottom of his waterfront hotel in Morgantown. Papa Joe may not have had anything to do with her promotion. She might have “earned” it by herself. Mike likes the young girls. I think he married one of his secretaries.
Can anyone get the email addresses of the WVU Faculty Senate members and send them (anonomously or not) Dawn Millers’ article on the Bresch MBA and the time line and commnets of common sense that was posted here yesterday? Most members of the Senate don’t read this blog and have limited knowledge about the “investigation” they voted for at the beginning of the week. Certainly the Dominion Post doesn’t cover the story.
It is clear that a majority of the Senate wants a truly independent professional investigation of the MBA scandal. They will not be pleased to learn that Profs Nutter and Lasinger have started the “investigation” 2 weeks before the 3 other members will be chosen.
They also won’t be happy to learn that Nutter has told the Charleston newspaper that he doesn’t think he will interview Garrison! Even though Garrison has been right in the middle of the MBA mess from the beginning.
I hope somebody here can get the senators email addresses and send them Dawn Millers’ article and common sense’s timeline.
Follow the menu at the top left for Faculty Senate, and click on the Senators link. Go to http://directory.wvu.edu for the Senator’s email addresses. I’m sure they’ll enjoy hearing from you.
The stacy editorial was ridiculous. She obviously has no clue how different graduate courses are than undergraduate classes. They are small and you know everyone in the class.
Come and listen to a story about a woman named Bresch.
A rich mountaineer, always kept her image fresh.
Then one year she didn’t go to class,
And pulled a degree right out of her ass.
MBA that is, WV was fooled.
Well the first thing ya’ll should know is dad’s a millionaire,
Gov. of the State who has friends everywhere.
Said baby girl don’t worry I know what it’s like,
And she picked up the phone and called her good friend Mike.
Garrison, that is.
An even bigger fool, a dimwit star.
The next thing Mike did was call his provost Lang.
Said “take care of this” or you’ll retire with a bang.
One lie turned to two and then it became more.
Bresch never realized what reporters had in store.
The WV Hillbillies! You couldn’t make this up!
WVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWV
Sung at the end of her tenure at Mylan:
Well now its time to say good-bye to Bresch and all her “friends”.
She’d shamed herself and West Virginia to the very end.
You’re all invited back to watch on Court TV.
She’ll be doin time with the others job free.
Hillbillies they are. Can’t get it straight. Take your shoes off and stay awhile. It’s better than Hee-Haw.
Yeah, they print anything. My friends and I have competitions to see who can get the craziest shit printed in the Vent Line and Reader’s Voice. My personal best was something about Jason Huber being Fidel Castro’s lover, which was funny because the Gaz folks must have heard a post-15 High Lifes Huber in the background telling me to fuck off.
There was some guy in a Friends of Coal hat playing the machines at Red Carpet hollering he was a friend of the Manchins and this investigation into their daughter has brought shame on our whole state. And how dare the press look into it. At the Broadway the discussion is that like Garrison, JOE should step in and just admit the real truth and it is remiss of him not to. Has Lara Ramsberg crafted up an official statement for Joe and Gayle? Seems like she has enough sense not to touch this one. Notice how Joe said he only heard of the MBA controversy because his press secretary told him of it. And then Lara declined to comment and sent inquiries straight to WVU. Eveyone’s playing hot potato. One of the most priceless things is Steve Goodwin’s back peddling.
January 15, 2008 at 1:24 am
http://post-gazette.com/pg/08015/849321-298.stm
Ya gotta love the look on Boss Hawg’s face….
January 15, 2008 at 2:27 am
Ultimately, the senate faculty expressed their concern about Lang’s trustworthiness and his ability. They decided that neither were worthy of their support - or the capital of the univerity’s reputation.
Mr. Lang, take note.
January 15, 2008 at 6:16 am
“Mah skeptosisum…U haz it”
January 15, 2008 at 6:31 am
Or:
“Yes, yes that was a clever and biting retort. Now how about putting some of that righteous indignation to work on these damned ear mites. And while your at it, take your opposable thumbs (such a waste on you people) to the TV remote - Meerkat Manor is about to start.”
January 15, 2008 at 10:52 am
From the Gazette (Charleston):
“Kleist said about 70 percent of the business college’s faculty and staff supports a panel of external and internal members.”
January 15, 2008 at 3:57 pm
http://www.da.wvu.edu/show_article.php?&story_id=31904&archive_date=2008-01-15
January 15, 2008 at 4:13 pm
http://wvgazette.com/section/Breaking/000001410
January 15, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Well hooray for the Faculty Senate. About time they got rid of the Governor’s flack as well.
January 15, 2008 at 6:26 pm
http://wvgazette.com/section/photos/2008011427?pt=20&build=yes/blank1.jpg
we were, the local charleston queers, the only ones thinking that these pictures of Blankenship and Justice Maynard are a bit…. sugary? the champagne flutes, the yacht, the French Rivera. oh come on!
January 15, 2008 at 7:15 pm
I bet you a dollar on a dime that Justice Larry Starcher somehow leaked those photos of Maynard and Blankenship. This is Starcher’s way of going out with a bang.
Who paid for this trip?
January 15, 2008 at 7:31 pm
http://mywvhome.blogspot.com/2008/01/flack-quits-daughtergate-probe.html
Flack has stepped down!
January 15, 2008 at 8:19 pm
“Lang, who met with Faculty Senate leaders Tuesday afternoon, said he will accept their recommendation that three outsiders be appointed to the panel investigating the executive MBA awarded to Mylan Inc. official Heather Bresch.
It’s now up to the Faculty Senate to produce a list of names.”
I hope they have that list ready, this does NOT need to drag out.
January 16, 2008 at 12:14 am
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08016/849421-192.stm
January 16, 2008 at 11:31 am
Hoppy is finally taking a stand.
http://wvmetronews.com/index.cfm?func=displayfullstory&storyid=23013
January 16, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Mmm…thank Hops, for reminding us that Harvard is “one of America’s most prestigious institutions of learning.”
