'...Chances are, many athletic directors across the country are studying the Minnesota stadium situation and trying to figure out whether they might be able to swing a similar deal. Could KU’s Memorial Stadium, for example, soon be named for some bank or generous contributor? It’s not out of the question; look at the situation at Oklahoma State, where the naming rights were tied to the $125 million gift of Boone Pickens!

Considering the importance KU’s athletic director places on money, surely he is thinking about ways to put the name of some individual or company on the side of Memorial Stadium or maybe even Allen Fieldhouse. For $25 million, $50 million or $100 million, who knows?


...What is the sales value for the KU athletic department or the university itself? How long will it be before corporate naming rights are granted in the Big 12 Conference, and how soon will there be corporate names on KU’s Memorial Stadium and Allen Fieldhouse or Kansas State’s Bill Snyder Family Stadium and Bramlage Coliseum?

Look at the extortion tactics in Allen Fieldhouse and the skyrocketing price for basketball tickets. It doesn’t matter what a person may have given last year, because there is an annual re-evaluation of seat prices, and the highest bidder gets whatever seat location he or she wishes.

Increasing numbers of longtime KU academic and sports supporters are saying enough is enough. Some are known to have changed their wills and long-range giving plans to KU, but apparently, the administration sees nothing wrong with the high-pressure tactics. Who knows what the eventual damage to KU will be? Of course, most of those responsible for the gouging on KU athletic tickets and those who approved the plan will be gone when the next major KU capital campaign comes along. The damage will be done for others to try to repair.'

An Eastern Oregon University professor and a student say they were raped by a university administrator.

The alleged victims are suing the man, the university and the board of higher education for more than $200 million.

Director of Undergraduate Studies, Robert Davis, allegedly raped the two women on successive nights at a conference in Atlanta.

The plaintiff's stories are similar. They say that Davis forced himself on them after they'd fallen unconscious, possibly after being drugged.

Both say they woke up during the attack but were unable to fight back.

University officials say they've placed Davis on paid administrative leave during an internal investigation.

Attorney Martin Dolan is representing the plaintiffs. He says the suit names the university and the board of higher education because they ignored previous complaints and were lax in enforcing sexual harassment policies.

Martin Dolan: "At least in the case of one of the plaintiffs' cases, the allegation is that those rules were not sufficiently implemented."

The student plaintiff is suing for more than $107 million. The professor for just over $100 million.

When it comes to New Mexico university presidents - two of whom were forced to resign this year before their contracts were even close to ending - isn't the silence just deafening?

Yet aren't New Mexicans entitled to some explanations?

Here we have, earlier this year, former University of New Mexico President Louis Caldera and now, this past week, former New Mexico Highlands University President Manny Aragon forced to empty their desks and take contract buyouts. But we don't really know why.

Obviously, there were unresolved conflicts between the two presidents and their respective boards of regents.

Obviously, the regents aren't talking, and neither are their institutions. Personnel issues are confidential, they plead.

Obviously, both of these men got attractive golden parachutes to make sure their exits had nice, soft, well-heeled landings.

And, obviously, the public - which pays the bills - doesn't have a clue what went wrong.

The French distinguish themselves, both statistically and anecdotally, ahead of Germans, Britons and even Americans in their obsession with blogs, the personal and public journals of the Internet age.

Just why the French have embraced blogs more than most is anyone's guess, but explanations range from technical to historical and cultural.

Sixty percent of French Internet users visited a blog in May, ahead of Britain with 40 percent and little more than a third in the United States, according to Comscore, an Internet ratings service.

Likewise, French bloggers spent more than an hour in June visiting France's top-rated blog site, far ahead of the 12 minutes spent by Americans doing the same and less than 3 minutes for Germans, according to Nielsen/NetRatings.

More than three million Internet users, or more than 12 percent of those online in France, have created a blog, according a study released in June by the ratings agency Médiamétrie.

"You cannot be elected president of France without a blog," said Benjamin Griveaux, director of Web strategy for Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a former finance minister who in 2004 was among the first politicians to start a blog. "Blogs have not replaced traditional media, but they are absolutely necessary for every politician."

Some even harbor a faint hope that flourishing online discussions might curb the French population's penchant for taking to the streets in protest.

"With so many blogs, I'm hoping for fewer protests and strikes in Paris this fall," said Loïc Le Meur, a pioneer French blogger and European managing director of the blog-hosting company Six Apart. "If people can express themselves online, then maybe they don't need to block the streets."

French blogs stands out in other measurable ways. They are noticeably longer, more critical, more negative, more egocentric and more provocative than their U.S. counterparts, said Laurent Florès, the French-born, New York-based chief executive of CRM Metrix, a company that monitors blogs and other online conversations on behalf of companies seeking feedback on their brands.

"Bloggers in the United States listen to each other and incorporate rival ideas in the discussion," he said. "French bloggers never compromise their opinions."

They also passionately debate why they blog so much. One common explanation in the blogosphere is that there are so many French Internet surfers to begin with. Last year the number of French people online passed the halfway mark of the total population of 61 million, with 85 percent of Internet users in May using high-speed broadband at home, according to Médiamétrie.

Over the past three decades there has been a gigantic effort to increase the share of Americans who graduate from college. The federal government has spent roughly $750 billion on financial aid. Yet the percentage of Americans who graduate has barely budged. The number of Americans who drop out of college leaps from year to year. ... Tuition tax credits and grants have not produced more graduates in the past and they will not do so in the future. Bridget Terry Long of Harvard meticulously studied the Clinton administration’s education tax credits and concluded that they did not increase enrollment. Sarah E. Turner of the University of Virginia concludes, “Very broad-based programs such as tuition subsidies or across-the-board grants to low-income students are likely to have minimal effects on college completion while imposing large costs.”

You have to promote two-parent stable homes so children can develop the self-control they need for school success. You have to fundamentally reform schools. You have to expand church- and university-sponsored mentoring programs and support groups.

[T]he obsessive focus on college education bespeaks a certain cowardice and calculation in Democratic circles. College is a cost that primarily affects the middle class and the well-to-do but, particularly in the private context, is hefty enough that it can be burdensome for both. Talk of making it more affordable, while ostensibly aimed at subsidizing the poor, is really a poll-tested way to speak to the politically potent middle- and upper-income quintiles -- it's a way for the Democratic Party to speak up the income ladder, where the votes are.

The whole thing is a basically coded appeal, framed in terms of economic uplift so all can feel progressive while supporting something for themselves. If we spent one tenth the energy working on high school graduation rates, we'd have both a more powerful impact on the truly disadvantaged and a more significant impact on college attendance. The problem is, the middle class and the upper class aren't worried about their kids graduating from high school, and so talk of those problems doesn't resonate with large swaths of the electorate. And that all points to the underlying dynamic here and elsewhere in Democratic rhetoric: Progressives now try to address poverty in the context of the middle class -- they seek out economic issues which could aid the poor but have plenty of relevance up the income ladder. In doing, they ignore the most destructive and entrenched pathologies and problems, as those tend to be rather rare among higher income earners, and for that reason much more damaging to those caught in their grip. The ultimate problem here is that the poor rarely votes, while the middle class does, and it's damn hard for politicians to figure out how to focus the electorate on things that aren't their problem.

[C]ommenters never agree with my college-skepticism. For starters, let me say I have no objection to increasing the number of college graduates in the United States. One thing I do worry about, though, is this. Right now a hefty proportion of kids do go to college. When you try to increase the number of college-goers by subsidizing college attendance, the tendency is for the vast majority of the subsidies to accrue to families that would have sent their kids to school anyway rather than to the marginal families who otherwise wouldn't have been able to afford it. Since college-bound kids come, as a rule, from wealthier families than do non-college kids, these schemes can often resort to upward wealth redistribution. The specific Clinton/DLC plan mostly avoids these problems, which is good, but I still think it's a strange thing for progressives to be prioritizing given that you can only focus on so many things at once.

The thing of it is that as you can read in Third Way's report (PDF) on "The Politics of Opportunity," Americans are already quite well-educated: "American students spend an average of 13.8 years in formal education—more than any other industrialized nation in the world except Norway" (see also Education at a Glance from the OECD). There's a real education problem in America concerning our large number of high school dropouts who, economically, end up doing quite poorly. But the economic problems we have vis-à-vis other rich nations -- rising levels of middle-class insecurity, enormous inequality, declining levels of social mobility -- aren't plausibly attributable to a shortfall in the number of people attending college. The statistics show that we have more people attending college than other countries do already.

"The question [in a Chronicle of Higher Ed forum] is whether Web-log commentary helps or damages an academic's career. It is a shameful question. Intellectuals should not be worrying about "careers," the tenured among us least of all. Despite the First Amendment, which only really protects one from the government, most Americans who speak out can face sanctions from other institutions in society. Journalists are fired all the time for taking the wrong political stance. That is why most bloggers employed in the private sector are anonymous or started out trying to be so.


...Being in the middle of [debates on the Middle East], trying to help mutual understanding, is what I trained for. Should I have been silent, published only years later in stolid academic prose in journals locked up in a handful of research libraries? And this for the sake of a "career"? The role of the public intellectual is my career. And it is a hell of a career. I recommend it."

One dreams of returning to the university. The tree-shadowed walkways. The shared goals of learning. The sexual and somatic adventuring. Ah, the student life.

In early May, I received an unsolicited invitation to join Trump University, which sounds like the kind of institution you might find parodied on the comics page. (In fact, it has been mocked in ``Doonesbury.") This wasn't like the letters my sons received when they were in high school, inviting them to apply to universities. This was an acceptance letter, a ``personal invite" from Donald Trump, contingent on my coughing up $40. Which I did.

You probably think I've been kicking back at my summer job bagging groceries while classes were out of session, but Trump U doesn't slow down. ``Focus is very important, and momentum," TU chairman Donald tells us in one of his many communications. TU is about learning, 24/7, with no shortage of face time with Himself. If you call watching little streaming video clips of Donald pontificating face time. Which, in a sense, it is. His face. Your time. Your money.

Here's what you get for the initial buy-in at TU: video Trumptalks on subjects like ``Dealing With Failure," ``Creating a Great Brand," ``Career Advice , " and ``Salesmanship." Sample pabulum: ``There's nothing like a great salesperson. I put them up with the greatest people in the world."

