Why has no one had the guts...

[eloracv]

to risk "admonishment," censure, even expulsion from the BoT by standing up in open session and being honest about what's really going on?
Hell, anyone who did that would be a hero and would galvanize the alumni to rally to their support. I believe that Larry Schultz will do that. Larry is a noun - not an adverb.

 

[NittPicker]

Why would someone run in the first place if they were OK with being expelled?? They can't affect change if they're kicked out of the room. I'd bet all of the current alumni elected members would love to do what you said but they are looking months and years down the road. I'd hate to see a BoT meeting look like a parliamentary session in Uzbekistan with members punching each other and throwing chairs. The university deserves better. Is the instant gratification of chewing out the OG in a public forum worth getting kicked out? The OG has heard countless alumni criticize them during the public comment portion of meetings. The OG thinks they have all the answers and they don't care what anyone else thinks, especially the alumni elected members.

That said, behind closed doors the alumni elected members have likely been making their feelings known to the OG. Just because we can't see something doesn't mean it isn't happening.

 

[eloracv]

Why would someone run in the first place if they were OK with being expelled?? They can't affect change if they're kicked out of the room. I'd bet all of the current alumni elected members would love to do what you said but they are looking months and years down the road. I'd hate to see a BoT meeting look like a parliamentary session in Uzbekistan with members punching each other and throwing chairs. The university deserves better. Is the instant gratification of chewing out the OG in a public forum worth getting kicked out? The OG has heard countless alumni criticize them during the public comment portion of meetings. The OG thinks they have all the answers and they don't care what anyone else thinks, especially the alumni elected members.

That said, behind closed doors the alumni elected members have likely been making their feelings known to the OG. Just because we can't see something doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Why would someone run in the first place if they were OK with being expelled?? They can't affect change if they're kicked out of the room. I'd bet all of the current alumni elected members would love to do what you said but they are looking months and years down the road. I'd hate to see a BoT meeting look like a parliamentary session in Uzbekistan with members punching each other and throwing chairs. The university deserves better. Is the instant gratification of chewing out the OG in a public forum worth getting kicked out? The OG has heard countless alumni criticize them during the public comment portion of meetings. The OG thinks they have all the answers and they don't care what anyone else thinks, especially the alumni elected members.

That said, behind closed doors the alumni elected members have likely been making their feelings known to the OG. Just because we can't see something doesn't mean it isn't happening.

]Why would someone run in the first place if they were OK with being expelled??
To make a statement by publicly speaking truth to power, galvanizing the forces for good, maybe effecting the biggest changes of all by actually doing something different. Just my opinion and I'm stickin' to it.
I'm old, and I have more passion than patience.

 

[lionlurker]

I could never figure out how the hell every single time the selected nobodies always voted with the power bloc. Every single friggin' time. Every single vote. Not a single one ever dissented???

Now, those are some sheep.

 

[Ranger Dan]

I could never figure out how the hell every single time the selected nobodies always voted with the power bloc. Every single friggin' time. Every single vote. Not a single one ever dissented???

Now, those are some sheep.

I believe this is because the rules state that the results of the real vote are hidden and then the decision will show as all BOT members agreeing. I forget how this is specifically worded, but it's something to this affect.

 

[psuro]

I believe this is because the rules state that the results of the real vote are hidden and then the decision will show as all BOT members agreeing. I forget how this is specifically worded, but it's something to this affect.

^^^THIS^^^^

This protects the sanctity of the BoT to the public. I believe this was one of the structural elements of setting up the BoT; it looks like decisions are unanimous - and up until Nov 2011, no one cared.

 

[fairgambit]

to risk "admonishment," censure, even expulsion from the BoT by standing up in open session and being honest about what's really going on?
Hell, anyone who did that would be a hero and would galvanize the alumni to rally to their support. I believe that Larry Schultz will do that. Larry is a noun - not an adverb.

Reminds me of this guy....someone named Patrick Henry. He was sort of famous back in the day.

"Caesar had his Brutus--Charles the first, his Cromwell, and George the third---("Treason!" cried the Speaker-------- "Treason, treason!" echoed form every part of the house)......may profit by their example. If this be treason, make the most of it."

(I wonder what Mr. Henry would have said if he was a member of our Board of Trustees. )

 

[StinkStankStunk]

That said, behind closed doors the alumni elected members have likely been making their feelings known to the OG.

And that has accomplished what....exactly?