January 16, 2008 at 4:04 pm
You see, Harvard and WVU are comparable institutions. Except for the have an esteemed historian as their president and WVU has a political hack. But the law schools are basically the same quality. Don’t forget that!
January 16, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Time to stop whacking the law school. T4 was a screw up by the administration; the school should be T2.
January 16, 2008 at 5:35 pm
I don’t know - WVU law doesn’t crack the top 100 on 4 or 5 different ranking systems I just glanced at. They did tie for 170th place (out of 185) for LSAT scores, right up there with Oklahoma City University and Nova Southeastern University.
Thank god many of our elected officials went to WVU Law.
January 16, 2008 at 6:25 pm
The memo below was sent to the sponsors of the motion adopted by the WVU Faculty Senate on Monday.
From: Parviz Famouri Tuesday - January 15, 2008 11:35 PM
To: WVU Science Chairs,
Congratulations on your passed motion that persuaded the Senate. I am sorry to say that you were played by our regional rival Pittsburg.
We, as the WVU Faculty Senate, have worked strenuously for many years in order to establish the Senate as where the buck stops on academic matters and integrity. We were making many strives. With this sensitive issue and given the opportunity to ultimately show the world that the WVU faculty is in charge of its academic programs and integrity, this motion managed to portray that we are not capable. That we, the Faculty Senate, need outsiders to step in and tell the Senate what our own could say.
I totally understand why the Senate didn’t want anyone from the HEPC. The mind boggling part is that the other three proposed members should be from outside, yet again discrediting WVU Faculty Senate.
The legacy of this story is that despite the past, the WVU Faculty Senate
members are incapable of impartial judgment and have no freedom. This will be the ultimate message that will come out of this story.
Parviz Famouri
WVU Past Faculty Senate Chair
January 16, 2008 at 8:10 pm
1. Someone ask Parviz if he was on the “search committee” for the President of WVU.
2. The “ultimate message” from Parviz is that he learned how to email from Craig Walker.
3. If the WVU faculty was “in charge of its academic programs,” why didn’t the 47-5 vote matter back in April?
I am left wondering if Parviz is going to lead a “freedom” charge or take Garrison’s bitch-tits out of his mouth.
January 16, 2008 at 8:10 pm
That would bePittsburgH….as in: ” it’s a ‘Burgh thing”….
Your Honor….the defense rests.
January 16, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Quick search on WVU website….Parviz and Nutter are colleagues work in same department (Lane Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering)….go figure…..sheeesshhh
Rumors here in Morgantown say that Lastinger is big time friend of Garrison’s brother in law….Mike Slaven….French history prof at IUP or Cal State University of Pa….
At least we have Rich Rod to distract us
January 16, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Lastinger. I knew that fucker was on the take. I posted on it before somewhere, about his reticence to vote against garrison.
January 16, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Lastinger is not the bad guy in this and doesn’t deserve the above comments. Keep focused at the top, they want you to think that some clerk or faculty toad screwed up (and even if they did) rather than an “fix it” directive from the top and a blind eye from the chief academic officer.
That language on my part (and many others) is precisely why there had to be external representation on the panel. It still may never be known for sure.
January 16, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Putting out others to deflect the criticism always makes sense. I would love to see a U.S. Attorney swoop into the situation. From the smell alone, we have a scheme to defraud and fraud on behalf of Mylan (Get her a MBA; hold out that she does one while knowing untrue), fraud on behalf of Bresch (no MBA), fraud and falsification of public records on behalf of Garrison (See Craig Walker email and Stewart Hall meetings), and I don’t think I have room for Manchin. I sure hope no money went from Mylan to Heather to Dad.
January 16, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Ok, fair enough about lastinger, someone said those connections to Garrison’s bro in law, are “rumors.” So, I’ll retract that he’s on the take.
But, I still think there was something funny about the way Lastinger handled the Garrison selection last year, and his wierd reticence on voting against Garrison’s appointment.
January 16, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Oh, and ignore Famouri. Here’s the scoop on that guy during the search committee’s work…..
“I think it’s unacceptable to coerce the board of governors in their decision,” said Parviz Famouri, a search committee member and chairman of WVU’s Faculty Senate. “This letter might try to do that.”
Famouri said he helped persuade the search committee to require a “good understanding of academics” from each candidate. But he also believes that the role of a university president has evolved over time.
In his view, presidents now look outward and focus on raising funds, with provosts and vice presidents handling internal affairs and overseeing academic details.
“I’m personally insulted,” said Famouri, a professor of computer science, electrical engineering and mineral resources engineering.”
He lugs around Garrison’s jock.
http://www.timeswv.com/westvirginia/local_story_091231134.html
I’m personally insulted this guy is telling us “move along, nothing to see here.” And, if he’s all fucking sure the “new breed” of presidents are those who “look outward,” I just point him to this (one of HK’s faves)…
http://wvpoliticalsweatbox.blogspot.com/2007/03/uhhhhhhhhh-mr-garrison-i-have-just-one.html
January 17, 2008 at 12:11 am
Michael Lastinger Saturday - April 14, 2007 11:53 AM
Subject :Re 4/11 Faculty Senate Special Meeting
There was one abstention in the final vote. Nobody perhaps noticed that, but it’s a technicality.
The Board’s voice vote was clear and overwhelming. I did not vote for Garrison, true. There was also a motion of unity and communication that followed and that passed unanimously. A sincere move on the part of the Board. All that happened in public.
As you’ll notice, here I’m responding at once to many, many messages I’ve received after the meeting today.
To those who thank me for a dissenting vote, and to those who wish I could have done more (me among them), all I can say is that I deserve neither so much credit nor quite that much blame.
My path in this was most times clear and easy to follow. There’s nothing special about that, except that such sense of ease is often itself the path to error.
My comfort there has been the many voices, divergent among themselves, that helped me choose steps along the way. If I had heard only one message, I would surely have been lost, so I thank all of you who have taken the time to speak across dimensions.
Now I’ll try to say what I can without violating the standards of executive session discussions.