You also receive a subscription to ``Inside the Trump Tower," a newsletter chock full of windy little essays. I especially enjoyed the moronic outing, ``The End of the MBA is Nigh!" by business guru and self-promoter extraordinaire Tom Peters . It's a quick piece of nothing fluff that never mentions the author's own MBA from Stanford University.

All over the website -- because that's all TU is, a website (www.trumpuniversity.com) -- chairman Trump rattles on about the value of extramural ``education" like TU. To recycle the slur often directed at President Bush, Trump is a man who was born on third base who later made much of hitting a home run; his father was a successful New York real estate magnate and Donald has a graduate degree from the Wharton School.

Inevitably, he blogs: ``Britney [Spears] has seen better days. She performed four or five years ago at the Trump Taj Mahal and she was great. Now it seems as if everything's slipping away from her. Britney, don't let that happen. Don't let it slip away. Keep your head on straight." Can you imagine Larry Summers bloviating about Madonna? Maybe he should have.

And, of course, Trump's favorite subject is . . . Trump. In one of his homilies, he celebrates the Top Ten Books on Entrepreneurship. The first six books were authored by, yes, Donald Trump.

Another ``benefit" of matriculating at Trump U is receiving a near-constant stream of e-mails and occasional phone calls from TU staffers trying to sell you more courses. Shortly after I enrolled, TU president Michael Sexton invited me ``to purchase a remarkable audio/video course available exclusively from Trump University. For the first time ever, Donald Trump has created a complete eight-week course on how to get rich." I continue to receive invitations to enroll at TU, even though I am already a student. A slip-up at the dean's office, I guess.

I called Sexton, and he picked up on the first ring. From his office at the Trump Building on 40 Wall Street, Sexton semi-apologized for the blizzard of come-ons I'd been receiving. ``We want to get people to take the first step and enroll for a course," he explained. He said TU had ``perhaps been a little overexuberant" in hyping its exciting new products. ``We've had feedback that we should be cutting down on the touch points," which I am guessing is businesspeak for ``people have been complaining about the spam."

``We don't spam anybody," he insisted. Just hours after he said this, I received yet another spam invitation for me to join Trump University. I forwarded the e-mail to him, with the comment, ``Michael, if this isn't spam, what is?" I have yet to hear back, but I know how busy university presidents are these days.

Careers are at stake because winning is far more important to a coach's job security than graduation rates. In some places, those are not just the jobs of the coaches, but of the college presidents as well.

The idea that the football team wants to have a college of which it can be proud once was meant to be something said as a joke.

These days, there are times when it's difficult to see the humor.

Compromises are made. Athletes who are forced to be students are pushed through classes and leave their colleges ill-prepared for the real world.

Graduation rates don't change that.

What needs to be changed is the idea that every player in a college uniform is a true student-athlete. The NCAA needs to understand that it's OK to admit this.

No one in the stands for the Auburn-Alabama or Texas-Oklahoma game or even the Virginia Tech-Virginia game is going to watch a player score a touchdown and then say, "I'd be much happier if his American literature grade was higher."

Universities should pay these athletes or provide them with a vocational education or permit them to work somewhere on campus. They still would be part of the university community and still could represent the school on the athletic fields.

'He currently gripes that no institute of higher education would hire him, despite his qualifications. "I discovered I could not gain a professorship even after applying many times," he writes in The Savage Nation. "My crime? I was a white male."'

"Dr. Richardson says the university is not waiting until the [internal] investigation is complete to take action. He says, 'I want to ensure that every course at Auburn is taught with the academic rigor that students should expect and they deserve.'"

The boarding school where I taught during the 2004-05 school year was accredited--but this was hardly a guarantee of quality, or even of responsibility on the part of the school. This school cost more than $32,000 a year, which is the going rate for boarding schools in New England and elsewhere around the country. That's a price tag that creates some entirely reasonable expectations; one imagines, if one is mortaging one's future to send one's child to such an institution, that for $32,000, one's child will have access to one hell of an education, one that far surpasses, in quality and variety, what's available at the free public school just down the road. But in schools as in other commodities, price tags are really only price tags, and all they tell you is what the market rate is for the commodity at hand. That's one of the many things I learned during my year teaching at a very expensive, but very academically weak school.

I won't name the school, since it's not my goal to cause problems for the school itself, and since it is my goal here to use my experience at the school to point to larger issues with the private school system. But I will give some particulars, just to explain what I mean when I say the school was academically inadequate. I say that the school was academically inadequate because it employed teachers to teach subjects that they were not able to teach. There were some excellent teachers there--but they were outweighed by the bad ones. There was a biology teacher who also taught introductory Spanish--but who did not speak Spanish, could not read or write Spanish with any real skill, and had no idea how to teach a foreign language; her worksheets and quizzes were riddled with errors because her own grasp of the language was so weak. There was an English teacher who also taught algebra one and two--but who could not actually explain the principles behind the math, and who, by the end of the year, also could not solve the homework problems assigned in the textbook. Because the school failed to employ a competent algebra teacher, large numbers of students lacked the skills to go on to pre-calculus. There was a U.S. history teacher who taught current events and leftist ideology rather than history proper. Because there was no set English curriculum and no real training in writing (one teacher actually devoted substantial time to having students write and illustrate comic books), the school graduated functional illiterates with depressing regularity. The SAT scores for students at this school were ludicrously low. They did not reflect students' intelligence, but they did reflect the poverty of their educational experience.

For $32,000 a year, parents were paying for a school that probably did more to harm their children's chances of going on to a good college than not. Worse, the parents did not seem to have the faintest idea that this was the case. The students at the school were, by and large, quite happy there (though many of them would tell you, with a frankness peculiar to teenagers, that they knew it wasn't a real school they were attending). There was much that was wonderful about the school apart from its abysmal academics--and parents, seeing their children happier than they had been at their previous school, and admiring the excellent arts program, the work program, the good cooking, and the school's pastoral setting, assumed that all was well. Teenagers don't tend to talk much to their parents about the daily details of their lives if they can avoid it; they especially don't tend to talk much about what they are learning in class; and the parents of boarding school students are exceptionally cut off from those kinds of details. The happiness of the kid and the price tag stand in as proxies for quality of education. It was scary to see how willing this school was to flush students' opportunities; scary, too, to see how trusting parents were, and how misplaced their trust was.

The self-containment of boarding schools can create terrariums of privilege in which students develop a skewed sense of money and have a hard time remembering that, in fact, it is not normal to go skiing in Switzerland just because it's March, or to receive an S.U.V. in celebration of one's 16th birthday. At, for example, Choate Rosemary Hall - one of many boarding schools starting classes this or next week - room, board and tuition for 2005-2006 is $35,360. If, as Choate's Web site explains, 27 percent of students receive financial aid, that means the other 73 percent come from families that are, by just about any standards except perhaps their own, very rich. Even when these schools hold chapel services espousing humility and service to others, it's the campus facilities - the gleaming multimillion-dollar gymnasium, say - that can send a louder message.

...It's hard not to wonder: in a world of horrifying inequities, at what point do these lavishly maintained campuses go from enriching and bucolic to just obscene? Can a student living on such a campus be blamed if, logically working backward, she starts to think her access to such bounty must exist because she deserves it? It is this line of thought, I suspect, that gives rise to the noxious attitude of entitlement and snobbishness that is simultaneously less common than pop-culture depictions of boarding school would have you believe and also not that hard to find.

For me, the question isn't why parents wouldn't send a child to boarding school as much as why they would. Unless there are either severe problems at home or flat-out terrible local schools, I don't see the point. Even in the case of terrible schools, I'm not convinced that parents can't significantly augment their children's education. Among the advantages of boarding school are opportunities for independence, academic stimulation, small classes, peer companionship and the aforementioned campus beauty - but every single one of these opportunities is available at dozens of liberal arts colleges, so why not just wait a few years until the student will better appreciate such gifts and save $140,000?

Anyone interested in actual improvement of the presence of good nonwhite faculty in our universities needs to take certain steps at their schools. Do not allow the hiring of more bureaucrats to gasp in predictable horror at the way things are. No more Assistant Vice-hand-holders in the bower of ethnic unhappiness. Forget all the false storefronts and unseemly fawnings that are the usual pewter trade beads of minority recruiting.

Start the laborious process of dragging recruitment out of the clinging vines of the H.R. people and back into the hands of departments. Accept the possibility that an imperfect process can lead to a perfect result. College leaders need the ability to go outside the standard hiring process to support and attract the best faculty, including minority faculty. They should also have the flexibility to flag potential scholars early in life and use university resources to assist them in their long-term goal of joining the professoriate.

Plan ahead a generation. Work ahead a generation. Figure out who of color in your local schools has the potential to be a good professor. Get rid of your highly paid and symbolic chief diversity officers. We all know that they accomplish little. This is not their fault; their jobs are inherently impossible. Respect can’t be legislated, it must be earned. Use that money to hire a brace of heat-seeking twenty-somethings to systematically find the most academically promising minority 10-year-olds in likely and unlikely places, and track and support them for a decade or more, as your university’s scholars-in-waiting. Consider advance long-term contracts with the best doctoral students. Be bold.

Let the word diversity lie fallow until something meaningful can grow from its good soil. Let the words affirmative action not be spoken until they mean action that is affirmative again.

[T]he story was greeted with great disdain in Auburn and with considerable laughter in other SEC locales like Tuscaloosa, Ala., and Knoxville, Tenn. But if you looked deeper, you would find that even those rivals who got a kick out of seeing the Tigers embarrassed were a bit nervous themselves.

Why?

Because they are all afraid their team is going to be next.

One of the most peculiar things about college athletics — and sports in general — is that even the most diehard fans watch the games with the nagging suspicion that everyone — even their team of choice — is cheating. Whether it's happening or not, many of them accept this as a necessary evil, even if they would prefer to ignore it and hope no one else notices.

Let's say you're an alumnus and supporter of University X. And let's say you take a trip back to the town of your alma mater and see the kid your school just signed to play quarterback driving past campus in a new Escalade.

Are you simply excited to see a young superstar in person? Or is your first reaction to think, "Gee, I hope no one tries to find out how he paid for that?"

These are answers that everyone deserves but nobody really wants. This is the reason most people aren't interested in the Auburn story, just like they aren't particularly riveted by the Barry Bonds controversy.

