Sunday, March 27, 2011

NC General Assembly: “Yup, We’re racist bigots.”

A resolution was recently brought before the floor of the North Carolina General Assembly to pardon Reconstruction era NC Governor William W. Holden. The offense that he committed which resulted in him being the only governor in United States history to be impeached and removed from office, was his attempt to curb the slaughter of innocent African Americans civilians by the Ku Klux Klan shortly after the Civil War’s end. This is an action by the General Assembly that is long overdue, such as the interracial marriage of heavyweight boxer Jack Johnson during the early Jim Crow days which was a crime in several southern states. Recently, Arizona Senator John McCain has led the crusade to have Johnson posthumously pardoned by the nation’s legislative body and to be signed by the president. There are many examples in history where grave and immoral injustices by the municipal, state, and country’s ruling body are rectified with apologies and pardons after generations of objectivity and distance from the emotional pressures of the day. The resolution to pardon Governor Holden is really a no-brainer and should have been adopted and passed with unanimity. However, Tar Heel politicians have managed to turn what should have been a sure thing into so much drama. Where the issue now stands, I know not and am thoroughly confused. I only know that it did not fly through the General Assembly for Governor Bev Perdue’s signature. What confounds me is what is the argument against passing such a resolution? By not absolving Holden for taking action against the KKK, the General Assembly is in essence saying to the world, “Yup. We’re racist bigots.” This sentiment is reinforced by the recent passage of a bill honoring the unrepentant and admitted racist Jesse Alexander Helms, a North Carolina senator whose actions inside Washington’s capitol helped impede the nation’s movement towards equal civil rights. Of course, Senator Helms’s actions in North Carolina were especially repressive and detrimental to African Americans, gays and lesbians. Yet, the General Assembly honored Helms by passing a laudatory resolution praising him by a bi-partisan, sweeping and almost unanimous vote, with but one nay dissent, and a dozen or so abstaining from the vote. Actions by the Assembly in both the Helms and Holden cases are an insult to African American in the state, and others who were discriminated against by Helms (such as homosexuals). Democratic Senator Dan Blue, one of several African Americans who voted in favor of honoring Jesse Helms, is a leading state senate voice for pardoning Holden. The Assembly’s refusal to do so is a slap in his face. It is indefensible. However African American politicians, such as Blue, have no one to blame except themselves for the disdain state politicians have shown regarding Governor Holden’s pardon. For example, black politician have remained silent when the state castigated former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong who was violently attacked for doing his job in extending the concept of “equal justice for all” to a young African American woman who claimed to have been sexually assaulted by members of the Duke Lacrosse team. Durham politicians in particular (Representatives Larry Hall, Mickey Michaux, and Senator Floyd McKissick) deserve the brunt of criticism, as they were also quiet as dormice when the Duke Lacrosse case victim, Crystal Mangum, was arrested on trumped up charges and held for three months until her unexpected release by a benevolent bail bondsman satisfied the $100,000 bond under which she was held. That trio of black Durham politicians, like so many other politicians, is missing in action when it comes to issues of the social injustices that plague our state with its tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color”… lacking the will and/or the courage to do the right thing. Governor William Holden should no more have been impeached and removed from office than Mike Nifong should have been disbarred and forced to resign as Durham district attorney. Generations removed from the accepted standards and attitudes of the day, the morally correct path is clear in the case of Holden, and it demands his immediate pardon. Generations from now, when the emotional turmoil that has been stoked by the biased media has simmered and the minds of the people are driven by reason and objectivity, a movement will be undertaken to reinstate Mike Nifong’s law license… rest assured. It will be Mike Nifong’s legacy that will shine brightest in the future, not the members of the unregulated North Carolina State Bar, not Attorney General Roy Cooper who caved in to defendants’ attorneys’ demands for him to issue an “innocent proclamation,” and not the three Duke Lacrosse defendants, who along with their attorneys, were responsible for shaking down Duke University for $60 million and with their greed not satiated are trying to rip off the cash-strapped city of Durham for $30 mil in addition. Today most people look back at the 19th century and wonder how an injustice such as the one against Holden could have taken place. In the future, the vast majority of people will shake their heads in disgust at the disbarment and mistreatment of Mike Nifong… as many people are already beginning to do. It would be a wonderful thing if people today could take responsibility for cleaning up the injustices it commits, instead of handing the duty for righting wrongs over to those in the future. Current North Carolina politicians should pardon William Holden and undo the injustice of their predecessors, and they should clean up their own mess by seeing that Mike Nifong’s license to practice law is unilaterally and unconditionally reinstated without restrictions. Don’t miss the most recent installment of Episode V of “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper”… Part 13 of 17. Be sure to view the Comments, Insight, and Analysis which follows the strip and feel free to offer feedback on the link at the conclusion of the commentary. A link is provided below. LINK:

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Right conclusion, but wrong hypothesis

On March 13, 2011, The News & Observer published an op-ed piece titled “An Anniversary Duke will try to overlook.” It was authored by Bob Wilson, a Durhamian who reached the correct conclusion, but by using faulty reasoning. Yes, Duke University would like to forget March 13, 2006, and the events that transpired subsequently. However, the overriding reason they would like to forget the incident is because it was bamboozled out of sixty million dollars ($60,000,000.00) by three avaricious and crafty attorneys who represented the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants. Those attorneys (Joseph Cheshire, Wade Smith, and James Cooney) probably convinced Duke that it would have no problem being reimbursed by their insurance carrier after paying the Duke threesome. Duke realized, only too late that it had been snookered when their insurance company refused to simply fork over to them the sixty mil. Then, Duke threw good money after bad when it fought to force the insurance company to pay, ignoring the fact that it was Duke that breached its contract with the insurance company and not the other way around. After substantially wasting money on this ill-fated endeavor, Duke University eventually dropped its complaint with both parties agreeing to pay their own costs.

The misguided columnist, however, seems to feel, for some unexplained reason, that the Duke Lacrosse defendants are entitled to an apology from Duke University. My question is: Why? The Duke Lacrosse defendants, with their well-earned reputation for revelry and debauchery, held the beer-guzzling, stripper ogling party with under-aged drinking (and most likely illicit drug use) despite warnings by the university president to their coach to rein in the boys. Not only did the Duke Lacrosse player who arranged the night’s entertainment use a false name to procure it, but a false pretense as well… stating two exotic dancers were wanted for a small bachelor party of four or five, instead of a rowdy kegger sponsored by the Duke Lacrosse team. Now, add to the mix that the partygoers shouted out racial epithets using the “n-word” to the two African American female performers.

The Duke Lacrosse team members had a shady background when it came to legal matters to begin with, as nearly a third of the team had run-ins with the law for offenses ranging from public intoxication, driving with open beer containers, urinating in public, and other transgressions. Specifically Collin Finnerty was convicted of assault and battery against two men who he erroneously assumed to be gay… a hate crime. Dave Evans was cited for driving with an open alcoholic beverage in his car. And Reade Seligmann had a lien slapped against him for attempting to evade paying taxes of $6.7 million on his $20 mil windfall. Mr. Wilson obviously believes these are the types of citizens who are entitled to a payday of $20 million… while Duke University hikes tuition and cuts services and classes for its entire student body in order to make up for the loss of more than $60 million. Rest assured, that none of the make-up for the debt is coming from the hefty compensation packages that the Duke University bigwigs enjoy.

The columnist seems to feel that the Duke Lacrosse defendants suffered greatly because a protester against their reckless party-going ways held up a sign that read “Castrate.” Face it, the boys never spent one day in jail, and the media played them as victims from the git-go. The biased media, following the Carpetbagger Jihadist doctrine to destroy Mike Nifong and anyone deemed to be against the Duke Lacrosse defendants, crucified Mr. Nifong and the victim of the incident, Crystal Mangum. Every article written and broadcast aired spoke about how the Duke Lacrosse defendants were wrongly accused, that Mike Nifong was disbarred, and that the defendants had been declared “innocent.” The media types knew that they were misleading the public and that the Attorney General Roy Cooper had no legal right to make such an unprecedented innocent proclamation. (This promulgation of April 11, 2007, was engineered by Joseph Cheshire’s underling Brad Bannon). Books have been written in defense of the Duke Lacrosse boys, and HBO has been trying to make a movie about the incident… but they had to keep firing scriptwriters for creating a story that was uncomfortably too close to the truth. (Trying to make the Duke Lacrosse defendants appear like choirboys is a monumentally impossible task, if an attempt is made to retain any semblance of the truth.)

The fact is that the Duke defendants prospered, and not just financially, because of their involvement in the case. An admiring judge in Washington, DC, expunged all legal trace of Collin Finnerty’s assault and battery conviction, and they were all highly sought after and recruited by universities and Wall Street-type companies. Doors were open to them for all types of opportunities and ventures. The ones who truly suffered as a result of the aftermath of March 13, 2006, are Mr. Nifong and his family, Crystal Mangum, Nifong supporters, and others considered to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case.