Today in the Board of Governors, none of my expressions of concern, which reflected to a high degree the senate vote from Wednesday, were ignored by anyone on the Board.
On the contrary, I can assure you everyone listened very carefully. Yet, as the long morning wore on, it became clearer and clearer that Michael Garrison has deep and wide support among many constituencies.
Even Board members who shared my, and even other, reservations could not ignore that.
In informal expressions of preference, it was clear that Garrison had broad support and that this support was based on different members’ different assessments of what would be best for WVU.
There was a clear sentiment among many that this candidate can do things both within and outside this state that will bring new levels of support to our university. We all saw the suggestions of this in the public forums.
The results of that promise will have to be proved, but the majority of the Board was convinced. If you took notes during our meetings, you will see that the results of our decision will be measured pretty directly and in good time.
At the end of this, I am convinced that Mike Garrison will absolutely do his best to fulfill his engagement. I’m not sure it will be easy for him or for us, but I do know he thinks he can. The Board thinks so too, and so for no other reason than their love of this university.
One proof of that is the hours Board members put in during ordinary times. This year has not been ordinary, and none of those hours are visible to most. Last Wednesday both Steve Farmer and Tom Dover rearranged appointments in other parts of the state to be in Morgantown to listen to the senate debate, and I can assure you they listened.
That was on top of their day jobs and on top of their already heavy work for the WVU Board. Steve Goodwin has simply given his whole life to this project all year long. Doug Leech, last year’s chair, and Robert Wells, chair elect, have done the same.
Hank Barnette (’the real deal’ no matter what blog you read) is a pillar of integrity, wisdom, and experience. That’s a simple fact. These are some more familiar figures on the Board, but each of them has made a similar commitment.
For our immediate state of mind, no matter how distressed some of us may be, that distress cannot be helpful now.
In Nietzschean terms, whatever we feel at this moment, we could ask ourselves:
“Did you ever say Yes to one joy? Oh my friends you must say yes to all woe as well.”
So spoke Zarathustra, and as much as any words, those words give me, perhaps not exactly comfort, but at least the will to move on.
Several of you suggest the moderate path of reflection and affirmation.
I think you are very right, Judith and Lisa in the following questions (whether a special meeting or a regular one is another question). We’ve moved clearly over the past couple of years to a consent agenda for regular business, allowing for substantial discussions like this on the standard agenda — that came largely from the BOG decision under Doug Leech to move to a consent agenda there — we got that from the Board, some not noticing the connection when our work in both senate and board is more routine.
We’ve not been so distant as some would say, but we’ve not been so visibly connected, either. Our work together could be more openly articulated.
In any case, here’s a constructive idea from today’s senate emails, kudos to Judith Sedgeman — and to the Board today, where some of these points were discussed explicitly (I copy BOG chair and next chair on this, knowing they really care):
“I would favor a special meeting. Among those issues that seem important are:
1. How can the faculty have a stronger voice on and a more meaningful dialogue with the BOG?
2. How much influence can we have over the selection of the Provost who will serve with the next president?
3. How can we affect the composition and conduct of future search committees so that this kind of situation will not recur?
4. How can we provide effective and meaningful academic input into the president’s decision-making about issues that are critical to the academic future of the institution?”
For the skeptical, in addition to its real and practical exertion of duties, the faculty senate has been keenly aware of these questions of role and communication.
Last year the executive committee appointed a special committee whose charge was to examine the relations among the senate, the BOG, and the state Advisory Council of Faculty.
That committee worked hard but could not really have anticipated the current circumstances.
Its work from then and now going forward may be a basis for our next steps in the work to make the faculty voice clearer in the many venues where we need to be heard.
Please remember also the motion on open communications that the Board passed unanimously today.
Regards and sincere thanks to all,
Mike Lastinger
January 17, 2008 at 8:30 am
Since when does the Faculty Senate involve itself with graduate issues?That is up to the Graduate Council.
January 17, 2008 at 9:42 am
I agree that some of the panel should be filled by WVU people if for no other reason than expedience. A board of all outsiders would have to familiarize themselves with WVU’s inner workings (the legitimate ones, that is) and trudge through finding the appropriate people to talk with. Faculty could help do away with that bother and keep this thing from dragging out. Plus, a totally external board could be met with closed doors whereas WVU faculty might help in gaining access to people and records.
That said, it is important to find the appropriate faculty members. Obviously tools like Famouri should not be considered, nor should rogues like Kevin Outterson (who I like, but he’s definitely contrary). Faculty, for the most part, are detached from the administration and certainly feel no pressure (again, in most cases) to see things in their favor. If WVU’s faculty senate is anything like Pitt’s, they represent a wholly independent faction that can grant or derail the administration’s progress on certain matters. They know this and wield that power accordingly.
Then again, Pitt is a world-class research center and WVU is the world’s largest beer pong game. Not to be snide, but notwithstanding Heathergate, I’d say the words “West Virginia University” are enough to devalue a degree. But I digress…
January 17, 2008 at 10:20 am
Oh my God, he quoted Nietzsche. I only wish he’d gone all out and said “Thus spake Zarathustra” instead.
January 17, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Reliable source says that reporters from the NY Times and the Washington Post have been spending the day milling about Woodburn Hall
January 17, 2008 at 1:38 pm
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08017/850020-100.stm
WVU prof: No record of Bresch in class
Thursday, January 17, 2008
By Len Boselovic and Patricia Sabatini, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
A professor who taught one of the six classes added to Mylan executive Heather Bresch’s West Virginia University transcript in October said today she has no record of Ms. Bresch being in the class.
School officials made the revisions when they retroactively awarded an M.B.A. degree to Ms. Bresch, daughter of West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin and longtime friend and former business associate of WVU President Mike Garrison.
The professor was not contacted before university officials, reconstructing Ms. Bresch’s academic history based on incomplete records, awarded Ms. Bresch the degree nearly a decade after she left the program. Before the revisions, the university’s official records showed she was 22 credits short of earning the degree.
“The decision to add people to the class list that were never in the class disturbs me greatly. It offends academic freedom,” the professor told the Post-Gazette.