After all, if those pesky reporters can nail the single-season home run king, then they might be able to nail my guy too, right?

This is why many people always will hate sportswriters more than political scribes. After all, the charm of politics is the corruption, the lying, the infighting. Sports are supposed to be the respite from all that madness, and the journalists who bring the ugly stuff to the forefront are ruining the fun.

Three Duke football players were dismissed from the program yesterday by Coach Ted Roof and a fourth, starting quarterback Zack Asack, was suspended and will miss the 2006 season because of a serious academic infraction.

The players dismissed were Andreas Platt, Deon Adams and Joe Suder. Platt, a 6-2, 200-pound strong safety, is from Greensboro and played at Jamestown's Ragsdale High School, and Adams, a 6-1, 195-pound receiver, is also from Greensboro, where he played at Smith High School.

Platt would have been a third-year sophomore after being redshirted in 2004 as a freshman. Adams would have been a senior. Suder is a 6-6, 340-pound defensive tackle from Reno, Nev., who redshirted last season as a freshman.

Duke athletics officials said that the three players were dismissed for violating team regulations. Platt, reached at home last night, wouldn't say what led to his dismissal. A DWI charge at least contributed to the situation.

Platt was found guilty of the charge in January in Orange County District Court for a July 16, 2005, minor traffic accident in Chapel Hill.

"I ain't got nothing to say," Platt said. "I ain't worried about nothing. It was just a mutual agreement that it was time for a change. I'm going to another school."

Platt said that he plans to continue his education and football career at Western Carolina.

Platt played in 11 games at Duke and had 15 tackles. Adams played in 27 games and caught 12 passes for 125 yards.

Asack was suspended for plagiarism and will not be able to attended classes in the coming academic year. School officials said that he will be eligible to return to school and to the football program in the summer of 2007.

"I made a mistake and am remorseful," Asack said in a prepared statement released by Duke. "I take full responsibility for my actions. I wish the team well and look forward to returning next summer. I love it here at Duke."

Asack would have been a sophomore this season. He started six of the Blue Devils' final seven games last season and finished the season with 966 passing yards. He completed 50 percent of his passes and had five touchdown passes. He was intercepted eight times.

Asack's absence will likely thrust rising sophomore Marcus Jones into the starting quarterback role. The only other recruited quarterback in the Duke program next season is incoming freshman Thaddeus Lewis.

Roof said that the Blue Devils will move forward and try to offset Asack's absence in the coming season.

"Sometimes great young men make poor decisions and that is the case in this situation," Roof said in a prepared statement.

"While I certainly don't condone his actions, I have been impressed with the manner in which Zack has handled this issue.

"I fully support Zack and am confident that he will grow in many areas as a result of this situation.

"When you are part of a family and make an uncharacteristic mistake, you are not kicked out of the family. Zack will remain part of the Duke football family and will be supported by everyone in our program."

The chancellor of Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville has been accused of plagiarizing parts of a speech from, among other sources, remarks by President Bush.

In a written statement issued on Wednesday, the chancellor, Vaughn Vandegrift, said he "relies heavily on his staff" to write his speeches. "I approved the speech, and I take full responsibility for its content," the statement said. "If mistakes were made, we will take steps so that it doesn't happen in the future."

The chancellor delivered the speech in February at a luncheon celebrating Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday. In the speech, Mr. Vandegrift said the following: "For generations, African-Americans have strengthened our nation by urging reforms, overcoming obstacles, breaking down barriers, rising above injustice, and enriching our society."

That language is nearly identical to a passage in a 2003 speech by President Bush: "For generations, African-Americans have strengthened our nation by urging reforms, overcoming obstacles, and breaking down barriers. We see the greatness of America in those who have risen above injustice and enriched our society."

Another 19-word passage in Mr. Vandegrift's talk appears to have come almost verbatim from the Web site of the King Center, in Atlanta.

The similarities were found by a sister of Chris Dussold, a former professor at Southern Illinois at Edwardsville who was fired for plagiarizing his teaching statement. Mr. Dussold believes he was unfairly dismissed, and he and his supporters have worked to uncover other examples of plagiarism at the university. "All of my friends and family, time permitting, start searching for plagiarism," Mr. Dussold said on Wednesday.

And they have found a number of examples, from both professors and administrators. In many of the cases, like the chancellor's, the copying has been only a few sentences. But Mr. Dussold argues that if he was fired for copying a teaching statement used only as part of his tenure review, then others should also be dismissed for similar borrowings.

"If mistakes were made, I think their policy is they fire the person immediately," said Mr. Dussold, who is now an assistant professor of accounting, economics, and finance at nearby McKendree College. "If you're going to consider what I did to be plagiarism, I want equal treatment."

Mr. Dussold has also pointed out that Mr. Vandegrift's 150-word online welcome statement -- titled "From the Chancellor" -- is identical to that of the previous chancellor. A spokesman for the university, Greg Conroy, said he had written the statement and that there was nothing wrong with reusing it because it is "university property."

Mr. Dussold also brought to light passages that had been plagiarized in a 2005 speech by Walter V. Wendler, chancellor of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. Like Mr. Vandegrift, Mr. Wendler said those passages had been included by a member of his staff.

Mr. Dussold, who was dismissed in 2004, is suing the university and plans to cite such examples as proof of unfair treatment.

S. Philip Morgan, a professor of sociology at Duke University, says that institutions would be wise not to encourage independent study courses, because he believes that professors — especially those who care deeply about the success of their institution’s teams — can easily manipulate grades for such courses. “There is very little oversight in those kinds of situations,” he says.

"[U]nless we attempt to read racialized trauma according to a more Freudian, Lacanian understanding for subjectivity we will continue to misunderstand why racial stigma persists and, more generally, why the laws humans create to protect against forms of discrimination leave in place a notion of the racialized subject as emptied of interiority and the psychical."

'The sad episode has one happy consequence. It has enriched the English language with a new verb. To quote an innovative blogger, "to frisch" means to write "something on the internet so creepy and offensive that you are forced to quit your job before getting canned."'

The blogger used it in a sentence: "Deb really frisched herself…"

Much of his teaching was aimed at cultivating the civilizing virtues as opposed to one's curriculum vitae. I learned about this side of him the hard way.

Acutely aware of the fact that I would soon be looking for a job — this was in 1978 — Professor Rieff began prodding me to start submitting articles for publication. One day I paraded into his office puffed up like a peacock because I had just garnered my first article acceptance. "Congratulations," he said, kindly adding, "There will be many more." But then he said, "Gordon, I have to tell you that from the first day that I met you, you reeked of ambition." I dropped my head, for the truth is I probably am one of those injured birds who constantly needs his feathers stroked. He went on, "And you had better understand that the profession that you are going into is all about teaching. I know many professors who went into this business because they loved writing books and articles and developing a little coterie of admirers. But when they got into their 50s and could feel the limits of their talents, they fell into very serious despair, because it was clear that they were never going to become the Kierkegaard that they imagined they were, and they dreaded teaching."

Rieff was on a roll: "Most academics are too narcissistic to be the parental figures that they need to be. They will slam their door on a student just so they can write their next forgettable article or book." Professor Rieff was not finished with his brass knuckles. He knew that I had a brilliant neuroscientist of a wife who helped me with typing and photocopying and, well, just about everything, so he hit me between the eyes: "These self-involved characters will also turn their wives into secretaries and sacrifice their children to feckless books."

'Days after announcing a crackdown on researchers who do not disclose drug company ties, the editor of The Journal of the American Medical Association said she was misled again, this time by the authors of a study linking severe migraines to heart attacks in women.

All six authors of the study have done consulting work or received research financing from makers of treatments for migraines or heart-related problems. Their research appears in Wednesday’s journal.

The authors said they did not report their financial ties because they did not believe they were relevant to the study. The editor, Dr. Catherine D. DeAngelis, said she would have published the authors’ associations with drug makers had she known about them.

The journal posted a letter online Tuesday from the authors explaining the omissions, Dr. DeAngelis’s response and a correction.

Last week, the journal disclosed that the authors of a depression study failed to report ties to makers of antidepressants. And two months ago, it reported similar omissions from authors of a study linking certain arthritis drugs to cancer.'

I filled out an application at the Belford University site (www.belforduniversity.org) for a PhD in Public Administration.

In the box labeled "Briefly type the work or life experience that qualifies you for this degree" I entered "significant attention to nightly news and newspapers."

Belford's reply: "We are pleased to announce that on the basis of your resume submitted by the Assistant Registrar, the 10-member evaluation committee at Belford University has finally approved you for Doctorate Degree in Public Administration."

After approval, I was then allowed to edit my order form so that the doctoral degree would instead be awarded for "Early Childhood Education."

"As hard as it is to see right now, this is part of my career plan," she said.

'Since going public [with massive academic cheating among Auburn's athletes], Gundlach has been flooded with telephone calls and e-mail messages expressing support and condemnation. He said he had received 69 positive messages and 66 negative ones. As he walked into the main academic building on campus yesterday morning, he said, 10 to 12 faculty members applauded him.

“It was a very pleasant experience,” he said.'

"Long ago, these universities made a choice that it wasn't about the bonds and relationships forged over 6 a.m. swim practices, nor handsome academic All-America certificates mounted on the athletic department walls. Everyone chasing the glory and shame of big-time Division I sports should stop apologizing for bailing on swimming and golf and crew programs, because college sports gave up on the illusion of sports as part of the overall collegiate education.

This isn't just Rutgers, but the rest of the places that have willing accomplices in the pursuit of football and basketball glory, the national television and exposure and companion shame that comes with this world. Six Scarlet Knights sports were thrown overboard Friday after the state cut $66 million in funding to the university, inspiring indignant pleas on behalf of the swimmers, tennis players and golfers told that they would be eliminated after one more season.

It's a shame the coaches lose jobs here, the kids lose the sports, but this isn't an injustice. It's business. It's a lousy, corrupt, flawed business, but a business nonetheless. And everyone needs to stop pretending that Division I college athletics aspire to some greater good, that it exists for the greater student body good.


Budget cuts hit Rutgers hard, and they'll probably hit harder again someday. This time, gymnastics, volleyball and wrestling made the cut. Next time around, those probably won't be so lucky. This isn't just Rutgers. And this will be happening everywhere over the next few years, as public money for universities gets tighter, as fund raising becomes tougher, as Title IX exacts a greater toll.

