newsobserver.com projects - James Oblinger - Comments

Re: Scandal follows Oblinger

AgentPierce — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:49:36 -0400

I could understand if someone had a unique talent but also had a "smudge" on his resume from some indiscretion out of the past .... that had been followed by a reasonable period of notable achievement ..... BUT Oblinger's "indiscretion" is still a steaming pile of cr*p.

He was fully aware that he was part of a conspiracy to circumvent a very clear policy. He made a conscious decision to take part in that conspiracy.

I could see him joining a faculty somewhere and contributing .... but to be given Academic CEO status so soon after being "caught red-handed" is ridiculous.

New Mexico .... have you no shame?

Re: Change of heart on Oblinger deal

google — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 07:40:58 -0400

http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/what_bowles_told_the_easleys

"...UNC system President Erskine Bowles had conversations with both the first lady and her husband."

What?!?!?!

Re: Change of heart on Oblinger deal

krw127 — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 07:38:28 -0400

Erskine Bowles says he wants to cut costs associated with the administration of the UNC system. He had the opportunity to cut Oblinger's salary immediately to a $173,000, but he allowed the former chancellor to keep his $420,000 salary for six months. Based on the actions of Oblinger there should have been no question that Oblinger did not deserve the extra pay of $123,500.00. How much extra was Oblinger paid while the Board of Trustees was reviewing the matter?

Re: Change of heart on Oblinger deal

robcamp — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 01:32:35 -0400

Appropriate consequences for both Oblinger and Larry Nielsen would be dismissal from any employment at NC State. Both lied about their parts in this fiasco and should be fired from any position at NC State. They're both still getting off easy.
I've also lost respect for Bowles for the original deal.

Re: What Bowles told the Easleys

domewatcher — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 14:35:46 -0400

Per the above article:

"I told Governor Easley the same thing I just told you: That we were going to treat Mary Easley the same way we would treat everybody else."

If they treat everyone else the same as they treated Ms. Mary.......well.........it's a fine place to work......a fine place indeed.

Re: What Bowles told the Easleys

BitterEXdemocrat — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 14:33:45 -0400

huh? wha? WHOA NELLIE! lol...

Re: What Bowles told the Easleys

google — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 13:48:26 -0400

In the words of Mr. Peepers, "What?!?!?"

Is this the first acknowledgement by Erskine that he met with both Easleys concerning Mary's position? Paging Agent Pierce. Agent Pierce, please report for duty. And alert igliigli and robdarich.

Re: What Bowles told the Easleys

skeptical — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 13:33:27 -0400

Boy, this one got buried quick!

Re: Nielsen, Oblinger talked legal problems

AgentPierce — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:16:40 -0400

Oblinger & Neilson = Laurel & Hardy ..... Abbott & Costello ..... One stooge short of Three Stooges (add McQueen amd there's Three of'em)

Re: Rand's specter halted Easley audit

Kingixolib — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 05:57:39 -0400

Career politicians breed corruption and lies. Vote them out or they die in office.

Option one....you win
Option two....you lose

Re: Rand's specter halted Easley audit

PoliticalJunkie — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:39:39 -0400

Great point Paul.

You ought to file one if nobody else has.

Re: Rand's specter halted Easley audit

PaulTerrell — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:15:59 -0400

I guess anyone can file a ethics complaint against Rand. I am surprised someone in the Republican Party has not.

Re: Chancellor e-mails gone for good

ncpoli — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:10:37 -0400

Wasn't there some kind of scandal involving RMA in Greensboro a few years ago?

Re: Chancellor e-mails gone for good

pongoed — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:52:27 -0400

Just wondering, how much did RMA charge?

Re: Rand's specter halted Easley audit

bellaparola — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:33:21 -0400

How is it not a conflict of interest for Rand to be lawyering against an outfit whose budget he basically controls? Is there any real protection in the state ethics laws and enforcement of them?