Ms. Bresch, who insists she earned the degree in 1998, was named chief operating officer of the Cecil generic drug maker in October. Her boss, Mylan Chairman Milan Puskar, is WVU’s largest benefactor.
Mylan did not return several phone calls today seeking comment.
This week, the university revised the composition of a panel appointed by Provost Gerald Lang to investigate the circumstances around the decision to award the master’s degree in business administration. Mr. Lang agreed to the faculty senate’s request to replace a high-ranking executive from the state Higher Education Policy Commission with three people not connected with WVU or state government. Those panel members have not yet been selected.
The investigation was launched after a Dec. 21 story by the Post-Gazette raised questions about how the university went about granting the degree even though university records showed Ms. Bresch had completed only about half of the credits required.
The revisions to her transcript included adding six classes, with grades, and changing two classes that were marked “incomplete” to show letter grades. The changes were worth 22 credits in the 48-credit program.
Following the Dec. 21 story, Mylan issued a statement supporting Ms. Bresch.
“Mylan stands behind the integrity of its longtime employee and senior executive Heather Bresch. Ms. Bresch is a highly qualified and well respected industry leader with an exemplary track record of success, established throughout her 15-year career with the company,” the statement read.
——————————————————————————–
More details in tomorrow’s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
First published on January 17, 2008 at 12:57 pm
January 17, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Jim you beat me to it.
January 17, 2008 at 3:48 pm
I’m really surprised the Surb’s not all over this one.
January 17, 2008 at 4:00 pm
I’m not.
He’s a butt fucking idiot.
And besides, who would he link to?
January 17, 2008 at 4:22 pm
It was a joke.
January 17, 2008 at 4:35 pm
I wonder why Surby is never on Hoppy’s or Agnello’s shows. Seems like they would be looking for each other’s bullshit input.
January 17, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Mountain Daddy is on top of things as usual with his rendezvous-gate comment — “I bet you a dollar on a dime that Justice Larry Starcher somehow leaked those photos of Maynard and Blankenship.”
Since this story broke, Justice Starcher has sent a memo to the Supreme Court’s administrator and instructed that all physical files and computer files containing this evidence be preserved. See: http://www.wvgazette.com/section/News/2008011525
This memo is outstanding for several reasons. First, Starcher used the term “inappropriate contacts” in the memo. Also, the fact that he even sent the memo, when it is already court policy to preserve this stuff, was clearly done to bring more attention to the matter. Methinks Justice Starcher may be soon vindicated as more of Big Bad Don’s machinations are finally dragged into the sunshine.
Now, if only the media will give half as much ink to this very serious issue as this forum gives to Garrison and Bresch, we’ll get some progress toward some semblance of Truth.
January 17, 2008 at 5:46 pm
More good news from WV: record EPA fine against Massey and Blankenship http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/17/us/17cnd-mine.html
NYT - please take the gloves off on Heathergate
January 17, 2008 at 6:36 pm
I have it on good authority that Starcher told the Martin Luther King Jr. Committee not to allow Maynard to speak at the MLK bell ringing ceremony. It is customary for the chief justice to speak. Starcher is on the committee.
Starcher told the committee that Maynard was a racist and that he didn’t value civil rights - and that he, Starcher, would not participate if the committee let Maynard participate.
I don’t know what the committee will do - but, that sounds like something Starcher would say and do.
January 17, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Well.
Maynard has leaked plenty of stories about the Court to the media over the years. Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it Spike?
January 17, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Come on, folks: Starcher’s just the other end of the same stick.
January 17, 2008 at 8:49 pm
How the hell would Starcher get the photos?
I’m with Lawbot - the WV Supreme Court smells like a sack full of assholes.
January 17, 2008 at 11:01 pm
While Joe is not as clever as Hillary and Bill…he really wants to emulate their behavior. All of you can expect a protect Heather - defend my baby campaign…beginning about now.
Hey, I don’t blame him. Fathers’ defending their children is as natural as rain.
She lied, though. Nevertheless, I understand his behavior.
January 17, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Hippie Killer Says:
“Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it Spike?”
It’s payback to Don, too. A month after the rendezvous, he filed a lawsuit over the policy that gives justices the authority to choose to recuse themselves from cases. At the time, Big D was targeting Larry Starcher, vocal critic of Don and his pet justice, Brent Benjamin. But that same policy is what allows Maynard to choose whether to stay on the Massey Energy case or not.
January 17, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Agreed Daddy….I would protect my lil girl with my all. It’s just that from knowing the players and the culture here I harbor this almost Malthusian view about the whole thing…..I want to see the whole thing just blow up.
JWB: I meant laughable in the pathos of the whole situation. I am rooting for Sbabtini, et al…and honestly feel sorry that they had to print a sort of retraction. But it’s evident to me the PPG has no intentions of letting up.
January 17, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Mountain Daddy, Starcher wouldn’t be “participating” in the MLK bell event anyway, except as an audience member. Only the top dogs (Gov, Senate Pres, House Speaker, Chief J) get to talk.
The question is whether Starcher will be at the awards ceremony Saturday to give out the Living the Dream awards. Chief or no, he’s very involved in that, while the other politicos are nowhere to be found.
January 17, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Lurking . . . I’m sorry, I meant the thread immediately before your post about the M & Ms — we have bigger fish to fry right now,
though there certainly is plenty to laugh at in all this thred. . .
the 4 empty beer glasses sitting in front of Spike and Don in the photo —
Lang and Sears pathetic squirelly radio/TV interviews —
Joe saying “bring in the Scotland Yards” —
Lastinger quoting Nietzsche —
Famouri saying “We were making many strives” before we “were palyed by our regional rival Pittsburg . . .”
Upon reflection, maybe the M & M routine provides a need break from too much really funny stuff . . .
January 18, 2008 at 3:04 am
wvstate, he’ll be there. He specifically asked that Wise put him on this committee. He never misses an event.
This person who told me all this stuff…..does not know that I blog.
This person has no reason to lie. Starcher said it.