The treatment I received by Duke University was far worse than what the institution doled out to the Duke Lacrosse defendants, as I was kicked off campus and nearly arrested at a public event I attended in April 2010. Because I was a known supporter of Mike Nifong, holding thoughts, beliefs, and opinions favorable to him, I was humiliated, intimidated, and nearly arrested by a security guard who was unable to give an explanation as to why I was being kicked off campus. As he stated, he was merely doing his job, which was to get rid of me. Fortunately for me, I ran into James Coleman, a Duke law professor and friend, who interceded on my behalf. Had he not, I believe the Duke police officer who was called in for backup, without cause, would have arrested me.

Duke University does have hostility and animus as a result of the Duke Lacrosse case, but I submit that it is directed at the wrong targets. Mike Nifong was conscientiously performing his duties when he prosecuted the Duke Lacrosse case, Crystal Mangum was the victim of the Duke Lacrosse case, and Mike Nifong supporters are merely seeking justice… equal justice for all, which begins with justice for Mike Nifong. And, none of the above attempted to shakedown Duke for $20 million.

If Duke University wishes to vent its hostility, it should direct it towards the true culprits, the Duke Lacrosse defendants. Yes, Duke University, Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and most everyone else involved in the case would like to forget the anniversary… everyone except the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants, the defendants themselves, their avaricious attorneys, and the Duke Lacrosse defendant worshippers (which probably includes Mr. Wilson) who want to brag about and laud before the masses their financial rip-off of Duke University. 

Below is a link to the documents and audio of Nifong supporter Sidney B. Harr’s encounter with Duke University on April 14, 2010.


Sunday, March 20, 2011

When it comes to owing the IRS tax, Reade Seligmann got a “rare deal”

I am definitely not a fan of reality television, and I do not recall ever watching an episode of “Survivor”… at least I will not admit to it in public. Through the tabloids and media, however, I am aware that Richard Hatch, the initial $1 million winner of “Survivor” had been having disputes and problems with the Internal Revenue Service regarding taxes he was supposed to pay on his million dollar winnings. Hatch has already spent three years in jail for these tax related issues, and without them being resolved, the meter has continued to run. As it now stands, with interest and penalty, Hatch owes the IRS two million dollars ($2,000,000.00), which amounts to twice the total of his initial winnings, and he has recently reported to prison to begin a nine month sentence for failing to pay back taxes.

To me it seems like Mr. Hatch is being treated cruelly, at best. Maybe someone in the IRS is homophobic (Richard Hatch is the gay contestant who frequently competed in the nude during the televised event). Regardless of his sexual orientation or propensity to bare it all, the treatment he received by the IRS seems draconian and excessive.

Another celebrity who has been at odds with the IRS is Wesley Snipes, who is currently serving a three year sentence for failing to pay taxes. According to news articles, Mr. Snipes owed $2.7 million on income of $13.8 million earned during a three year period. Surely the IRS has ways to collect the income owed from citizens who are reluctant to pay taxes. Why not do so? Why is the penalty against Snipes so extreme and punitive? According to prosecutors for the IRS, they wanted to send a message to deter others from trying to obstruct the IRS.

Evidently, the message the prosecutors are trying to send with the Snipes prosecution is not getting through, because Duke Lacrosse defendant Reade Seligmann was accused of not paying taxes on the $20 million windfall that resulted from a successful shakedown of Duke University in 2007. According to a lien filed recently, Seligmann owes approximately $6.7 million in taxes on the settlement earnings which stemmed from the Duke Lacrosse case. (Currently Seligmann, along with the other Carpetbagger families and their attorneys are still in litigation trying to wrest $10 million each from the cash-strapped city of Durham. They had erroneously concluded after Duke easily rolled over and gave them the $20 mil, that getting Durham to settle for half that amount would be a piece of cake… however, it did not quite work out that way.)

The question I have is why is Hatch serving a nine month sentence, after being locked away for three years already for not paying taxes on $1 million, and Snipes serving a three year sentence for not paying taxes on $13.8 million, when Reade Seligmann is not being tossed into prison for three years for not paying taxes on 2007 income of $20 million? All the IRS did to Mr. Seligmann was apply a lien, which evidently amounts to a rare deal. Why was this action not applied to Hatch or Snipes when their tax payments were not forthcoming?

