I do agree with Nancy here. But either way, he *did* uphold
the law of the land. And that is a good thing.
All best,
Kevin
---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:31:32 -0500
>From: Sunshine49 <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: The Constitution
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Aside from the rightness or wrongness of the decision of the
new
>president of W&M, he could have handled it better.
Considering how
>tradition-minded Virginians are, he could have taken that into
>consideration, had some public meetings, presented his
thinking,
>perhaps made a few converts to his POV, and then done exactly
what he
>did do. But it would have made people feel they were
consulted and he
>took the time to discuss his reasoning with them. Instead of
breezing
>into town and saying the cross must go. IMO he handled it very
>poorly, and that kind of high-handed attitude will not win
you any
>friends.
>
>Nancy
>
>-------
>I was never lost, but I was bewildered once for three days.
>
>--Daniel Boone
>
>To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
instructions
>at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
Kevin R. Hardwick, Ph.D.
Department of History
James Madison University
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|