January 18, 2008 at 8:18 am
Decent editorial by Dawn Miller today, pretty much lays it out.
January 18, 2008 at 9:27 am
Today’s Gazette says Maynard has recused himself. http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Breaking/000001423
At this stage, isn’t this like closing the barn door after the horse has been eaten by a wolf in coal operator’s clothes?
January 18, 2008 at 9:32 am
To the person who left all those comments I deleted:
If you’re going to spam my blog, at least be funny.
January 18, 2008 at 9:34 am
There is one element to this story that nobody has touched on. And it is a vitally integral plot point in this whole sordid soap opera. It speaks to motive. Let’s see - what vice usually attends sordid tales of money, power, politics and corruption? It’s buzzing all over the statehouse…..
January 18, 2008 at 10:02 am
HK you lost me up there. Who is “spamming” the blog? And since when is funny a prerequisite on here? I thought angry was more like it.
January 18, 2008 at 10:04 am
Oh. I deleted a bunch of stuff earlier. Trust me, you didn’t miss anything exciting. :-)
January 18, 2008 at 10:32 am
BigStomp,
You’ve got our (or at least my) attention. The vice that comes to my warped mind is prostitution.
Am I right? What’s the story?
January 18, 2008 at 10:55 am
Finally, we get some sex. Thank God.
I think the photo thing is funny bc (1) they were probably taken with a digital camera (2) by one of Spike or Blankenship’s “companions” who (3) probably got dumped sometime thereafter and (4) is a little pissed.
January 18, 2008 at 11:00 am
The potential that someone may have cheated to get a major college degree from a university, the prospect of perhaps a not so prudent jurist being bought by a companion who has brought a case before him, and the downright venomous theft of documents as one stole away to greener pastures have one cumulative result.
The result of each of these recent headlines may be public embarrassment
and or some legal ramifications for the perps but reading about these escapades in toto in the national media brings some measure of cultural guilt by association on all of us….
January 18, 2008 at 11:13 am
Maybe we deserve it for putting up with it for so long. I don’t know.
January 18, 2008 at 11:23 am
MSN: complicity because we allow it!! But “we” are a contradictory people….over my lifetime we have always seemed to appreciate the benevolent tsar…hating the sin, but forgiving the sinner. Screw it!! Public embarassment be damed…transparency,integrity,accountability…somebody translate it into French so it has some marketing potential.
It’s not just with RRod, MicroJo, Boss Hawg….look at the legislature…casino employees sponsoring gambling bills (and I have nothing against gambling)….grr…i don’t even want to get started. But your point is a good one.
Maybe we need a new state seal: Jessica Lynch on the obverse; Lynndie England on the reverse…since we seemingly don’t want leaders but rather flawed heros..
January 18, 2008 at 11:30 am
Is my mind totally in the gutter or did Big Stomp just suggest that those women who were with Maynard & Blankenship were beards?
January 18, 2008 at 11:45 am
Finally!
A voice of reason and journalistic integrity emerges from Charleston Gazette after a month of an anemic and pathetic response to the “MBA Mystery” scandal:
http://wvgazette.com/section/Opinion/2008011712?pt=10
Kudos to Dawn Miller for her best ever OPED.
Among the points she makes:
“However this farce was born, Garrison has the ability and authority to clean it up without waiting all year for an investigative panel. He should lay it all open before the public, acknowledge mistakes, discipline any wrongdoers, fire someone if necessary and pull WVU out of this destructive rut.”
“The body that accredits WVU — that assures students, employers and taxpayers that the university meets a certain level of generally accepted standards and competency — has said WVU isn’t the first school to be in this fix. An accrediting agency doesn’t get too concerned unless there’s reason to believe a school has a habit of manufacturing degrees.
But WVU doesn’t have to jeopardize its accreditation to be discredited.”
“And the longer WVU draws this out, the more harm it does.
Do we really want to spend all of 2008 talking about how corrupt WVU is? Better to fix it and move on. Otherwise, this farce will overshadow every basketball game, commencement, the start of fall football practice, homecoming, just as it stole some of the attention from the Mountaineers’ spectacular Fiesta Bowl win.”
“WVU’s attention should be on drawing more West Virginians into the life-changing experience of higher education, attracting competitive research grants and finding ways to apply the knowledge generated at the state’s university to improving the lives of the people it serves.”
“This situation would be resolved if people entrusted with the treasure that is West Virginia University would simply do the right things for the right reasons. An apology would help, too.
Mike Garrison has the ability to cut this wound open and clean it out. The sooner he does so, the better for everyone. Just do it.”
Miller is absolutely correct that Garrison could have, should have and still has the authority to resolve this immediately —- which he could have done in October or later in December when the Post-Gazette published its first article.
Garrison didn’t need to pass this extraordinarily important issue off to “the academic unit” or to an investigative committee. He simply had to call in to one meeting all of those who knew what transpired — and get to the bottom of what happened in short order.
He is supposed to be a lawyer for God’s sake who must have at least the fundamental skills of cross-examination possessed by even mediocre attorneys.
However, there is a fundamental flaw in Miler’s analysis, which she should have addressed.
That is the strong possibility that Garrison knew from the start exactly what was going on.
After all, on Friday, October 12, the day after the first Post-Gazette inquiry on Thursday October 11, there was a meeting right down the hall from Garrison’s office on the matter of Bresch’s MBA. In attendance was Garrison’s Chief of Staff Craig Walker, Provost Lang, Associate Business school Dean Cy Cogar, and former eMBA program director Paul Speaker and WVU general Counsel Alex Macia.
Is it reasonable to believe that an issue of possible dishonesty by the Governor’s daughter (who is also a top official of the company headed by WVU’s single biggest donor) was not discussed by those who were quickly summoned to an emergency meeting held within steps of Garrison’s office?
Moreover, on Saturday October 13, an e-mail from Business school Dean Sears to walker reveals he was not in attendance at the Friday meeting? However, in that Saturday afternoon e-mail Sears told Walker he and Cogar were ready to assist in any way.