Don’t get me wrong, for I’m not suggesting that Seligmann be tossed in the brink for evading taxes, but my position is that Hatch and Snipes should not be incarcerated for their tax-related sins. Hatch, for one, will probably never be able to satisfy the $2 million tax debt he now owes, and which is growing. Is the IRS going to continually keep putting him in the slammer for being unable to come up with the dough? There is a simple solution, however, for Mr. Hatch, who has been a contestant on another TV reality show, “Celebrity Apprentice.” Have Donald Trump pay the amount Hatch owes to the IRS in full. Surely Mr. Trump can afford to do so. Then the Donald can work out a schedule for Richard Hatch to re-pay him that is far more lenient than that of the IRS. With regards to Mr. Snipes, he should be released so that he can make another “Blade” movie… or other movie, and he can designate that his salary goes towards satisfying obligations to the IRS. It would be a much more constructive option for all involved. Currently taxpayers are footing the bill for his accommodations behind bars, Snipes’ talents are languishing, and the public is being deprived of enjoying his performances… not unlike the public being deprived of enjoying the pugilistic prowess of Muhammad Ali when he was barred from boxing at the height of his career because of trifeness.

I’m no historian, but I believe that using tax evasion as a means of incarcerating individuals began with the Chi-town gangster Al Capone. It is obvious that Richard Hatch and Wesley Snipes are not violent criminals from whom the public at large needs protection. They do not deserve to be treated like Scarface. They should, instead, be treated like Reade Seligmann… in other words, fairly. Allow them their freedom so that they can be productive, employed citizens able to work towards paying taxes they may owe. Although Richard Hatch, an openly gay man who enjoys traipsing around in the buff, and Wesley Snipes, an African American with a militant streak may not be media darlings like Reade Seligmann, they should be treated equally and justly. 

Note: below is a link to the latest installment (Part 12 of 17) of Episode V of “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper.” Be sure to visit the site for Commentary, Insights, and Analysis which follows the comic strip, to get the best educational value. At the end of the commentary is a link for feedback. Enjoy.


Thursday, March 17, 2011

Wake County School Board VP Debra Goldman got caught with hand in cookie jar

Debra Goldman, the Wake County School Board Vice Chairwoman should be sent to detention for bringing more unwanted attention to a county school board that is already under fire both locally and nationally for its efforts to replace the diversity program with a neighborhood friendly school assignment program. According to an article in The News & Observer titled “Tata to look into transfer: Girl’s mother is on school board,” Debra Goldman secretly conducted a mid-year transfer of her daughter from Martin Middle School (a Wake magnet in West Raleigh) to Davis Drive Middle School. Davis Drive School is highly regarded, but it is not Goldman’s base assignment… however, that point is apparently irrelevant to Ms. Goldman. Not only that, but the school system took the extra step of re-routing the bus so that it stops directly in front of Goldman’s house on its way to and from Davis Drive Middle School.

Goldman’s daughter was secretly transferred in January 2011, with approval by the interim Superintendent Donna Hargens. At the time of the transfer, Ms. Goldman and interim Superintendent Hargens made no attempt to make a disclosure to the public. It was only after the media discovered the move and reported about it that Ms. Goldman acknowledged the move with a response. Goldman defended her actions, according to the newspaper article, by stating that she utilized a seldom used administrative policy to justify the transfer. That policy was never defined or explained in the article.

In an attempt to show integrity, she sent an e-mail to current Wake County School Superintendent Tony Tata, asking him to look into her transfer. This is hardly a move that can be construed to be ethical, as Goldman was integral in voting for Tata to be hired for the position he holds as superintendent. And from the sparse statements made by Mr. Tata so far, it is obvious that his findings will support the transfer. For example, he stated that Ms. Goldman’s daughter’s welfare was his chief concern. Specifically, Mr. Tata said, “I want to make sure that she is protected and in a place where she feels safe.” In other words, Mr. Tata is implying that for some reason or another Ms. Goldman’s daughter does not feel safe in Martin Middle School. Notice how he evades the real reason that Ms. Goldman is seeking the transfer… she wants her daughter enrolled in a school with the best educational reputation and program. If we are to believe that the daughter of a school board vice chairwoman has reason to feel unprotected and insecure at Martin Middle School, then how must the children of parents without ties to the County School Board feel when it comes to their safety and security at the school.