Someday, here's what it will be: Football, basketball, women's sports to balance Title IX scholarships and a bunch of club teams that raise money with candy sales to take vans to neighboring schools for competition.

If nothing else, Rutgers needs to explain why an athletic director paid out millions of dollars in contract extensions to failed coaches. Yet, it doesn't need to defend itself for refusing to bankroll the good, dedicated coaches and kids in fringe programs. Maybe it's hard to hear this -- maybe it should be different -- but these teams aren't part of the mission statement in Division I anymore. They're not the priority.

The only time athletic departments ever pretend to care about these sports are when they can parade the graduation rates and grade-point averages of those kids around, as though to balance the mess usually found in football and basketball.

Because reckless administrations and boosters kept participating in an arms race, building state-of-the-art arenas, practice facilities and luxurious locker rooms -- all with the logic that it's needed to out-impress its rivals in recruiting -- a culture of excess has been created to compete at the highest levels.

Rutgers wanted to engage in the arms race of college football, constructing space age practice and weightlifting facilities, planning a luxury box expansion of the football stadium. Rutgers made the choice to give Greg Schiano, still without a significant, signature victory in his career, a long-term extension that will pay him more than $1 million annually. Athletic director Bob Mulcahy has made a career of overcommitting too much money, over too many years to coaches he misjudged.



...As budgets get tighter, as funding dries up, colleges are going to keep eliminating minor sports. Mostly men's minor sports, too, because Title IX protects women's sports scholarship numbers. More and more, the best opportunities to play those sports in college will come on the Division II and III levels, where schools that stay out of the big-time rat race aren't hunkered down with feeding the monsters of big-time football and basketball.

Rutgers isn't the University of Texas, but its athletic department was carrying more varsity sports than that kind of a monstrous state university. To hear these athletes tell of the way their hearts were broken Friday, that their dreams were dashed, tugs at your heart. It's a shame, but it's no justice. This is the business of big-time college sports, and the business is lousy.

But it hasn't been about those kids in crew and swimming and tennis for a long time, and never will again."

"[T]he University of Louisville [has] signed football coach Bobby Petrino to a ten-year contract, worth at least $25.5 million on July 13. The university, which has raised tuition by levels thought only to exist in the professional leg-breaking industry over the past five or six years, is in the middle of what's being called the biggest financial commitment to football since Papa John's Cardinal Stadium was built. The new contract makes Petrino one of the highest paid coaches in college football today.

I call foul, and the reasons just keep mounting. Athletic director Tom Jurich said he fully expects Petrino to turn his back on other offers. Yeah, that seems to be an issue right there. After each of Petrino's three seasons at UofL, he had interviewed with other teams. First, it was Auburn, with whom Petrino spoke with in secret, lying at nearly every public turn he had...until he was caught. From there, it was on to Louisiana State, an interview Petrino took just a week after signing a contract extension pushing his guaranteed salary to $1 million a year.

That prompted Jurich to question whether or not to keep Petrino around at all. According to Jurich and Petrino, a refused $20 million offer from the NFL's Oakland Raiders from earlier this year is what pushed the hand for the big new deal. Yeah, I can imagine. The idea that [there] are loyalty bonuses in the contract worth $5 million seems a little ironic at this point, especially when the first $1 million is due June 30, 2007. What? The guy gets a million dollars for doing the first eleven months of a ten-year job? Did the Kentucky legislature come up with this math? I should have learned how to run a West Coast Offense.

Next, naturally, are the perks, including a $10,000 gas allowance. If I told you what I really thought about a guy making $2.5 million a year needing an allowance for anything, this article never would have passed review. Also included are the seemingly-obligatory county club membership and stadium suite, but my favorite has to be the rent-free use of football facilities for Petrino, to supplement his income running football camps. That is flat-out arrogance when the student body as a whole props up the athletic department, never minding what kind of "surplus" the department is currently running. Ah, yes, life as a student in a Division I-A school. Damn good thing they have public transportation in Louisville, cause you can burn an awful lot of gas sitting downtown, working your way through the red-light jungle. I'm not sure if you could burn $10k a year in gas, though, and especially when your sole purpose in the universe is to win twelve football games a year. Not in this universe, at any rate.

University President James Ramsey was gushing over the deal. No word on if he was jumping up and down on couches, screaming "I love Bobby Petrino!," but gushing nonetheless. Pleased as any man could be, with a fat new paycheck to sign on the university's behalf, Ramsey hopes for stability as a result of the contract, and went on to say the deal was a "huge statement," and that "stability in the athletic department is absolutely critical to me." That seems about right. When a school is willing to offer a $10,000 reward for an embarrassing graduation rate of 50% to any of their employees, academic or athletic, stability may be vital, but only for a few Saturdays out of the year."

Lewis seems to be a supporter of [the Humanities'] role in required undergraduate courses, but he has made little effort to learn what Humanists do. For example, discussing Harvard’s required area of Moral Reasoning, which typically offers a variety of courses in ethical theory and the history of ethics, Lewis makes the jejune complaint that students will try to give professors the “right answer”, so they won’t really learn anything. But this complaint shows that Lewis has made no effort at all to visit such classes and see what actually goes on there.

Anyone who teaches ethical argument to undergraduates is well aware of the danger Lewis mentions, and any decent teacher works hard to avoid presenting the students with a cooked “right answer” that can easily be identified. In any case, it is really not the answers that one is trying to convey, it is the way one might analyse a problem, and the different theoretical approaches to such problems. Moral reasoning, if well taught, is Socratic: it is about showing people how they might go about leading an “examined life”; that goal requires caring about arguments, more than about “right” conclusions.

So lacking in curiosity is Lewis about what his colleagues in the Humanities have been doing that he fails (at least in this book) to grasp a very fundamental distinction that goes across the Humanistic disciplines: between the intellectual aspect of character-building and the many other ways (personal advice, personal influence) in which young people can find their characters shaped by what they encounter in a university.

He repeatedly suggests that the main way in which universities build character is through the latter set of techniques – mentoring, advice-giving, personal example. In consequence he makes the alarming proposal that candidates for academic posts should be evaluated for their moral character: not just that part of character that is relevant to the performance of one’s job, where severe substance abuse or a penchant for sexual harassment might possibly be legitimate issues to raise in the hiring process, but their private lives as well, their treatment of their children, and so forth.

I think that Lewis simply doesn’t believe that the intellectual endeavour of the Humanities makes any contribution to building character. Because he has not spent any time with the Humanities, he cannot picture what that contribution might be. But one may learn to take apart and deeply appreciate a line of Latin verse from someone whose behaviour to his or her children is simply not known or, even, is known to be bad. One may learn how to think about the arguments of Plato and Aristotle from someone whom one might not like to have as a friend.

Learning these modes of analysis, however, does make its own contribution to citizenship, for the reason identified by Socrates: most people, having never learned to examine their beliefs, are actually somewhat half-hearted and crude in their commitment to them. If you simply don’t know how to distinguish a utilitarian from a Kantian argument, there are issues that you may easily miss – as a doctor, as a juror. You might think, for example, that respecting a patient’s choice and promoting the patient’s interest are the same thing, and you might just assume that your own judgement about the patient’s interests is the only thing that needs considering – as many doctors are all too inclined, paternalistically, to do.

Again, if you don’t know how to recognize the various forms of logical error that politicians bring your way, as they always do, you might fall for a fallacious argument and end up with a conclusion that you would not endorse if you got all the thinking right. One could say related things about the skills learned from the close reading of literature and the study of history. What Lewis really doesn’t understand is that literary, historical and philosophical skills make their own contribution to character and citizenship.

Not having a handle on this very fundamental point – which, after all, is crucial to saying why we want young people to go to college, rather than only to church – Lewis is not in a position to make any very useful recommendation about what an undergraduate liberal-arts curriculum ought to be. And he does not even try. On the question whether there is any necessary tension between the goals of a great research university and those of a fine liberal arts college, dedicated to teaching, Lewis does not get very far, simply because he assumes that academic expertise doesn’t help build citizenship.

...surely the most overrated essay in the modern canon, George Orwell's turgid, self-righteous and philosophically hopeless "Politics and the English Language."

A former Bush administration official, after arguing violently with his wife Thursday night, shot and killed his 12-year-old son inside their McLean [Virginia] home, then turned a shotgun on himself and committed suicide...

William H. Lash III, 45, was an assistant secretary of commerce from 2001 until last year, then returned to teach at George Mason University Law School in Arlington, where he had begun as a professor in 1994. ...

Friends and neighbors described Lash as devoted to his only child, William H. Lash IV, who was autistic. Will Lash had just completed sixth grade at Haycock Elementary School in the Falls Church area, Fairfax school officials said. The father and son could often be seen side by side on the swing set in their back yard, one neighbor said, and the pair often attended Washington Nationals baseball games.

Police said they had not been summoned this year to the blue expanded Cape Cod-style home on Pathfinder Lane in the West McLean neighborhood. There was no record of any domestic complaints. Neighbors said the family kept a low profile.

But shortly before 10 p.m. Thursday, police said, Lash and [his wife] had a dispute and [she] ran from the house and called police. [The] dispute was physical enough that police later obtained a warrant charging Lash with domestic assault...

...Daniel D. Polsby, dean of GMU's law school, said, "This thing just doesn't belong to the normal range of human experience, and we're all just heartbroken for his family, his community and for ourselves."



Lash's résumé was long and quintessential of the Washington elite -- an Ivy League pedigree, high-powered law firms, a presidential appointment, think tanks, boards of directors, guest spots on television news programs, and prestigious university positions.

He had an undergraduate degree from Yale University, a law degree from Harvard University. He clerked for a New Jersey Supreme Court justice. He served as counsel to the chairman of the U.S. International Trade Commission during the Reagan years, worked for the law firm of Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson and served on the boards of directors of private and publicly traded corporations. In 1994, he found a place in academia on the GMU law faculty.

He specialized in the arcana of business law there and earned a reputation as a generous and jovial cigar-smoking colleague, an approachable professor and a sharp-minded and willing debater of ideology.

"He was a wonderful colleague, lively and full of ideas, full of energy," Polsby said. "I would describe him as an engaged and articulate person, not at all the sort of person whose last act would be what it appears to have been."

Polsby said "there was nothing" to suggest that Lash was troubled.