Apparently Sears (who in a TV interview claimed total responsibility for the investigation and retroactive degree awarded to Sears) worked fast — because early on the afternoon on Monday October 15, WVU sent the Post-Gazette a statement informing that the records had been checked, an error found, an the conclusion reached that Bresch had earned the MBA in 1998.
Are we to believe that the official statement of Monday afternoon was not something reported in advance to the President of the University?
Are we to believe on that Monday Garrison, when informed of the conclusion Bresch actually had earned the degree, did not ask for any specifics — such as — why the screw-up? and, how did you reach such a conclusion over the weekend (without Sears being involved)?
Are we to believe that Garrison did not immediately pick up the phone that October Monday afternoon and call his friend Heather, or donor Puskar and the Governor to explain to them why and how Bresch’s grades and degree had failed to be reported to the Office of Admissions and Records?
Dawn Miller writes:
“[Garrison] should lay it all open before the public, acknowledge mistakes, discipline any wrongdoers, fire someone if necessary and pull WVU out of this destructive rut.”
Of course, such authoritative action would be impossible if Garrison from the very beginning was in on the corrupt decision to award the degree to Bresch with out adequate evidence to support the action.
If Garrison acquiesced in the decision made over the weekend of October 13-14 to grant the degree before any investigation occurred, then that would explain the false representation by Provost Lang and Dean Sears that a one to two week investigation preceded the conclusion and decision that Bresch had earned the degree.
And — it would explain the otherwise inexplicable failure of President Garrison to quickly sit all the actors in the drama down in his office (for goodness sakes they include his close associates and his close friend Macia — all of whom should be expected to tell him the truth) and get to the bottom of what happened without the need for a long, drawn out controversial investigation.
If President Garrison does not follow Miller’s extraordinarily sound advice, then it won’t be difficult to understand what underlies the drama that has kept WVU’s reputation twisting in the wind for more than a month.
Would the truth require Garrison to discipline or fire himself?
January 18, 2008 at 11:49 am
HK and others have hit the nail on the head.
Greed is not the problem inasmuchas that has always been a motive for the actions.
The problem there is no one or group with any moral authority and capabiltiy of putting an end to the flat out corruption that dictates this state’s existence.
The last time a governor tried he ended up a drunk taxi driver in Chicago.
January 18, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Anyone else concerned that the Daily Mail reports the presently-two-member panel is proceeding with interviews? One one hand you don’t want to hold things up, on the other you hope the new members get there before “all the work is done.”
January 18, 2008 at 1:19 pm
“The last time a governor tried he ended up a drunk taxi driver in Chicago.”
You sound as if you think that’s a bad thing.
January 18, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Unfortunately we can’s ask the taxi driver if he thinks he got a “fare” deal.
January 18, 2008 at 2:11 pm
If only somebody could somehow find a way to file suit (fraud?) then depositions taken under oath would go a long way to cleaning the sewers currently occupied by WVU administration. Most involved right now view this as worst case a disciplinary issue that could result in job loss and they are of course trying to protect their income and way of life. If everyone also were to realize that time in jail is a consequence of what they say then you will see a lot more progress being made and a lot less revisionist history.
In my view Garrison was aware of and involved in this from the moment the PPG called. How else to reconcile his legal background with his academic management and handling of this case? Any university president NOT involved in a similar situation would immediately move to correct the record and maintain the reputation of the university for which they work and represent. As Dawn Miller states Garrison “has the ability and authority to clean it up without waiting all year for an investigative panel.” At this point his inactions say more than his actions and he has already demonstrated that he is unfit to be a leader by allowing this to go on as long as it has without taking active involvement in the resolution of Ms. Bresch’s degree.
January 18, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Don’t kid yourself: anyone involved who faces discipline would lie. The story’s so convoluted right now that ten or eleven depos would muddy the facts further and leave participants enough room to lie rather plausibly. Prepping these folks would be cake. “Tell your story, the way you remember it,” would be code for “Say whatever. We can clean it up later.”
January 18, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Anyone seen the latest? First the PPG reported that a prof who taught one of the disputed classes stated Bresch’s name (then Kirby) did not appear on her class list. then apparently the prof found her personally prepared list and the name was on it and the PPG has revised the story. Evidently, the “official” WVU records and this prof’s list vary. The prof also says the list did no indicate she actually completed and passed the course.
Maybe it is a big deal that Rodriguez shredded his papers?
January 18, 2008 at 3:02 pm
UPDATE #2
The Daily Mail is reporting that Lang now concedes it is even money the degree was improperly awarded.
If nothing else, this is already proof that the college of B&E has serious institutional problems. Whether corruption or systemic incomptence or both.
January 18, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I was referencing the WVU degree kerfuffle.
January 18, 2008 at 5:49 pm
This afternoon’s Daily Mail story referenced above in this thread contains important comments by the new “independent” chair of the MBA investigation committee:
Regarding the university backing off its claims that Bresch met degree requirements in 1998, Nutter said,
“I don’t know what their attitudes are. I’ve talked to Lang, but specifically about procedure and how to get the committee going. I haven’t talked to (WVU President Mike) Garrison, and I probably will not.”
The panel has, however, begun interviewing faculty and administration at the business school about Bresch and the degree.
So —- Professor Nutter and his colleague Michael Lasinger are so independent that they are starting the investigation and doing interviews before consulting with the other three members of the panel or, in fact, before the majority of the panel was chosen.
No sitting down with all members of the panel.
No deciding how to approach the investigation.
No discussion of whom to interview and in what sequence.
No discussion concerning whether and/or how to record each interview.
No discussion of how to deal with interviewees who may request anonymity out of concern for their jobs.
No discussion of what documents to request.
—- Just a few of the many issues a truly independent and competent investigative panel would thoroughly discuss and explore before undertaking an extraordinarily important investigation.
And then there is the truly astounding Nutter comment:
I haven’t talked to (WVU President Mike) Garrison, and I probably will not.”
Not interview Garrison?
Defenders of the WVU Administration such as former Faculty Senate Chair Foumori wonder why objective critics don’t trust an “in-house” investigation?
