Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Dartmouth Undying: We Know Your Head Hurts, Just Trust Us

Us thinking about you.

I've commented before how John Mathias, Jr. '69, nominee for AoA president, doesn't have a high opinion of his fellow alumni's intellectual caliber. He's commented multiple times over at the AoA's blog about how his poor fellow alumni get duped by the forces of evil (this paper and others) into thinking preposterous thoughts. You know what? He's right. Honestly, it's obvious to all of us in the know (like Mr. Mathias and myself) that the proposed constitution didn't hurt the chances of petition trustees. Can't you all see? Making the petition candidates hand in their petitions before the official candidates are announced actually works in their favor! We (Mr. Mathias and myself) can't believe you would actually think that petition candidates decide whether or not to run based on who the official nominees are! Obviously they've been planning to run for years—ever since women were admitted actually (which just goes to show how extreme they are in the cases of Messrs. Robinson, Zywicki, and Smith). Also, there's all this talk about Dartmouth becoming Harvard-lite; a sort of Pepsi to their Coke. Well, we love Pepsi! Sure, when we were younger we liked Coke. We really wanted to 'drink' Coke after high school graduation, but sometimes—even when you put in your best effort—life hands you a pile of rocks and you have to end up drinking Pepsi. But you know what? Pepsi starts to grow on you, and pretty soon you become a Pepsi partisan. In fact, the only thing not to like about Pepsi is that it doesn't taste like Coke, if you catch our drift. So all of this Harvard-lite talk is nonsense—once we have more world class research institutions set up in Hanover the rest of the world will be calling Harvard Dartmouth-lite. Who will be laughing then? But this beautiful dream will never be realized if we, as alumni, keep getting bogged down in details of votes instead of just voting how our representatives at the Alumni Council vote. Now there's a smart group of folks; only one of them voted against the constitution. You know what that tells us? They know what's best for everyone: petition candidates and real candidates alike. Unfortunately, the alumni of Dartmouth get duped all the time into thinking that we want to change Dartmouth. Preposterous! You know what brings more change? More elections! That's right, we're fighting for the forces of good folks, Mr. Mathias and me, we're doing it; we're walking the walk. We know this stuff "seems really complicated" and is "all very confusing." We know you all have been tricked before, but we're here to tell you 'Don't get tricked again!' It's easy. Just vote for who we tell you to. Is it really that hard to understand?

Hat Tip: Jake Baron '10


Anonymous said...

What is it that these toadies get out of supporting Haldeman and Wright so slavishly?

By now, even the D has taken to referring to Wright's time in office as a period of "sleepy stagnancy". Yet Mathias & Co. parrot the "all is well" mantra and think that they are doing God's work.

Just goes to show that if we were invaded, there would be a healthy supply of collaborators.

By the way, check out Mathias's law firm's home page:


In the left hand "overview" column, they have clicks for:


LGBT Diversity

Racial and Ethnic Diversity

And just below that, there is an entry for "Women's Forum".

I wonder if they support diversity....?

Or if they have time to practice law?

Anonymous said...

John Mathias recently had this to say about elections conducted by his fellow alumni, and the role of alumni in helping provide oversight of the College:

I have come to the view that "parity" is not a good thing, driven principally by the abusive electioneering and demagoguery of the last two petition trustees [Smith and Robinson/Zywicki?], the slating done by the Hanover Institute, the formation and financing of petitioner candidate slates by the Hanover Institute for election to the AoA EC, the acceptance by the Hanover Institute of non-Dartmouth financial support, the egregious misconduct of Trustee Zywicki (who should never have become a Dartmouth Trustee under any credible system of selection), and the ideas currently being advanced by the likes of Mr. Gale that alumni trustees should somehow "steer the Board"--among other things.

So, I do not think parity is a good idea at all.
By john mathias '69, at 11/16/2007 9:53 AM

Speaking of Slates said...

The Dartmouth UnDying site campaigns for their slate and its agenda, primarily to concede the battle for alumni parity on the Board of Trustees. The head of that slate, chosen for nomination by a committee of appointees all of like mind, recently made the following pronouncement:

In many political systems, the slatemakers are kings. If you don't satisfy them with your loyalty, you don't get slated for election or re-election. Sometimes politicians get a little carried away with themselves and believe they don't need the slatemakers to get them elected. They soon find themselves off the ticket and on their own.
By john mathias '69, at 11/29/2007 4:40 PM

Anonymous said...

Mathias doesn't disrespect your intelligence, he disagrees with some alumni, especially the ones who are in the pockets of the Hanover Institute. (Yes, the Hanover Institute has secretly provided support for its loyalists inside the Association of Alumni. Talk about respect for our intelligence...)

But maybe it's time people stopped giving alumni a pass on their intelligence. Anonymous 7:24 apparently gets Dartmouth confused with its Alumni Association.

Mathias is running for president of the Association. He will help decide what the Association does, particularly regarding the ridiculous lawsuit filed by a few of its officers. (I assume he will stop payment on the AoA checks those officers have made out to themselves or their outside clubs, too). But Mathias won't affect the operation of Dartmouth's administration.

Anonymous said...

"(I assume he will stop payment on the AoA checks those officers have made out to themselves or their outside clubs, too)"

PARDON ME. Is someone alleging corruption???

Anonymous said...

The EC majority has made multiple payments to at least one of its members. The latest was decided on January 8th. Click here.

The majority has not yet refunded money to the Hanover Institute, but alumni may expect that task to be at the top of the agenda just prior to the election. The last thing those people would want - after the halting of the law suit - would be to give Mathias access to money raised by the Hanover Institute.

Anonymous said...

My word! You've found the smoking gun!!!!

The "payment" to Gado was for reimbursement of mailing expenses.

We should limit posts to people who are sincere - and not just hecklers who want to hear the sound of their own voices.

Anonymous said...

"if we were invaded, there would be a healthy supply of collaborators." Do you mean "traitors"? Like Alex Mooney and Joe Asch, who tried hard to get the government to launch a legislative attack on Dartmouth? Even the legislature didn't think much of their bill...

Anonymous said...

Everyone knows Gado paid the HI to send out AoA propaganda, and then he and his compadres voted that the AoA should pay him back. The whole scheme was wrong in the first place and an improper use of AoA funds. That is why the new EC should stop payment on all checks to former members, and especially any checks to the Hanover Institute. When the regime is in its last days and Saigon is about to fall, people might start writing checks and "misplacing" documents.

Diversity said...

I'd be curious to find out how Baron learned the identities of the members of the "very vocal minority of alumni." Because he'd have to know whom he was talking about to know that any statement describing them was "a bold [sic] faced lie," wouldn't he?

Anonymous said...

Anon. 7:24, thanks for the link to Mathias's firm page. It is actually pretty impressive. I originally thought Mathias was slightly foolish to want to spend any time with the dysfunctional Alumni Association, but now I see that he's going to forgo some serious potential income to spend hours on the phone every week or two cleaning up this giant mess. He's not one of those local retiree gadflies with nothing to lose.

Anonymous said...

Here is The Joke of The Day

From the Dartlog:

"We enforce our comments policy.

1. Any comments containing personal attacks will be removed."

A. S. Erickson said...

I'm not precisely sure which comment you are referring to, but I try to moderate with a light hand in the belief that heavy-handed moderating would be counter-productive to discourse. Would it be a better world if everyone treated everyone else with respect? Yes, of course, but that's not the world we live in. So I try to strike a balance.

Anonymous said...

I think we've got a sensitive (guilty conscience?) AoA Executive Committee member here who is trying to trigger the comments policy so s/he can shut down reasonable criticism.

Anonymous said...

Or maybe a sensitive member of the Mathias slate? It's a two-way street. Looks both ways before crossing.

anon. 10:12 said...

I assumed 11:18 is the same as 11:45.