Lash took a leave from the law school in 2001, when President Bush appointed him assistant secretary of commerce for market access and compliance. Among his duties at the Commerce Department, Lash headed a task force on the reconstruction of Iraq, in which he dealt with businesses seeking contracts.

In a statement, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez said: "Bill was a passionate, committed and hard working individual who was much loved and respected by his colleagues. . . . He was a vivacious, expansive, and tenacious Assistant Secretary."

Lash resigned the post last year and returned to GMU. He also was a senior adviser to the Brunswick Group LLC, a firm specializing in corporate public relations.

A few weeks ago, he had dinner at his house with a Mason colleague, Todd J. Zywicki, whose office was next door. Zywicki said he detected no signs of trouble that night, not even in retrospect.

"I'm just stunned," Zywicki said yesterday. "He loved his son so much. He really loved his son . . . and he did everything for him."

It was the impression Lash left on most everyone.

"I have no explanation," said Michael Krauss, another GMU colleague. "There are people who seem troubled, but I never would have thought that about Bill Lash. Never."

The University of Wisconsin-Madison lecturer who has taught that the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were an inside job was convicted in 1996 of disorderly conduct, but the university determined that should not prevent him from teaching.

According to Dane County Circuit Court records, Kevin Barrett was charged after police responded to a call from a woman who said he had punched her in the face. Barrett, who pleaded guilty and was fined, said the charge was the result of him "resisting arrest."

UW-Madison Provost Patrick Farrell considered the conviction when he conducted a review of Barrett this month to determine whether he was fit to teach. "During our meetings, Mr. Barrett and I did discuss some issues in his past," Farrell said in an e-mail. "I determined that these issues were personal and unrelated to his responsibilities as an instructor."

"I can assure you as provost that academic misconduct will not be tolerated at Auburn University."

ALLENTOWN, Pa. -- A former university class president accused of robbing a bank to pay his online poker debts pleaded guilty Wednesday to one count of felony robbery.

Greg Hogan, 20, the son of a preacher and former president of Lehigh University's class of 2008, was accused of holding up a Wachovia bank Dec. 9 by handing a teller a note demanding money and saying he had a gun.

He got away with $2,871, then drove off with two of his fraternity brothers, according to police. Both said they knew nothing of Hogan's plans, and neither was charged.

Hogan was arrested that night and charged with robbery, theft by unlawful taking and receiving stolen property. He owed $5,000 in debts from playing online poker and later entered a treatment program for gambling addiction, according to his attorney, John Waldron.

Throughout the hearing Wednesday, Hogan politely answered questions from the judge.

Under sentencing guidelines, he faces 22 months to three years in prison at his sentencing Aug. 17.

The Rev. Gregory Hogan Sr. said his son completed a 36-day treatment program for gambling addiction and has received a "good bill of health from that."

"Greg is very sorry," said the elder Hogan, who sat next to his son in court with his arm wrapped around him. "He's apologized. We're here to support our son. We love him."

Greg Hogan is no longer a student at Lehigh, said school spokeswoman Sarah Cooke. She said she could not comment on any possible school-related discipline because academic records are private.

Hogan's plea comes as Congress is debating whether to pass tougher laws to restrict online gambling. On Tuesday, the House passed legislation that would prevent gamblers from using credit cards to bet online and could block access to gambling Web sites.

six months of probation. Judge John Baily also ordered Finnerty to undergo drug and alcohol counseling if required by probation officers. He must also stay out of Washington's Georgetown neighborhood while on probation.

(1.) I am embarrassed for my University.

Ken Mayer
Professor of Political Science
UW Madison

(2.) My pride in UW is diminished by this shameless ideologue.

(3.) [T]his is a stupid hire, and the approval of his study plan [is] yet another reason I do not contribute to general alumni funds anymore.

(1.) [W]hen is the University of Wisconsin hiring a Professor of Astrology?

(2.) I'm not sure why the UW is allowing this. My current UW (Washington) got rid of an anthropology graduate student who was teaching what basically amounted to pseudoscience paleoanthropology. Such as that Homo erectus had domesticated cheetahs (!) and was using them to hunt with. The decision to can him was basically driven by the department who, rightfully I think, is obliged to maintain some control over the content of their classes.

(3.) [T]his is exactly why there is so much disrespect for academics in general. A true profession polices its own ranks in its own interests. Why then do the UW professors not speak out against allowing this putz to teach?…No wonder people bitch about tuition... especially if it's paying a salary to this guy. I think the moon landing was faked.. Can I teach at UW? I know who the gunman on the grassy knoll was...Can I teach at UW? I know the Jews control the media... Can I teach at UW? I think the holocaust was faked.... Can I teach at UW?

(1.) How does a guy like this even get past the job interview? The only answer seems to be that someone in the UW administration believes this, or something like it. So, the real problem is not Barrett, who is at least a visible and identifiable loon. The problem is the loose screw you can't see.

(2.) What do you mean "they couldn't fire him and make him a martyr"? So, it is better to waste public funds and let him promote this garbage? The Provost didn't fire him because at heart he doesn't really have a problem with what the guy is saying…How is it that the leaders of UW allowed such a corrosive and ignorant culture to develop that people in positions of authority would come to believe hiring this guy was a good idea? Because behind closed doors and in their most private moments the powers that be at UW don't think what the guy is saying is untrue much less beyond the pale. That is the conclusion I draw from this. If the people at UW don't like people drawing that conclusion, then take some responsibility and stop doing things like this.

The High Court case is expected to last a week and Mr McKenna is due to take the stand on Tuesday.

The 43-year-old TV hypnotist disputes an October 2003 article, which mentioned his "bogus degree" from Lasalle University, Louisiana.

He claims he was "pilloried" by journalist Victor Lewis-Smith on around 10 occasions from 1997.


…Mr McKenna's counsel, Desmond Browne QC, told the court: "Victor Lewis-Smith and the Mirror pilloried Mr McKenna as a fraud, claiming that he had a doctorate to which he had no honest entitlement.

"They can't prove that to be true."


He said that the newspaper, which denies libel, had defended a grave allegation of fraud and dishonesty with "increasing desperation and inconsistency".

Mr Browne said that Mr McKenna, a dyslexic, sought a PhD to make up for his failure at school, to make a contribution to the community which would have practical therapeutic benefits and to add value to his business.

He said that far from being able to buy a doctorate, the evidence showed that Mr McKenna was initially rejected for the course.

The fact was that at the end of 1996 - although Mr McKenna did not know this until later after he had submitted his final project - it emerged that Lasalle was only accredited by a body called the Council for post-secondary Christian Education, which turned out to be a fraudulent creation of the university's founder, Thomas Kirk.

Investigations by the FBI and the US Department of Justice concluded that Kirk had defrauded innocent unsuspecting students by leading them to think that their degrees were accredited by a recognised body.

"The judge who sentenced Thomas Kirk referred to the innocent victims of this fraud, and one of them was Mr McKenna," he said.

He said that Mr McKenna tried to resolve his difference with the newspaper sensibly without recourse to litigation but it was the newspaper's own intransigence and obstinacy that finally drove him to issue proceedings.

The newspaper was not saying that McKenna was a charlatan, claimed Mr Browne, but was suggesting that he either knew his degree was bogus or was reckless as to whether it was.

'Yesterday's horror came after two previous suicide tries by Bartha, an emergency-room doctor who has worked at Lenox Hill Hospital as well as Phelps and Mount Vernon in Westchester.

Last year, he was discovered barricaded in his basement, nearly unconscious, after being overcome by gas, officials said.

And several years earlier, he had locked himself in his office and tried to do himself in by setting off an insecticide bomb, sources said.


...Bartha's mother had lived on the second floor, performing manicures and pedicures, before she died in 1997, neighbors said.

The woman who initially took over the mother's apartment said Bartha seemed very upset when she arranged her furniture differently than his mom had.

On at least three occasions, she said, she returned home from work and found him inside. She said he told her, "This is set up all wrong. My mother didn't have it set up like this.

"I had to keep reminding him that he just couldn't keep entering someone's apartment," she said. "I left after one year. I couldn't wait to get out."'

Colmes begins and tries to present Barrett in a fairly positive light by bringing out the facts that the course is not required, the 9/11 conspiracy theory will take up "only about one week" of the course, that the students will not be required to "regurgitate" his theory, and that he means to inspire "critical thinking." (Smarter students, I note, may want to regurgitate.)

From the moment he begins speaking, Barrett twitches and jerks around quite oddly and speaks in a breathless, excited way. He tries to unload a torrent of words about the theory and won't stop to give Colmes a chance to get through his series of questions, which are quite clearly designed to put Barrett in a positive light. Barrett, however, is so keen on his theory, he'd rather spout conspiracy. He looks nutty even before Hannity starts the questions that are meant to trash him. That is, Barrett's a witness who mucks up the direct examination. It doesn't take cross-examination to bring out the problems.

When Hannity takes over, Barrett interrupts him in the middle of his first question. When Hannity insists on finishing the question, Barrett smugly goes "Yeah, yeah, finish up." On Hannity's show! As if he thinks the only people who are watching are folks who think Hannity's a jackass. Hannity asks him if he really believes 9/11 and other terrorists attacks were "an inside job." Barrett, inspiring no confidence that he will allow students to debate with him, says sharply, "I don't believe, I do know that 9/11 was an inside job." Barrett then tries to lay out the details of the theory. The word "thermate" comes out of his mouth. (It's supposed to be "thermite," but why be precise?)

Hannity breaks in to say, "All right, so you believe that the buildings came down in a controlled demolition." Again, Barrett excludes the possibility of alternate theories: "Well, I don't believe it. I've looked at the evidence, and the evidence is overwhelming." Hannity's response is perfect: "All right, the evidence is overwhelming to you because you're a conspiracy nut." Hannity tries to set up his next question: "But putting that all aside..." That's perhaps the funniest line of the night, but it's stepped all over by Barrett, who motormouths conspiracy theory. Hannity goes ahead and asks his question with Barrett yammering over him. Hannity finally just lets the man babble. Then, he mutters, "Okay, I wish I had the 'Twilight Zone' music."

Hannity says, "Okay, here's my next question," and Barrett breaks in with a laugh and says "Okay, friend," and shrugs, looking quite pleased with himself, as if he believes he's getting the better of the exchange. As Hannity tries to ask the question, Barrett keeps interrupting, offering survey statistics that he seems to think show that people agree with him -- 60%! "You're in the minority," he tells Hannity. That is, we see Barrett garbling facts in real time, on camera.

Finally, Hannity gets Barrett to hear the question: Should extremists like you be allowed to teach? Barrett says: "No, you're the extremist. Fox News is the biggest bunch of extremists on the planet." He's got a huge laughing grin now. Hannity doesn't think Barrett should be teaching, and Barrett responds that he doesn't think Hannity should be on the air. "I think you guys should be taken off the airwaves, because you are the guys who are..." A desperate Colmes breaks in: "All right, we don't want to silence anybody...."

Colmes's attempt at the beginning to present Barrett in a good light by emphasizing that Barrett will bring debate and critical thinking to the classroom is all shot to hell. We've seen Barrett in action. Barrett retained his position here because we care about free speech values, but he slammed us in the face with his disrespect for free speech.

Despite objections from some professors, alumni, and students, Columbia University has temporarily suspended its Institute for African Studies, one of eight regional institutes at its School of International and Public Affairs.

Lisa Anderson, the school's dean, said on Monday that the center had been without a permanent director for several years because no senior faculty members had stepped up to take on the role. "We had a period where it was dry," she said. So administrators decided that instead of essentially maintaining the charade of having a fully functioning institute, she said, they instead will suspend the center and put its resources toward African programming, which will be run out of her office.

But the institute's defenders, who have created a blog calling for its reopening, say that the university unfairly took action during the summer, when fewer people are on the campus to oppose the move. In an open letter written last month to Columbia's president, Lee C. Bollinger, students in the school's Pan African Network argue that, in closing the center, Columbia "sadly joins the rest of the world in the continued marginalization of Africa."

On the contrary, said Ms. Anderson, by redirecting money that paid for an acting director's salary, administrators will be able to strengthen the university's African offerings, including new classes this fall on contemporary Africa. Also, she said, she hoped that admitting the program's shortcomings will create the necessary pressure to improve the situation.

Ms. Anderson added that the decision was made in May, but that "people just weren't paying attention."

'The first two floors of the four story building were occupied by a doctor's office and the top two were converted into a duplex apartment owned by Dr. Nicholas Bartha and his wife.

Bartha was alone at the time and was found barely alive. The fire department say the blast is being investigated as a suicide attempt.

The doctor's suicide plans were apparently spelled out in an e-mail to his wife's lawyer.

Sources say Bartha is in the midst of a messy divorce.

Nicholas Scoppetta, FNDY Commissioner: "[S]ome communication with somebody outside the building … leads us to believe there was a potential for suicide."

Sources say the divorce was proceeding since 2002 and that a judgment was just handed down against the doctor on Friday. The building was set to be put on the market for sale at the end of the month as part of the settlement.'

MARY GORDON: And the greed that this, to tell you the truth, to see people driving Hummers sometimes makes me feel so sick that, you know, I want to just drive them off the road and say, okay, in the name of Christ, in the name of peace and justice, I'm just going to shoot you because you have to get out of your car now. We live in a very stupid, banal, gross, greedy and rather disgusting culture.

BILL MOYERS: But it does not lead you to do what Osama Bin Laden did, to kill.

MARY GORDON: And I think that I have to go back to a religious position, which is that if reading the Gospel means anything, if Jesus means anything, it's about seeing everybody, every human being as Jesus. That's what makes sense. That-- therefore, every human being is of enormous value. Every human being is sacred. So it seems to me the only thing that stops me from going out and shooting people in Hummers is a religious belief that, even though I don't like them, they are sacred and valuable in the eyes of God. And that does stop me. Because I could really, you know, go out on quite a spree.

Gov. Jim Doyle is hinting that a controversial lecturer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison may be unfit to teach.

Doyle told reporters on Friday that based on a letter he received from Islamic studies lecturer Kevin Barrett, the university must look closely at "whether he has the capacity to teach students."

In an interview, Barrett claimed much of the letter he sent to the governor was merely a parody, suggesting that anyone espousing critical or conspiratorial views would be considered unfit to teach at the university.

But based on Doyle's reaction, Barrett said, "I question his ability to govern the state."

He added that Doyle is "making himself into another McCarthyite."

Barrett has drawn fire for his plans to teach an Islamic studies course next fall that questions whether the U.S. government was involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in Washington, D.C., and New York City.

Some state lawmakers, conservative commentators and Republican gubernatorial candidate U.S. Rep. Mark Green have called for Barrett's firing.

Doyle, a UW-Madison graduate, said the issue of Barrett's employment is not "a matter so much on what his political views are" as his fitness to teach students.

Doyle described the letter, dated July 5, as "sort of a diatribe about a lot of different issues."

"One of the things you want at the university is someone who bases their teaching on facts. If there's any institution that should be devoted to a factual analysis of what's going on, it should be the university," he said.

Doyle added, "This is for the university to look at, but I think they really have to take a hard look at that."

In the letter to Doyle, Barrett acknowledged the governor's previous criticism: "You apparently believe that I am incapable of performing well as an instructor of Islam 370 because I am convinced that the 9/11 Commission Report is a farcical coverup and that overwhelming evidence suggests top U.S. officials were complicit in the attacks of September 11th, 2001.

"I understand that you are under political pressure from your right flank, and that you may feel you have no choice but to call for my dismissal," Barrett wrote.

But he cited polls that show large numbers of Americans and Wisconsin residents believe the government's official report on the Sept. 11 attacks is wrong.

"I understand that there are Green and Libertarian candidates running for governor, and I predict that the controlled demolition of our corrupt two-party system by the 9/11 truth movement may begin here in Wisconsin this fall, with you and Mr. Green serving as first victims," Barrett continued.

Barrett also included a farcical questionnaire that he said would be required for anyone teaching at the UW. The questions included, "Do you believe that the Warren Report performed a thorough and unbiased investigation of the murder of JFK?" and "Do you believe that allegations of government involvement in the assassinations of Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, John Lennon, Mel Carnahan, and Paul Wellstone, and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, have been conclusively disproven?"

Anyone answering no to a question could be dismissed, he said, and signed the letter

"Steve Nass, Reichschancellor, Thoughtcrime Division, University of Wisconsin-Madison."

Nass is a Republican state representative from Whitewater who has called for Barrett's firing.

David Walsh, president of the Board of Regents at the University of Wisconsin, has characterized the issue as one of academic freedom and is not calling for Barrett's dismissal.

UW-Madison officials have said they are reviewing Barrett's plans for the class and will likely announce their decision on his hiring next week.

'I suspect the real Kevin Barrett was killed by the CIA or foreign terrorist groups in 2004 or 2005, shortly after defending his dissertation. The original Barrett mentioned the possibility of a conspiracy at a bar a couple of times in early 2002; such ramblings are how the CIA targets people for "replacement." What they do is find a left-leaning critic of the government and replace them with a plant who can unleash political controvery at will. There are actually undercover agents in all 50 states who can be activated at any time. In this case, the operative ("Kevin Barrett") was activated to help the Republicans continue to control the WI state legislature. Control of the state legislatures is obviously necessary to ensure the Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage is successful. The next step of the plan is to activate the conspiracy theorists in Oregon. This will inevitably lead to the universities supporting the conspiracy theorists, thus providing a platform for Republicans to galvanize control of the Oregon state legislature.

And the reason why terrorists are working with the CIA on this is because a Republican-dominated US will continue the "war on terror," thereby giving them a focal point for recruiting new members.'

Professor Muhammad Memon said he usually teaches the class himself, but he is going on sabbatical this fall.

Memon said Barrett, the only applicant for the job, was seen as a strong replacement because he gained familiarity with the class as a teaching assistant.

"I have good feelings about his teaching, and I trust he will do a good job," he said, adding that he was not aware of any complaints related to Barrett's political views when he was involved with the class.

before taking his class, i was really interested in it and afterwards, i felt as though i really did not learn much at all. i thought he was unapproachable, and did not really have organization to his lectures.. his tangents made me feel really lost, and no matter how hard i tried to pay attenion, i kept zoning out every time.


Absolutely awful. Lecture attendance is required, but he covers no material at all, just rambling about nothing in particular and clearly having done no preparation. He's also unfriendly if you try to approach him outside of class. He should be ashamed to accept money for teaching, since he doesn't do anything close to teaching all semester.



Worst professor I have ever had. He just rambles all lecture about things unrelated to the course. Exams don't reflect material covered in lecture, so discussion sessions are a must in order to figure out what's going on in the course. He takes attendance in lecture. Never seen so many people sleep through a class. It's awful

The cherry trees are dying faster than people can replace them, so the homes reveal more of themselves each year: humble brick ramblers, built in the 1950s on postage-stamp lots a quick walk from Holy Cross church. The neighborhood is largely untouched by the wave of knockdowns and jumbo additions swamping Montgomery County. It still feels a little like the '50s.

It's called Garrett Park Estates, but we joke that it's also North Bethesda or Rockville depending on whether you're buying or selling. No doubt it'll be Strathmore one of these days in honor of the new, elegant concert hall nearby.

Of course, we'll never have as many grand trees and millionaires as Garrett Park next door, but that's okay. We still have the community pool and the shortcut to the movie theater at White Flint Mall. And -- this is key -- we have more kids. When we moved in, one was dressed in full cowboy regalia, right down to the badge and six-shooters, as if from a place and time that no longer exist.

The professional future of Jones Professor of Economics Andrei Shleifer ’82 rests in the hands of Harvard’s top officials, who are weighing a committee report issued last month on the economist’s alleged role in defrauding the U.S. government while he served as an adviser to Russia, people close to the committee said.

While the content of the report was not immediately clear, Shleifer could face penalties as severe as the revocation of his tenured teaching appointment, according to two individuals who have spoken with members of the Committee on Professional Conduct (CPC), the eight-member group investigating the matter.

Following standard procedure, the committee forwarded the results of its months-long investigation to interim Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles last month, the two individuals said. Interim President Derek C. Bok and members of the Harvard Corporation—the University’s most powerful governing body—have also been briefed on the matter, one of the individuals said.

The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because the committee’s work is considered confidential and the individuals agreed not to divulge what they had been told by committee members.

A federal court held Shleifer liable in 2004 for conspiring to defraud the U.S. government by privately investing in Russia while leading a Harvard economic reform program in the country. The Harvard program was funded by the U.S. government.