Recall that:
Days before he was appointed, Professor Nutter gave his views on the MBA matter to the daily Mail.
Nutter told the DM:
“If indeed there was a degree awarded when the person completed only half the courses, I am indeed livid and heads should roll. I seriously doubt however that this occurred as it has been reported,” Professor Nutter told the Daily Mail on Dec. 27
Apparently the WVU Administration liked what Nutter told the Daily Mail.
However, neither Lang nor the “cohort” in the President’s had to wait for the DM to publish the story to learn his view—
because Nutter cc’d Lang when he sent his email comments to reporter Jake Stump
The Post-Gazette reported what happened next:
• Gerald Lang to Virginia Kleist
Nine minutes later, Provost Gerald Lang forwards a copy of Mr. Nutter’s comments to the paper to Virginia Kleist, a faculty senate leader who subsequently recommended that Mr. Nutter investigate the decision.
• Gerald Lang to Roy Nutter
One minute after e-mailing Ms. Kleist, Mr. Lang sends an e-mail back to Mr. Nutter, whom he eventually named as an investigator. There is no message to Mr. Nutter on the e-mail, just a copy of Mr. Nutter’s comments to the newspaper.
• Mike Garrison to Bill Case, Gerald Lang, Craig Walker
Two hours later, University President Mike Garrison sends a copy of Mr. Nutter’s comments to his chief of staff, the provost and his communications aide.
In spite of this Faculty Senate members were willing to compromise and accept Provost Lang’s hand-picked selections Nutter and Lasinger to stay on the Panel.
Now, we learn that Nutter has told the daily Mail today that he probably won’t talk to garrison during the investigation.
Not talk to — indeed —- closely question President Garrison!
Let’s revisit the post above concerning dawn Miller’s oped today and Garrison’s failure to act immediately to get to the bottom of a scandal that is destroying WVU’s reputation:
There is the strong possibility that Garrison knew from the start exactly what was going on.
After all, on Friday, October 12, the day after the first Post-Gazette inquiry on Thursday October 11, there was a meeting right down the hall from Garrison’s office on the matter of Bresch’s MBA.
In attendance was Garrison’s Chief of Staff Craig Walker, Provost Lang, Associate Business school Dean Cy Cogar, and former eMBA program director Paul Speaker and WVU general Counsel Alex Macia.
Is it reasonable to believe that an issue of possible dishonesty by the Governor’s daughter (who is also a top official of the company headed by WVU’s single biggest donor) was not discussed by those who were quickly summoned to an emergency meeting held within steps of Garrison’s office?
Moreover, on Saturday October 13, an e-mail from Business school Dean Sears to walker reveals he was not in attendance at the Friday meeting? However, in that Saturday afternoon e-mail Sears told Walker he and Cogar were ready to assist in any way.
Apparently Sears (who claimed total responsibility for the investigation and retroactive degree awarded to Sears) worked fast because early on the afternoon on Monday October 15, WVU sent the Post-Gazette a statement informing that the records had been checked, an error found, an the conclusion reached that Bresch had earned the MBA in 1998.
Are we to believe that the official statement of Monday morning was not something reported in advance to the President of the University?
Are we to believe on that Monday Garrison, when informed of the conclusion Bresch actually had earned the degree, did not ask for any specifics — such as — why the screw-up? and, how did you reach such a conclusion over the weekend (without Sears being involved)?
Are we to believe that Garrison did not immediately pick up the phone that October Monday afternoon and call his friend Heather, donor Puskar and the Governor to explain to them why and how Bresch’s grades and degree had failed to be reported to the Office of Admissions and Records?
Dawn Miller writes:
“[Garrison] should lay it all open before the public, acknowledge mistakes, discipline any wrongdoers, fire someone if necessary and pull WVU out of this destructive rut.”
Of course, such authoritative action would be impossible if Garrison from the very beginning was in on the corrupt decision to award the degree to Bresch though there was not adequate evidence to support the action.
If Garrison acquiesced in both the decision made over the weekend of October 13-14 to grant the degree before any investigation occurred, then that would explain the false representation by Provost Lang and Dean Sears that a one to two week investigation preceded the decision that Bresch had earned the degree.
And — it would explain the otherwise inexplicable failure of President Garrison to quickly sit all the actors in the drama down in his office
(for goodness sakes they include his close associates and his close friend Macia — all of whom should be expected to tell him the truth)
and get to the bottom of what happened without the need for a long, drawn out controversial investigation.
So, Nutter doesn’t think he will talk with Garrison . . .
Time to pull the plug on Professors Nutter and Lasinger and bring in truly independent investigators. Investigators qualified to carry out a thorough and profession inquiry without oversight of the WVU Administration—
investigators who will not need to share the findings at any point during the investigation with the people in the President’s office who must, based on the available evidence, be targets of the investigators.
January 18, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Very provocative Common Sense Says. You have obviously gone to school on this issue and have studied the timeline and were able to make reasonable assumptions based on the facts. I nominate you for the panel. In fact this entire blog, or at least focused parts, should be required reading for new panel members. There are pearls of wisdom and advice inside. Perhaps someone should take the initiative to lay out exactly what and how the panel should undertake this investigation. It’s obvious that they can’t do it on their own. Another concern is that the two member panel gets out ahead of the investigation and steers new panel members away from others that have already been contacted. Or they take the opportunity to influence (read intimidate) critical persons in the process.
This is moving beyond something that can be handled by the Monongalia County Solid Waste Authority to someone who should be wearing a HAZMAT suit.
January 18, 2008 at 10:17 pm
I am starting to have “Back to School” flashbacks with the Thornton Melon Business School.
January 19, 2008 at 9:45 am
Letter to the editor today thinks everyone should ignore this “MBA kerfluffle” and move on to better things. I guess everyone DOES have an opinion.
I have to wonder if the author got her writing skills from reading certain newspapers, or if they really teach “kerfluffle” at WVU.
January 19, 2008 at 10:31 am
Stacy North of Morgantown. Who’s she?