NOTHING has been achieved through acquiescence and submission to the Scoundrels.
NOT ONE SINGLE VOTE HAS BEEN CAST ON ONE SINGLE ISSUE by ANY of the Scoundrels or their proxies that was NOT in line with the scoundrels desires.
NOT ONE.....EVER

There is nothing to be gained through "closed door diplomacy"......it was tried twice (the $60 million for "victim" settlements, and the unanimity in approving the Corman Surrender....and both times the elected Trustees - and all of us - got nothing for those concessions except for another "bending over").
Now, let me say - I have NOTHING against "engaging" in logical, thoughtful, diplomacy....and our elected Trustees SHOULD do that. But they should not (and I hope not) expect that it will EVER effect a change in the positions of the Scoundrels.....certainly never make any more "one way concessions" in the hopes of receiving reciprocal treatment.

YEARS of "diplomacy" regarding Board reform led to what???? When Corbett was on his way out, and the Scoundrels were in trouble, they simply crammed down more proxies to the Board - in direct conflict with any sense of ethical behavior, and while spitting in the face of the Governor elect and the PA Legislature.
ANYONE who didn't see that coming is a fool. There was no way to stop it....not short of a true coup d'etat....but certainly no one should have expected anything less of the Scoundrels, or should have expected that logical debate and engaged diplomacy was going to "win the day".

Over FOUR YEARS, the only gains that have been made have been through the Courts....and by engaged (enraged?) Penn Staters evicting Corbett from the Governor's Mansion.

Moving forward, the only gains that will be made will be through the Courts or the Legislature or through pressure applied to our elected Reps down in Harrisburg.....and an informed, engaged, hopeful demographic of Penn Staters can only help that cause.

No one - I do not believe - expects or wants anyone on the BOT to take a chair to the head of Masser or Lubert (as justified as that may be)......but there is nothing to be gained by not speaking the truth.
And speaking the truth DOES not lead to any disbarment/censure/or being "kicked out"....the OG Scoundrels may want to bluster, but if they actually tried to invoke such measures - when the Trustee(s) in question broke no vow of confidentiality etc - or any legitimate expectation of a Trustee....they would have WW3 on their hands - and even they aren't that stupid.

You don't "debate" with f&cking Pirates.
When you are in the majority.....you kill or arrest them (metaphorically of course )
When you are not in the majority.....you rally forces by exposing them for what they are.


Responsibilities trump Rules......especially when the "rules" are bogus and unenforceable.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

^^^THIS^^^^

This protects the sanctity of the BoT to the public. I believe this was one of the structural elements of setting up the BoT; it looks like decisions are unanimous - and up until Nov 2011, no one cared.

PSURO...this is a perfect example, thank you for bringing it up:

The OG Scoundrels had instituted this "All votes are to be announced as unanimous" nonsense (straight out of the freaking Politburo).

Some of the elected Trustees simply said "F&ck that", and called for public votes and recording of the votes as they were - not as unanimous in favor of the majority.

The OG Scoundrels - obviously - hate that. But even they know that can't enforce that bogus "unanimity" crap.....and, now, we at least have the voting record of each trustee on record.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

to risk "admonishment," censure, even expulsion from the BoT by standing up in open session and being honest about what's really going on?
Hell, anyone who did that would be a hero and would galvanize the alumni to rally to their support. I believe that Larry Schultz will do that. Larry is a noun - not an adverb.

View embedded media

I don't expect Larry to take a chair to anyone's head....or even to bring his chainsaw into a BOT meeting .

I do expect...in fact I would bet the mortgage money on it....that Larry Schultz would be committed to vigorously pursuing righteous governance for all Penn Staters.
Honestly, intelligently, ethically, and energetically.

We owe a lot to the folks we have elected to the BOT over the last few years......and we need to provide them with the best resources possible.

 

[marshall23]

Might I suggest the Alumni Elected Trustees create a "Rump" BOT. Schedule meetings on the same day and approximate location, create agendas for discussion and invite public input. Let the Misanthropes continue with their Grand Deceptions with empty chairs and to deal with being further exposed as the despicable people we know they are.

 

[Tweedbear]

Can someone explain to me where the "business and industry" trustees come to the board?
Who appoints them? Where does the appointment authority originate.
Do we have any recourse on these appointments. Is this title a cover for political appointment.
I was and still am puzzled that Tom Ridge was standing in the wings waiting to assume the presidency during the crisis
Graham Spanier was an obvious political target. The charade confused me.
Was the whole scandal an attempted political coup?

 

[Ranger Dan]

[QUOTE="

[/QUOTE]

You would think he could have taken the glasses off of his head before taking the selfie... that is such a duchy look!

