It’s good to know we live in a meritocracy:
In one e-mail exchange, University of Illinois Chancellor Richard Herman forced the law school to admit an unqualified applicant backed by then- Gov. Rod Blagojevich while seeking a promise from the governor’s go-between that five law school graduates would get jobs. The applicant, a relative of deep-pocketed Blagojevich campaign donor Kerry Peck, appears to have been pushed by Trustee Lawrence Eppley, who often carried the governor’s admissions requests.
When Law School Dean Heidi Hurd balked on accepting the applicant in April 2006, Herman replied that the request came “Straight from the G. My apologies. Larry has promised to work on jobs (5). What counts?”
Hurd replied: “Only very high-paying jobs in law firms that are absolutely indifferent to whether the five have passed their law school classes or the Bar.”
Something tells me that “Kerry Peck” isn’t a Latino name.
I want the names of those firms out in the public square for rotten fruit and vegetables.
Credit where credit is due: The Chicago Tribune has been doing a great job digging through this sordid mess and plastering the latest developments over the front page time and time again. An example of what reporters can do when they actually try.
It’s becoming clear that we lost Rod before his entertainment value had been fully realized. A shame.
The response was snark. Good for her.
@dmsilev: Yes, they’ve been very good at raking through the muck that is Blago and his shit. Their own reporting is pretty good even though their editorial section is wingnut-lite.
Unfortunately this has to happen at my school (still got another year at U of I before graduation), so nice to know corruption taints even the university. Albeit the stink is mostly on the law school and other departments, not heard a thing regarding the engineering college (mine, EE). My guess is if you’re not smart enough to get in without the clout, you have zero chance in hell anyway; a very believable proposition.
When white law students read Stellaluna, it’s not because they need to learn English, it’s because they like the pretty pictures.
Love the post title, DougJ. Speaking of which, season #3 of “Mad Men” is back August 16.
Ah, a proud day for me and my fellow alums of the University of Illinois College of Law.
Then again, I don’t really see what the big deal is. I’m living proof that we’ve been accepting unqualified candidates since at least 1998.
I’m buying Season 2 on disc on July 14.
It’s always those gosh darn entitled Chicago kids coming to our little town and sullying the reputation of our illustrious university. GRRRRR.
Mad Men!! Oh, very very nice, DougJ.
Would love to talk about what is going to happen to Pete in Season 3, based upon Season 2, but then the people would start in with the spoiler-talk, and it would just turn into a melee, or something.
I can hardly stand waiting for Season 3. I think about it every day. It will be at least 1964. Will Don Draper be wearing a Beatle haircut? Pegged pants?
I also love Peggy, and can’t wait to see what she’s been up to.
@Cat Lady: 1964? I kind of hope not… after watching the way they handled Marilyn Monroe’s death (eerily reflected in real life the last day!) and the Cuban Missile Crisis, I’d be very interested to see how they handle Kennedy’s assassination, the US arrival of the Beatles, etc. I read over at Alan Sepinwall’s site that the writers are hinting at a fast-forward, so you might be right about 1964. At any rate, best 60’s show evuh, evuh, evuh.
The last scene between Peggy and Pete was, in my opinion, one of the best of both seasons. And Joan! Do you think she married that hideous man? And Roger, who clearly went through his own Sanford Moment last season. Will Duck be back (poor Chauncey!)? What about Salvatore, and his office-crush? And of course, our hero, Don Draper, and the long-suffering Betty. What a show. Sterling-Cooper forever.
I can’t wait either! August, right?
Not to get all parochial (which means I will), but I think the Tribune stories on this event are a mixed bag. Without revealing too much, I’m somewhat biased to be defensive about the University of Illinois. On the one hand, it’s great that preferential admissions will be ended as a result of these stories. In that sense they are a service to the University.
On the other hand, my reading of the Tribune stories has been that they have heaped a lot of scorn on indignation on the University of Illinois and very little on trustees and government officials forming the other half of the dance-team. The University administration should have fessed up immediately and simply stated that they felt they had to do the admissions given the budget situation and who holds the purse strings. That doesn’t excuse the University failings but I think it would have painted a fuller picture of the systemic failure rather than giving people the impression that the University is simply corrupt.
I get the feeling that stories about bad UI behavior draw a big readership among the suburban parents of students who feel they pay too much in tuition. The Sun-Times recently ran a piece on the salaries of University employees which, oddly enough, focussed on the high-end salaries of a few professors. This goes hand-in-hand with the stories of sky-rocketing tuition. I have yet to see a story on the dwindling state-funding of the University (I think less than 20% of the operating budget if from state funding now) or the number of years most university employees have had salary increases ranging from 0% to 2%, which in my book is not exactly excessive.
On the bright side, nice to know one of them was a relative of a rich Blogo donor. Things have been very bad for rich lately, they’ve lost a lot of money. And the socialaBama-ists have sparked an massive wave of unfairness towards these unfortunate, oppressed people.
In other words, same old, same old. Blegh.
I read the stories and it bothered me that they tried to portray the law school dean as equally responsible for the mess. I’ve spent all my working life dealing with University administrations and I can tell you at all times they win because they hold the cash. The best you can do is pick your fights and make the best deal you can get. As Barbara says the dean’s response is pure snark.