January 19, 2008 at 10:47 am
Stacy is a long-time state empluee and union activist….DHHR i think
January 19, 2008 at 10:52 am
Small state, huh?
January 19, 2008 at 11:08 am
Yep….and getting smaller all the time
January 19, 2008 at 12:20 pm
the saga DOES include sex. before heather got her big promotion she used to “clerck” in a lot of time with Mike P at his sleazy meat market Rat Pack lounge in the bottom of his waterfront hotel in Morgantown. Papa Joe may not have had anything to do with her promotion. She might have “earned” it by herself. Mike likes the young girls. I think he married one of his secretaries.
January 19, 2008 at 1:38 pm
^^
Oh, this just gets better and better.
January 19, 2008 at 1:56 pm
60 Minutes
524 West 57th St.
New York, NY 10019
EMAIL: 60m@cbsnews.com
PHONE: (212) 975-3247
Pick one:
Anderson Cooper
Katie Couric
Steve Kroft
Lara Logan
Scott Pelley
Bob Simon
Lesley Stahl
January 19, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Lara Logan.
/swoon
January 19, 2008 at 2:25 pm
True that.
January 19, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Did you guys hear about that corrupt spinning class that involved Don Surber?
January 19, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Can anyone get the email addresses of the WVU Faculty Senate members and send them (anonomously or not) Dawn Millers’ article on the Bresch MBA and the time line and commnets of common sense that was posted here yesterday? Most members of the Senate don’t read this blog and have limited knowledge about the “investigation” they voted for at the beginning of the week. Certainly the Dominion Post doesn’t cover the story.
It is clear that a majority of the Senate wants a truly independent professional investigation of the MBA scandal. They will not be pleased to learn that Profs Nutter and Lasinger have started the “investigation” 2 weeks before the 3 other members will be chosen.
They also won’t be happy to learn that Nutter has told the Charleston newspaper that he doesn’t think he will interview Garrison! Even though Garrison has been right in the middle of the MBA mess from the beginning.
I hope somebody here can get the senators email addresses and send them Dawn Millers’ article and common sense’s timeline.
January 19, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Yeah, Lara Logan’s got the
(.)(.)
) . (
( v )
but her interview with Eric Prince was complete crap.
January 19, 2008 at 5:43 pm
I also heard that she used to be a magician’s assistant and never recovered from a “Saw-The-Lady-In-Half” trick.
@@(.)(.)@@
@@.) . (.@@
@@( v )@@
Let’s see if that works.
January 19, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Daughter and Mr P is old news….current fling is with Coury
January 19, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I don’t remember “Cindy” being his secretary….she mostly hung on the bar at a restaurant he owned(s)
January 19, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Faculty Senate -> http://www.wvu.edu/~facultys/
Follow the menu at the top left for Faculty Senate, and click on the Senators link. Go to http://directory.wvu.edu for the Senator’s email addresses. I’m sure they’ll enjoy hearing from you.
January 19, 2008 at 9:40 pm
The stacy editorial was ridiculous. She obviously has no clue how different graduate courses are than undergraduate classes. They are small and you know everyone in the class.
January 20, 2008 at 12:16 am
Not an editorial, just a letter to the editor. They’ll print anything, they’re probably glad to have a change from the usual Creationist letters.
January 20, 2008 at 12:18 am
Not an editorial, just a letter to the editor. They’ll print anything, they’re probably glad to have a change from the usual Creationist letters.
January 20, 2008 at 5:30 am
WV Hillbillies
Come and listen to a story about a woman named Bresch.
A rich mountaineer, always kept her image fresh.
Then one year she didn’t go to class,
And pulled a degree right out of her ass.
MBA that is, WV was fooled.
Well the first thing ya’ll should know is dad’s a millionaire,
Gov. of the State who has friends everywhere.
Said baby girl don’t worry I know what it’s like,
And she picked up the phone and called her good friend Mike.
Garrison, that is.
An even bigger fool, a dimwit star.
The next thing Mike did was call his provost Lang.
Said “take care of this” or you’ll retire with a bang.
One lie turned to two and then it became more.
Bresch never realized what reporters had in store.
The WV Hillbillies! You couldn’t make this up!
WVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWVWV
Sung at the end of her tenure at Mylan:
Well now its time to say good-bye to Bresch and all her “friends”.
She’d shamed herself and West Virginia to the very end.
You’re all invited back to watch on Court TV.
She’ll be doin time with the others job free.
Hillbillies they are. Can’t get it straight. Take your shoes off and stay awhile. It’s better than Hee-Haw.
January 20, 2008 at 11:51 am
Yeah, they print anything. My friends and I have competitions to see who can get the craziest shit printed in the Vent Line and Reader’s Voice. My personal best was something about Jason Huber being Fidel Castro’s lover, which was funny because the Gaz folks must have heard a post-15 High Lifes Huber in the background telling me to fuck off.
January 20, 2008 at 1:44 pm
That WV Hillbillies thing is hilarious.
January 20, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Poetic Champion,
You are a genious. It was poetic genious.
I think you should sing that on Mountage Stage tonight……talk about allowing anything!
January 20, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Bravo! Author! Author!
January 21, 2008 at 12:28 pm
There was some guy in a Friends of Coal hat playing the machines at Red Carpet hollering he was a friend of the Manchins and this investigation into their daughter has brought shame on our whole state. And how dare the press look into it. At the Broadway the discussion is that like Garrison, JOE should step in and just admit the real truth and it is remiss of him not to. Has Lara Ramsberg crafted up an official statement for Joe and Gayle? Seems like she has enough sense not to touch this one. Notice how Joe said he only heard of the MBA controversy because his press secretary told him of it. And then Lara declined to comment and sent inquiries straight to WVU. Eveyone’s playing hot potato. One of the most priceless things is Steve Goodwin’s back peddling.
January 21, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Thanks, LL. Now all I can think of is Thursday Steak Night at the Carpet.
January 21, 2008 at 11:44 pm
New York Times: WVU MBA
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/us/22heather.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
April 2, 2008 at 3:13 pm
[...] one. [...]