with all due respect, here's my perspective on your opinions:
1. mba has more value as a career credential than actual process where student learns something. this is probably true. in fact, i'm getting ready to start my mba in the fall and i've pretty much accepted this is the case. furthermore, i was flat-out told this by one of the few b-school grads i talked to as i considered this career move. coming from a non-business b/g (journalism), i'm sure i'll learn more business basics than my peers, many of whom are coming from the business world. but i don't give much credit in the "so what" category here because, well, it's conventional wisdom.
2. that the people who will soon fill the upper ranks of American business lack courage, imagination, and reasonable sense of right and wrong. come on. is there an impending crisis as mbas reach the upper level of corporate america? even if there were, it would be a problem with mbas taught 20 years ago, not those matriculating at wharton right now. this is another easy generalization that someone could lob at the mba community without doing any real research, let alone an ostensible year's worth.
3. they weren't fierce enough to make themselves known to the reporter during the entire year she spent at their school. wharton graduates 800 or 900 people a year. you're telling me there's not one decent soul among them? please. i met a lot of very sincere, very impressive people the two times i visited wharton. a lot of people reflected the negative traits the reporter described, too. i wouldn't argue that. but this goes to my fundamental contention that the story lacks balance.
4. if the story doesn't have an answer it may be because the school doesn't either, aside from sending their students ... etc. or the reporter didn't bother to shore up both sides of the story. (detect a theme here?)
5. it's only the most prestigous business school in the entire country. If you wanted to figure out what MBAs are about, where else would you start? here i'll admit that the story is written for a philadelphia magazine and thus has limited interest in describing a broader theme. but there were statements made about a broader theme, and clearly the idea is to use wharton as a proxy for what is wrong with business schools in general. and that's once again where i'd attack the article.
give you an example: wharton students were described as casual in class. in fact, i observed some of those traits when i visited the school. so i can't criticize there. but i observed the opposite when i visited, for example, chicago (where i'm headed). and darden. and michigan. at those schools i saw a sincere, scholarly atmosphere.
so are b-school students, across the board, ignorant of learning? are the ranks of corporate america doomed to be filled with executives who "lack courage, imagination, and reasonable sense of right and wrong?" maybe. maybe i'll be looking for a refund in two years. but this story certainly doesn't make it, to me at least, in any sort of convincing way.