Mr. Tata then stated, “She deserves to be at a good school with great teachers.” In other words, Ms. Goldman’s daughter deserves to be at a good school with great teachers because her mother is the Vice Chairperson of the Wake County School Board. The other students at Martin Middle School don’t deserve to be at a good school with great teachers. And, Mr. Tata implied, with his remark, that Martin Middle School is not a good school and that its teachers are not great.

Now the people are supposed to be satisfied because Mr. Tata stated that he would look into the cases of the 15 students who have received administrative transfers, which are based on oral requests. How convenient that the reasons for their transfers are not in writing. The reason for that is so that there can be no accountability. The problem is not whether policies are followed. The problem lies within the policies themselves… policies which favor students with parents who have connections with the administration… policies that grant special treatment for those students, such as bus stops at their front door.

It is no wonder that the school system, like other agencies in the state are having budget problems. Policies that are in place, such as those governing administrative transfers, need to be abolished. All students should receive the same treatment and the same opportunities, the same quality of education and instructors, and the same sense of security.

In this particular instance, Superintendent Tony Tata needs to scrutinize the fairness of the schools policies, and not whether or not unfair school policies are followed.

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Secrecy – the most valued weapon in the ordnance of the Greedy

Secrecy is employed by the greedy to conceal from others their outrageous, insatiable, gluttonous appetite for money and the possessions and power it can purchase. Whenever transactions are made in which pertinent details are omitted or withheld, it is a sure bet that the reason for its concealment is an attempt to shield from view unreasonable and outlandish terms benefiting one or both parties. For any transaction that is legitimate and on the up and up, and void of excessive, over-the-top compensation, there is no need to withhold terms, especially financial, of the agreement.

Transparency in contractual matters is the honorable policy and one which best serves the interests of all. Transparency is the policy by which the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong conducts its business and to which it strictly adheres.

Unlike the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants and their avaricious attorneys demanded that the terms of their settlement with Duke University be cloaked in secrecy. Carpetbagger attorneys were successful in shaking down Duke University for a total of $60 million for their clients because they imposed upon Duke University a vow of secrecy regarding its financial settlement until the financial transfer had been completed and it was too late. At the crossroads, Duke elected to abide by its agreement with the Carpetbagger attorneys even though adhering to that agreement was in conflict and violation of its agreement with its insurance company and resulted in a breach of contract with its insurers. As a proximate result of withholding terms of its settlement from its insurance company, Duke University forfeited coverage which it might have been entitled had it reached a reasonable agreement.

Due to Duke Lacrosse defendant Reade Seligmann’s attempt to evade paying taxes on his windfall settlement, the Internal Revenue Service slapped a $6.7 million plus tax lien against him, and it was only through this public filing that tax experts were able to accurately calculate the payout that Duke University made to the Duke Lacrosse defendants nearly four years earlier… $20 million per defendant… a $60 million total.

Greed, unfortunately is widespread, and arm in arm is the secrecy that is in place to conceal it. A prime example is the recent dispute between players and owners of the National Football League. The owners of the teams, who are basically nothing more than parasites living off the gridiron gladiators who destroy their bodies and brains in a brutal sport, risk strangling the lucrative enterprise in order to squeeze every last cent they feel that they can. The owners want billions of dollars off the top of $9 billion annual revenue claiming that they need it for “operating expenses.” However, when the players ask to actually “see” the operating expenses, secrecy jumps into the mix and the owners refuse to open their books. The same secrecy employed by attorneys for the Duke Lacrosse defendants (Joseph B. Cheshire V, James Cooney, and Wade Smith).

I would have more respect for the owners of the NFL teams if they just came forward and admitted that they want all of that money because they are greedy. Instead, they expect the football players, the football fans, and the public in general to believe that they are really not greedy… that cost of living expenses, oil problems in Libya, natural disasters, and other expenses which they have no control over, have raised costs of operations to the point that they need all that money in order to barely break even with just a minimal profit. In other words, the NFL owners believe that the American people are idiots. For the most part, Americans aren’t idiots… they’re just apathetic. They know the owners are in it, not for the love of the game or to provide family entertainment… but because they’re greedy. That, greed, is why they do not invest any of their excessive profits in supporting the wounded and injured players after they retire or are forced by injury to retire. The owners care not a whit about the Alzheimer’s or other debilitating brain damage that the players suffer. The owners will continue to demand as much money as they can from the hardworking ticket buying fans. And the owners will continue to extort from cities taxpayer money to build palatial stadiums with luxurious skyboxes and offices which deprives cities of revenue for the services and programs most in need to help the poor and disenfranchised.