Last year, Harvard agreed to pay $26.5 million to settle the suit, in addition to a $2 million payment by Shleifer himself, who has denied any wrongdoing.

Knowles’ reaction to the report could be the first significant—and perhaps the most thorny—decision of his tenure as interim dean, which began Saturday.

Knowles was dean of the Faculty in 2001 when Lawrence H. Summers—a close friend of Shleifer—was named president. In a 2002 deposition, Summers acknowledged that earlier in his presidency, he had told Knowles that he was “concerned to make sure that Professor Shleifer remained at Harvard.” Knowles elevated Shleifer to the Jones professorship in 2002.

If Knowles recommends the retraction of Shleifer’s appointment, University rules dictate that he must go to the Corporation for implementation. The third statute of the University’s charter gives the Corporation the authority to remove professors only for “grave misconduct or neglect of duty.”

The committee’s report is the product of a three-person investigating subcommittee, which is formed only when the CPC determines that a case “merits further action,” according to FAS regulations. Under the same rules, the accused party is given the right to appear before the investigating subcommittee and to issue a response to the report that is sent to the FAS dean.

The subcommittee’s findings were unanimous, according to one individual in touch with committee members.

The identities of the three subcommittee members were not immediately known, but one individual said that a member of the subcommittee was affiliated with a non-FAS school.

Some professors have said that Summers’ affiliation with Shleifer contributed to his failed presidency, which ended last week after five turbulent years. Just weeks before his resignation, Summers said at a confrontational Faculty meeting that he did not know enough details to have an opinion on the Shleifer case, angering some Faculty members who saw his remarks as disingenuous.

The University’s decision to pay settlement costs and to allow Shleifer to maintain his teaching post have also irked some professors, who believed it might be the result of Shleifer’s close relationship with Summers. But in May, the Corporation issued a statement saying that Summers had been ”recused totally” from discussions about the litigation and any possible disciplinary decisions in the case.

Forty-five million dollars in federal grants to Yale University are under investigation by the federal government amid concerns about inadequate accounting practices at the school in New Haven.

According to Yale administrators, the university received subpoenas from the Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the National Science Foundation (NSF) late last week. The subpoenas requested material relating to a total of 47 grants.

Yale, like other major universities including Harvard, relies heavily on federal funding for scientific studies and receives the bulk of its federal grants from the DOD, HHS, and NSF.

The purview of the subpoenas, which Yale officials described as “administrative” rather than criminal, extends to documents as much as ten years old. Such subpoenas need not be part of a grand jury investigation and can be issued either by an executive agency with sufficient statutory power or by the Department of Justice at an agency’s behest.

A Garrett Park Fourth: The Barbecue That Was No Picnic

By Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts
Thursday, July 6, 2006; C03



No Garrett Park event is complete without someone upset about something, and the Fourth of July was no exception. This year's fracas? A pig roast and nearly naked protester.

The tiny Montgomery County town's Citizens Association carefully planned a wonderful Independence Day: the two-mile fun run and walk, a morning parade led by the Kensington Fire Department, Popsicles for the kids, live music, a belly-flop contest and softball game. And to top off the celebration, a free evening picnic with pork barbecue and smoked salmon.

The barbecue was originally described as a "pig roast," which caused a few people to object on religious grounds that smelling or seeing a pig roasting was offensive. Matt Stavish , co-president of the association, sent off a letter to his neighbors last week: "We apologize for the offense and will prepare the meat at a private residence rather than at the tennis courts as originally planned. Just our effort to 'put a little lipstick on that pig.' We apologize for any misunderstanding and distress to GP residents. Our goal is simply to provide a night of fun and camaraderie, and we hope everyone will feel welcome to attend."

Problem solved? Hah! A year-long resident of the town, Innis Phillips, protested the pig roast by walking along the parade route Tuesday morning wearing only an apron, a dish towel and an apple in his mouth. Police were summoned; Phillips was not arrested. "A few people were offended by the pig," said Stavish. "Many more were offended by the protest."

"Why can't anything be simple and uncomplicated?" sighed Carolyn Shawaker, mayor of the liberal community of about 1,000. "Several people have talked to me and are very upset. Children got an awfully good view of his anatomy."

Resident Molly Shuck , a mother of four, said she supports Phillips's right to an opinion but not his costume: "Be a pig in pants. There's no reason to be naked."

Phillips, trained as a potter and now a stay-at-home dad, said yesterday that he wasn't trying to be a flasher and deliberately wore a red apron in front with a dish towel tucked and stapled to the back apron strings. "As someone who has done performance art, I wanted to dress appropriately for what I was trying to say."

The 53-year-old said he's sorry if he upset his neighbors and just wanted the picnic to be more inclusive. "If I were going to give a party at my house for a lot of people, I would make sure it had food everybody would enjoy." And no, he's not a vegetarian: "I actually eat pork."

But he didn't go to the barbecue, which went off without incident, without power, but with clothes. More than 100 people showed up for the candlelight feast and live musicians. Can't wait for next year!

Ken Lay's Heart Attack: A Case of Death By Stress?

The death of Enron founder Ken Lay Monday, reportedly from a heart attack, has raised the question of whether stress can, literally, kill you.

Lay, 64, was at the center of one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history. Convicted in May of 10 counts of conspiracy and fraud, he was due to be sentenced in October and faced 25 to 40 years in prison.

Although Lay's family has not yet released details of his death in Aspen, Colo., or his health history, news reports early Monday quoted Lay's Houston pastor as saying Lay died of a heart attack. Later Monday, doctors who were conducting the autopsey [sic] on Lay said Lay's arteries were clogged and reported that they had found evidence of a previous heart attack.

WebMD spoke with cardiologist Robert Myerburg, MD, about the role stress may play in heart attacks. Myerburg is a professor of medicine and physiology in the cardiology division of the University of Miami’s medical school. Myerburg is not familiar with Lay’s medical history.


…If Lay had had a heart attack or died suddenly upon hearing his verdict, that scenario would have qualified as acute stress. If his legal case had lasted 10 years, that would fit long-term stress, Myerburg says.

But Lay’s death doesn’t quite fit either pattern. “It’s hard to know where to put that,” Myerburg says, calling Lay’s legal ordeal an “intermediate” length of stress.

Enron entered bankruptcy in 2001. And Lay’s criminal case lasted several years, but it was “not long enough to talk about development of heart disease,” and “not long enough to develop atherosclerosis,” Myerburg says.


…Getting a thorough checkup can help gauge your heart risk. And since stress is part of life, learning to cope with it may help.

Handling stress can be “rough,” Myerburg says. Acute stresses often can’t be avoided, and long-term ones may be hard to budge.

Myerburg says he often advises people to see psychiatrists or psychologists to help them cope with situational stresses. He calls long-term stress a “quality of life issue.”

The following strategies may help you cope with stress:

--Eat and drink sensibly. Overindulging in alcohol and food adds to stress.
--Assert yourself. Learn to stand up for your rights and beliefs while respecting those of others.
--Stop smoking. Nicotine acts as a stimulant and brings on more stress symptoms.
--Exercise regularly. It’s a stress-buster. Get your doctor’s approval before starting a new fitness program.
--Relax every day. Techniques include meditation, deep breathing, biofeedback, and mental imagery.
--Take responsibility. Control what you can and leave behind what you cannot control.
--Cut causes of stress. Take good care of yourself, don’t overload your schedule, set priorities, and skip hassles, such as bad traffic, when possible.
--Examine your values and live by them. Doing so may make you feel better, even under stress.
--Set realistic goals and expectations. It's OK -- and healthy -- to admit you cannot be 100 percent successful at everything all at once.
--Build your self-esteem. Feeling overwhelmed? Remind yourself of what you do well.
--Get enough rest. The time you spend resting should be long enough to relax your mind as well as your body.

France began this tournament saddled with worries about the ageing legs at the heart of their team, but they have changed their tune.

America is said to be the arena on which the battle of freedom is to be fought; but surely it cannot be freedom in a merely political sense that is meant. Even if we grant that the American has freed himself from a political tyrant, he is still the slave of an economical and moral tyrant. Now that the republic - the res-publica- has been settled, it is time to look after the res-privata- the private state - to see, as the Roman senate charged its consuls, "ne quid res-privata detrimenti caperet," that the private state receive no detriment.

France began this tournament saddled with worries about the ageing legs at the heart of their team, but they have changed their tune.

[T]his community blamed her, ridiculed her and threatened her over these issues, many of which existed before her tenure.

…There was too much anger and vitriol aimed at Chancellor Denton personally — her manner, her look, her style, her sexual orientation.

And this anger swelled into hate speech, homophobia, lookism, gross caricature, and to violence -- rocks shattering windows at her home, hate mail, life-threatening mail, mob-like threats from "nonviolent" students.

And what did this community do? What did we do? The forces of innuendo, gossip, hearsay, fabrication and discrimination, clouded our judgment of her.

…She cared for Santa Cruz but Santa Cruz didn't care for her.

In 2004, President George W. Bush appointed Denton to the National Medal of Science charged with selecting the nation's highest award.

Nancy Hopkins, a biology professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology … recalled a telephone conversation this month in which Dr. Denton did not sound like herself.

"The person on the phone was almost gone," Dr. Hopkins said. "I almost couldn't recognize her. It was very upsetting."

Each of us can help, by not falling for the false representations of psychiatric treatment, by checking in with those who may be at risk, and by acknowledging in ourselves when we may need assistance.

[W]e have no conception of the inner torture which precedes suicide. … The continuity of … inner life is broken… personality is at an end. … What is certain is that they all suffered beyond description, to the point where suffering had become a mental sickness. And, as we bow in homage to their gifts and to their bright memory, we should bow compassionately before their suffering.

Federal authorities are investigating how Yale accounts for millions of dollars in government research grants, school officials said Monday.

Yale received three subpoenas last week from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Defense Department and National Science Foundation seeking grant documents. Authorities also have been interviewing university employees about accounting issues.

In an e-mail to faculty and staff on Friday, Yale President Richard Levin urged employees to cooperate with investigators.

"Regardless of the outcome of the current investigation, we must get all our processes right and make sure that we are good stewards of the funds entrusted to us by the federal government," Levin said in a statement released Monday. "We know that we have more work to do."

The school has acknowledged it must improve its accounting process. A report by the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services noted in February that university procedures were not always followed or were inadequate.

The school has hired a consulting group to speed up accounting improvements.

Yale, like most large research universities, relies heavily on government grants to pay for scientific research.

Ironically, Ms. Denton, 46, an accomplished electrical engineer and champion of women in science who had made diversity in academics a focus of her career, was also harangued recently by student protesters decrying "institutional racism and sexism."

If Ms. Denton was personally shaken by the furor, it was not apparent during a late-January visit she made to The Chronicle. In a freewheeling and upbeat discussion with reporters and editors, she said her response to the outrage over hidden or unreported compensation was "Message received."

A university president's job is "infinitely more complex today" because of the expectations of "vastly different constituencies," said Ann J. Duffield, a co-founder of the Presidential Practice, a company that provides advice to university presidents. "These have almost become undoable positions."

FAYETTEVILLE, AR—Alan Gilchrist, an associate professor of English literature at the University of Arkansas infamous for his tough grading standards and dry lecturing style, was coerced into sleeping with an undergraduate on Monday in order to earn a good course evaluation. "My tenure's on the line here, so I allowed a student to take advantage of me," said an emotional Gilchrist of the experience, which he hopes will earn him at least six "very much enjoyed" responses on the eight-item evaluation form. "I told myself it would be just this once, and that it would be over soon, and that it wouldn't be that bad, but I was used. And I can't stop showering." Sources said that the unidentified student is one of the most popular and charismatic on campus, raising questions about possible abuse of power.'

“Look," Joseph Jacobs is assuring me, "no one starts out wanting a 30,000-square-foot home. You say, 'I want this and that' and then you get up to 30,000 square feet."

To be precise, the new house Jacobs hopes to build in Greenwich is 32,114 square feet, plus a 1,165-square-foot pool house. Jacobs, a founding partner of a hedge fund called Wexford Capital, is unapologetic. "America's a great country," he says. "I've worked hard. I've made a few bucks. So I want to build a house for myself. Is that so wrong?"

It's February 2006. I'm in Greenwich… [Jacobs] is entranced by the idea of building what he call his "dream house." "What can I say?" he tells me, washing down a pill for acid reflux with a glass of Lactaid skim milk. "I always wanted to build a house that would have everything I want—a house that I could build for my kids and grandkids. Is that a crime?"

You have grandchildren? I ask, surprised.

"I don't," concedes Jacobs, who is 53, "but I hope to one day."

…The idea [for the house] came to him one night at the movies. "I thought it up in my head," he says. "It needed to be in a meadow, just like in France." Michelle later confirms, "It was his dream, no question."

In September 2003, Jacobs paid $5,575,000 for 11 bucolic acres in Conyers Farm, a gated community in Greenwich's backcountry. It took more than a year for the first draft of architectural drawings to be completed. As time passed, according to Jacobs's architect, Dinyar Wadia, the house expanded. "When Joe came to me, he said, 'I don't want to be one of those hedge-fund people who builds a monster house,'" Wadia recalls. "But then he talked to his sister-in-law, and his decorator, and he kept adding more to the first floor.

He added a breakfast porch, and, because he's into symmetry, we then needed to add a library porch. He added a wet bar off the library … " Wadia's voice trails off.

With breakfast cleared away, Jacobs pulls out a thick roll of drawings. Looking at a sketch of the façade, I see a neoclassical palace with two perfectly symmetrical wings. Sweeping entrance steps lead to a grand loggia framed by three radiating stone arches. Above, reminiscent of Venice's Ducal Palace, is a second-story viewing balcony with ornamental stone balustrades. A large central pediment with a carved floral relief serves as the focal point of the façade. I study the slate roof: by my count, there are 12 dormer windows, four chimneys, and two cupolas.

Is it a formal French country manor house? A proto-Palladian villa? "I'm not sure what it is—I'm not an architect," replies Jacobs. Adds Michelle later, "We wanted an old house that's new." Jacobs again: "We wanted a symmetrical, sort-of-European-influenced house … I wanted it to look like it was there a long time—it'll have ivy."

Jacobs walks me through the proposed highlights: "There's a dining room that seats 16. It's 27 feet by 20 feet. It's a big room, but it's not a ballroom, O.K. … Over here there's a room for playing billiards—which is a fun thing to do."

As Jacobs flips from one drawing to another, I notice three staircases, one rising from the center hall, another in "the East Wing," and yet another in "the West Wing." There's also an elevator. On the second floor, occupying the entire West Wing, the master suite encompasses a bedroom, a living room, a wet bar, his-and-her bathrooms, and two dressing rooms, each about the size of a Manhattan studio apartment. (Says Michelle, "For me, as long as I had my closets, it was fine.") In the East Wing are four more bedrooms, plus two apartments for staff. And on the top floor, yet another four bedrooms. Every bedroom has its own bathroom. "The third floor no one will use until I have grandchildren," Jacobs explains.

What particularly delights him are the plans for the lower level. You may think of the "lower level" as a basement. Often damp, with low ceilings and concrete floors, basements used to be places to store old bicycles, do laundry, and, in better homes, install "rec rooms" with brown wall-to-wall carpet. In Greenwich, however, the basement as it once was has been transformed into something grand. Home theaters are commonplace. So are exercise rooms and wine cellars. Now, following Steven Cohen's lead, the newest basements of Greenwich's hedge-fund elite have arts-and-crafts ateliers with built-in sinks, massage rooms with waterfalls ("so you get that Zen feeling," one builder explained), panic rooms, and hockey rinks.

Jacobs does not play hockey, so instead he decided to install a regulation-size squash court in his house. "I'm not really a big squash player, and you should know I'm a lousy squash player," he says. "But squash is fun, especially in bad weather. I figure if I build the house why not have the things I really want? I'm paying for it."

What did Jacobs want in his basement? "I created a yoga room," he tells me. "There's a golf simulator in the basement, next to the home theater—again, if it's raining outside, it's fun." There's also the spa: it includes an indoor pool, a steam room, a sauna, and something called a Swiss shower, with a dozen adjustable showerheads.

Jacobs pauses. "So, what do you think so far?" he asks. Without waiting for an answer, he continues: "We wanted the house, although it's grand, to be comfortable."

"Not fussy," agrees Michelle.

"We want it to be country comfortable," adds Jacobs. "We want furniture you can sit in. We're not having black-tie dinners, not that there's anything wrong with that."

"Nothing fussy, just nice," repeats Michelle. "We were hoping it would be tasteful."

"I wanted something that didn't look like some McMansion," says Jacobs.



Despite Jacobs's best intentions, some people in Greenwich view his new house as just that: an unsightly McMansion. Last December, at a public hearing before Greenwich's Planning and Zoning Commission, a lawyer representing Conyers Farm had this to say about the house: "It is too large, it is too in-your-face, it is too visible."

Next to offer her view of the matter was Regina "Gigi" Mahon-Theobald, a former journalist who heads the Planning and Architectural-Review Committee at Conyers Farm. "I've been on the PARC for I believe it's six years," she said, "and there's never in my experience been a project that aroused anywhere near the depth of passion, really, that this one has. It's really kind of an uproar."

One month later, when I meet Mahon-Theobald, she gets right to the point: "Jacobs is building a monster manse," she declares. "In the past few years, there has been teardown after teardown. All these old, interesting houses are torn down every day, and they put up these massive things that are overwhelming the properties, overwhelming the roads. With the Jacobs house you finally get to the point where you say, 'Enough is enough.'" Apparently there are limits, even in Greenwich.

…On March 13, Joseph Jacobs was awakened from his dream. That morning, a little before seven, he heard the telephone ring. His wife rolled over in bed, reached for the receiver, and handed it to him; Jacobs heard an unfamiliar voice on the other end. It was a reporter from the financial network CNBC: "Mr. Jacobs? Do you have any response to the article in today's Times?"

There it was, for all to see, on the front page of The New York Times's Metro section: an article about Jacobs's house. The headline: "Land of the Big Puts 'Too Big' to the Test."

By the time Jacobs got to his office, a camera crew was waiting for him in the lobby. That day, hanging in the sky above Jacobs's bucolic 11 acres were television news helicopters, droning, greedy for substance. Covering the big story about the big house were reporters from CNN, CBS, ABC's Good Morning America, NBC's Today show, News 12 Connecticut, and Hartford's WTIC NewsTalk 1080 talk-radio station. Even Jon Stewart called and invited Jacobs to go on The Daily Show.

The next morning, Matt Lauer introduced Jacobs's home on the Today show. "Katie," he began, turning to his co-host, "Americans are getting bigger and bigger these days. I'm not talking about our waistlines." You'd have thought that Jacobs was the first man in Greenwich to have built a big house.

Having just hired a spokesperson, Jacobs released a statement. "In light of the publicity," it read, "I no longer have any plans to build this house."

"On Friday, June 23, my son J.D. and I were involved in a boating accident on Hyco Lake in Person County. It occurred as we were trying to navigate our way back to shore in dark, rainy conditions. The boat ran ashore, and I suffered a laceration on my head, which was bleeding. Because of the remote location of where the boat was aground, J.D. had to swim for roughly an hour, and ran to several houses before finding a home with someone to get me help. Upon the arrival of the EMS team, I was taken to the emergency room at Person County Memorial hospital and received several stitches in my head. I walked out of the emergency room on my own that night. I am thankful that the incident involved only one boat, that no one was seriously hurt and that my son was able to locate an occupied home on the lake with gracious people willing to assist us. The injury was not serious and I was in my office working today."

Alleva needed 42 stitches to his head after a boating accident Friday on a Person County lake. His son, former Duke baseball player J.D. Alleva, was charged with operating a boat while impaired.

Authorities said the younger Alleva refused to give officers a breath or blood sample, but three officers smelled alcohol on him several hours after the accident.

Because they are symbols of power, mere things, college presidents are not recognized as having feelings or basic human rights. As did Denice Denton, they find themselves dehumanized. Who among us can survive this kind of treatment unscathed?

[T]he kind of devaluing language that, for instance, then-Dean Denton directed at [Larry Summers] after he spoke about women and science… must have been a bit galling to Summers, if not actually hurtful. Apparently, like most others, Denton was unable to see that the president has two bodies — his own and his institution’s, and that the former when pricked does bleed.