 

[StinkStankStunk]

Can someone explain to me where the "business and industry" trustees come to the board?
Who appoints them? Where does the appointment authority originate.
Do we have any recourse on these appointments. Is this title a cover for political appointment.
I was and still am puzzled that Tom Ridge was standing in the wings waiting to assume the presidency during the crisis
Graham Spanier was an obvious political target. The charade confused me.
Was the whole scandal an attempted political coup?

Since 2001...there is ZERO accountability. NONE

Her Honor Cindy Baldwin led an "ad hoc committee" back in 2001, that took a very nebulous process (it had essentially been controlled by PMA...Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association- you've heard of them I assume....the Lobbyist arm of PMA, not the current Insurance entity - though they share a common history) - and made it COMPLETELY black box.

So-called "B&I Trustees" (who, if you've followed along, are consistently the worst of the worst of the Scoundrels) are now "selected" - according to the letter of the bylaws - by a 5 Person Committee (who's composition is privileged...i.e. "secret" even from the other members of the BOT) of which at least 3 must be existing "B&I Trustees"

In other words, and in actual practice....the "B&I Trustees", when one of them "terms out", simply picks their replacement.

It is how Broadhurst (on his way out) and Frazier added Dandrea (Dicky's inlaws are BFF with the Broadhursts, and Dicky is a co-hort - Pharmaceutical Defense Lawyer - of Kenny)..etc etc etc.
No one votes for them, no one vets them, no one has any recourse to prevent them from coming in - or to ever be able to vote them out. NONE.
Completely and utterly unauthorized and unaccountable. So, "Dicky the Dickless" Dandrea serves at the feet of his masters....with no impediments to pushing forth their unholy agenda.


Now.....how can that Cabal be broken? Legislatively, that is the only recourse.

The "Yudichak Bill" would do just that.....it would do away with this secret society bullsh&t. (among other things.....which is a whole 'nuther discussion)

While the majority of the members of the State Senate have Co-Sponsored the bill.....the bill has been barred from coming up for a vote (which is the wonderful way the PA Senate works) by Senator Folmer and Senator "The White Knight of PSU" Corman.....the chair of the Government Committee and the Senate Majority Leader, respectively (apologies in advance if I got the exact titles wrong, it was OTTOMH.....but you get the gist of it).

 

[PSUfan98]

I could never figure out how the hell every single time the selected nobodies always voted with the power bloc. Every single friggin' time. Every single vote. Not a single one ever dissented???

Now, those are some sheep.

Larry is sheep as well, a lawyer who spends half of his working day on this board, and has been caught multiple times misrepresenting the words, misquoting, and intentionally pulling phrases out of context of posters with whom he has disagreed. Yes, methinks he has a price and it is chump change.

 

[PSUfan98]

Can someone explain to me where the "business and industry" trustees come to the board?
Who appoints them? Where does the appointment authority originate.
Do we have any recourse on these appointments. Is this title a cover for political appointment.
I was and still am puzzled that Tom Ridge was standing in the wings waiting to assume the presidency during the crisis
Graham Spanier was an obvious political target. The charade confused me.
Was the whole scandal an attempted political coup?

I don't about a political coup but the other party certainly was very vocal about Penn State's guilt all the way to the top and I mean the very top.

 

[Ten Thousan Marbles]

I don't about a political coup but the other party certainly was very vocal about Penn State's guilt all the way to the top and I mean the very top.

You are the only sheep in this entire thread, as far as I can tell. A sheep that thinks it is a wolf. Or, are you only aspiring to coyote? Very sad.

 

[PSUSignore]

This protects the sanctity of the BoT to the public.

That seems to be working out quite well for them recently. /s

 

[PSUfan98]

You are the only sheep in this entire thread, as far as I can tell. A sheep that thinks it is a wolf. Or, are you only aspiring to coyote? Very sad.

You may have overdone the animal references for someone that wants people to take them seriously. I used sheep as the poster that I had quoted to convey how easy it seems that Larry would be lead astray. That is evidenced by things that Larry does on this very board that everyone but the newest here has seen. When you intentionally misrepresent your opposition and are called out on it in the same thread by multiple posters in multiple threads over many years, it exposes an integrity issue.

What exactly has Larry done to earn his integrity back? He has proven himself to be a dishonest man on this board repeatedly. Seems to me that he would be easily bought and certainly shown himself willing to lie. He has done it on this board for all to see for absolutely nothing but feeble attempts to win an argument. It would stand to reason that the corrupt BOT could buy him for very little as they have their previous lawyers.

Lawyers and their puppetmasters brought this mess on, another lawyer who has shown himself to be dishonest on this board with even trivial matters is like throwing fuel on the fire. A leader is needed, not a politically driven and self motivated lying lawyer who spends half of his day on a message board.