Of all of the teams in the NFL, the current world champions, the Green Bay Packers, have the best model… a team that is not owned by one person or one family in the private sector, but by a community. I believe that all sports teams should be owned by municipalities, and that profits should be used to help support its citizens through social programs and help its fans by providing tickets at reasonable prices.

The owners should open their books, but they won’t because they have something to hide… proof of their greed. Just as in the Duke Lacrosse case, when Attorney Jim Cooney refused to divulge the amount of the settlement payment given to the Duke Lacrosse defendants by the university, he wanted to hide from the public proof of the greed of the Carpetbagger families and their attorneys. Shameful.

Transparency is the answer in all issues… whether you’re talking about legal settlements, arbitration in professional sports, or contracts involving the purchase of an automobile through financing by the automaker. 

Below is a link to Part 11 of Episode V of “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper.” Be sure to view the Commentary that follows the strip which can be accessed by clicking the upper left blue button. We welcome comments with an e-mail link that is present at the conclusion of the Flash commentary.


Thursday, March 3, 2011

Challenge to the N&O’s Barry Saunders

In today’s The News & Observer of March 3, 2011, columnist Barry Saunders opined about Dr. Raymond Cook’s DWI case. Saunders pretty much jumps into any topic, no matter how controversial, with gusto, and usually produces a scathing, satirical, stinging, and sarcastic masterpiece. I am in awe of his literary talents, and only wish that on occasion he would lend them to this blog site.

However, the one topic that he has steered clear of is the shakedown of Duke University by the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants and their attorneys for $20 million each… a total of $60 million. In addition, the university squandered another huge undisclosed amount of money for attorneys to try and get the school’s insurance company to reimburse them after Duke had flagrantly breached the contract. Mercifully, they finally agreed to drop their suit and lick their wounds.

Actually, there are three related stories that the media has recently decided to keep isolated and hush-hush with minimalist coverage. And they all began with an IRS lien filed around February 17, 2011 against Duke Lacrosse defendant Reade Seligmann. Local media pretended not to notice that the lien even existed, and it took the Detroit News, a newspaper in the Motor City in the state of Michigan, to bring it to the attention of the world. Now, in all fairness, local media did report about it on television and newsprint, however, if you blinked, you would’ve missed it. Keep in mind coverage of this volatile story pales in comparison with the massive media overload given to a rinky-dink piece of gossip about Duke Lacrosse detective Linwood Wilson. That story about a private and personal marital squabble consumed the local media spotlight for months.

Anyway, the disclosure of the Seligmann tax lien and resultant accurate estimates of the amount Duke doled out to the three defendants began when the university announced that it was going to settle the lawsuit it brought against National Union Fire Insurance Company. Basically, Duke would drop its suit, National Union would drop its countersuit, and both parties would pay for their own attorneys’ fees. On Duke’s part, it is a classic case of throwing good money after bad. Duke University was probably motivated to settle when it learned that a lien against Seligmann had been applied by the IRS.

The Detroit News article was published about a week after that, and reported in The News & Observer shortly thereafter, a day after its article on Duke’s settlement.

Then, low and behold, three days later, Duke University raised its tuition a whopping 4.3% … to total as much as $53,905 with room and board included. Well, it is no wonder after its ill-advised and generous gift to the three Duke Lacrosse defendants… the university is trying to make up for its $60 million plus loss on the backpacks of its students.

What Duke University needs to do is address the compensation paid to the administrators instead of shifting attention to the students in the form of tuition and other fees. Administrators with their high salaries, bonuses, pensions, and benefits are financially sapping the budget of funds that should be used to pay instructors and professors and help defray costs to its student body. At least that’s my opinion, and I would really be interested in what Barry Saunders has to say about this and other topics touched upon in this blog.

Barry, I know that you must answer to you superiors, so I recommend that before you take my challenge that you obtain an okay first. I would hate for you to be axed on my account. Anyway, the gauntlet has been thrown. Barry, it’s your move. 

NOTE: Due to unavoidable and unforeseen scheduling conflicts, Part 10 of Episode V of “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper” will be uploaded today, three days earlier than planned. Be sure to check out the commentary which follows. At the end of the commentary feature, there is a page with an e-mail link. I appreciate all feedback.

A link to Part 10 is below: