Monday, April 21, 2008

The Dartmouth Review of Mr. Haldeman and the Upcoming AoA Elections

The new issue is now online and includes the following articles:

Yes, it's a long issue.


Old Alum said...

A review of the Review:

Haldeman doesn't need your trust. He's not representing you, and he wasn't elected by you. He couldn't care less whether you trust him. Emily has written an editorial about a non-issue.

The "Never Forget" editorial was done with extreme sloppiness, even for an editorial. Did the Hanover Institute or "Dartmouth Parity" pay for that?

Frank Gado has some guts writing that "My active involvement dates from 2003, when I witnessed the undemocratic manipulations of the then-Executive Committee, in league with the Alumni Relations office, to try to foist their destruction of the Association of Alumni on the membership." He's beholden to the Hanover Institute and is dishonestly using his Association office to pursue its agenda. He should be forced to resign by anyone who believes that "it is necessary to recognize a serious conflict of interest that Mr. Spalding has in determining which constituency should be primary for him." (Oh, wait, she's on the same slate! How did the Hanover Institute ever let Chambers's statement slip past?)

The Gov. Comm. was not "secret." The Freemansons and the Hanover Institute are "secret," because they don't tell what goes on inside. The Gov. Comm. published a report. Was Aditya being paid by the Executive Committee, "Dartmouth Parity," or the Hanover Institute? Then why write such a fawningly inaccurate editorial, even for an editorial? "Disenfranchising" alumni? Come on! Does anyone really believe that stuff?

Finally, a question for Chambers: are you aware of the authority of the office for which you are running? It's in the Alumni Association. You are not running for Trustee. You can't reasonably believe that you have the slightest hope of affecting any of the issues you talk about. Why should the voters elect anyone to the Alumni Association who talks about employee health care at Dartmouth?

Anonymous said...

Is the Review aware that Joe Malchow has been misrepresenting Ms. Esfahani-Smith's article in this way?

In a wide-ranging article, The Dartmouth Review reports on charges of malfeasance against Ed Haldeman

There are no charges of malfeasance against Haldeman, and the article does not report on any. Esfahani-Smith wrote:

In his new position as CEO, Haldeman not only vowed to steer the company out of its ethical morass, but he swore to change the way the company did business.

DartAlum said...

Petition trustee T.J. Rodgers condemns the "whistle blower":