Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Mark Kennedy new, but soon to be old CU President - Official CU president Thread

dio said:
Here is the interview that Zandi references

https://www.cpr.org/news/story/buff...te-says-he-ll-be-a-champion-for-welcoming-all

Zandi is right that this guy is just a snake - clearly just trying to answer questions to get the job rather than on his principles. He knows he can't answer how he wants to answer on Affirmative Action.

Finally, he says he wants technology to be a focus of his administration. If that is the goal, then go get a technologist - his background certainly isn't that.
Click to expand...
Hooooooly ****.

"What are your thoughts in general on affirmative action in college admissions?"

"I have not wrestled with that at a university yet in that our restrictions have not been.... let me go back....I... Can I not answer that question?"

....

"Do you like Affirmative Action?"

"I believe we need to be fair to all."

Then he proceeds to talk about "a bunch of deferred maintenance on Boulder's campus" that only he sees.

This guy is an intellectually vacant asshat. I cannot believe he's even being considered for this position. All the Regents can get ****ed.
 
That was a really bad answer. You know you’ve failed when you effectively ask for a “do over”.

Setting Mr. Kennedy aside, I guess I never viewed the CU President’s role so politically. I did not think views on gay marriage, flag burning, abortion, etc. to be all that relevant to the job. Stem cell research I get. I always thought the job was one of management, oversight, lobbying the legislature, budgeting, and fundraising.
 
Creebuzz said:
That was a really bad answer. You know you’ve failed when you effectively ask for a “do over”.

Setting Mr. Kennedy aside, I guess I never viewed the CU President’s role so politically. I did not think views on gay marriage, flag burning, abortion, etc. to be all that relevant to the job. Stem cell research I get. I always thought the job was one of management, oversight, lobbying the legislature, budgeting, and fundraising.
Click to expand...
If you're not a liberal Democrat, you face an uphill battle in Boulder. How can you not know that by now?
 
MiamiBuffs said:
Maybe we can get Hickenlooper
Click to expand...

Ken Salazar

Creebuzz said:
That was a really bad answer. You know you’ve failed when you effectively ask for a “do over”.

Setting Mr. Kennedy aside, I guess I never viewed the CU President’s role so politically. I did not think views on gay marriage, flag burning, abortion, etc. to be all that relevant to the job. Stem cell research I get. I always thought the job was one of management, oversight, lobbying the legislature, budgeting, and fundraising.
Click to expand...

If you leverage a stint in politics into becoming a university president, it becomes relevant IMO.
 
Buffarino said:
If you're not a liberal Democrat, you face an uphill battle in Boulder. How can you not know that by now?
Click to expand...

Obviously I know the politics of Boulder (limousine liberal, but that’s a whole ‘nother discussion), but I think it’s a sad day when personal politics enters into hiring executive management positions. Alas, that’s the way things go in an ever increasing polarization of The USA. Obviously, @Duff Man and others find his past political record more relevant that I do.

In any case, based on the good riddance reaction from UND and it’s stakeholders, as well as Mr. Kennedy’s inability to handle an actual relevant question on affirmative action admissions standard within universities, he isn’t wowing me much.
 
Creebuzz said:
Obviously I know the politics of Boulder (limousine liberal, but that’s a whole ‘nother discussion), but I think it’s a sad day when personal politics enters into hiring executive management positions. Alas, that’s the way things go in an ever increasing polarization of The USA. Obviously, @Duff Man and others find his past political record more relevant that I do.
Click to expand...
It always has, hasn't it? And I agree that he doesn't sound like the right guy. The search committee and the Regents really screwed the pooch on this one. Can they unscrew it is the question.
 
Well, it’s Mark Kennedy that’s really getting screwed. They made him the sole finalist, and I honestly believe they made him feel like he had the job, and now he may be out at both UND and CU. Ouch.

I can’t imagine other candidates will be lining up to get a similar screw job.
 
dio said:
Mark Kennedy screwed himself. He is the one that sent the original letter out that sent everyone scrambling.

Guy seems like a grade-A moron
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was not a good move. I think he felt he had th job in the bag. He’s not the first employee to turn in a resignation letter only to have the new offer pulled.
 
Creebuzz said:
Obviously I know the politics of Boulder (limousine liberal, but that’s a whole ‘nother discussion), but I think it’s a sad day when personal politics enters into hiring executive management positions. Alas, that’s the way things go in an ever increasing polarization of The USA. Obviously, @Duff Man and others find his past political record more relevant that I do.

In any case, based on the good riddance reaction from UND and it’s stakeholders, as well as Mr. Kennedy’s inability to handle an actual relevant question on affirmative action admissions standard within universities, he isn’t wowing me much.
Click to expand...
I actually do not find his personal political stances to be extremely troubling, insofar as most of them would be irrelevant to the position. I like to think that intelligent people can evolve in their thinking, and I'll take his word when he says that he's done so with regard to same-sex couples. I suppose I'm a bit more concerned about his anti-abortion stance since it could have a trickle-down effect on research direction and/or healthcare choices made by the university for employees and students, but I think there would be significant mitigating factors to prevent either of those things from happening.

However, his current philosophy that is clearly anti-affirmative action is extremely troubling to me not just from a moral point of view, but also a legal point of view. Putting someone in charge with that kind of philosophy carries with it significant risk factor for the university IMO.

The other thing I'm extremely troubled about from his interview is that the subtext for his discussion about technology is clearly about two things:
  • An enhanced focus on on-line degree and certificate offerings
  • A broadened offering of trade degrees
I could be in the minority, but I view a strategy based upon either or both of those things to fly in the face of CU's vision as a tier-one research university. I suppose I could see those things as components to the success of something like CU-Denver.

the main thing I come back to, however, is that he's not impressive in any facet. His CV is lackluster for a president, he's not very inspirational, and he doesn't seem to be very aspirational, either. He talks about the CU job as a career capstone for him- his ambition seems to go no further than to just be CU president, not to take CU further or to act as a steward of CU for future students and a future president.
 
Denver_sc said:
I actually do not find his personal political stances to be extremely troubling, insofar as most of them would be irrelevant to the position. I like to think that intelligent people can evolve in their thinking, and I'll take his word when he says that he's done so with regard to same-sex couples. I suppose I'm a bit more concerned about his anti-abortion stance since it could have a trickle-down effect on research direction and/or healthcare choices made by the university for employees and students, but I think there would be significant mitigating factors to prevent either of those things from happening.

However, his current philosophy that is clearly anti-affirmative action is extremely troubling to me not just from a moral point of view, but also a legal point of view. Putting someone in charge with that kind of philosophy carries with it significant risk factor for the university IMO.

The other thing I'm extremely troubled about from his interview is that the subtext for his discussion about technology is clearly about two things:
  • An enhanced focus on on-line degree and certificate offerings
  • A broadened offering of trade degrees
I could be in the minority, but I view a strategy based upon either or both of those things to fly in the face of CU's vision as a tier-one research university. I suppose I could see those things as components to the success of something like CU-Denver.

the main thing I come back to, however, is that he's not impressive in any facet. His CV is lackluster for a president, he's not very inspirational, and he doesn't seem to be very aspirational, either. He talks about the CU job as a career capstone for him- his ambition seems to go no further than to just be CU president, not to take CU further or to act as a steward of CU for future students and a future president.
Click to expand...
CU Boulder could offer several programs online as do many other Tier 1 research universities do, especially professional post-grad degrees and certificate programs. Full online bachelor degrees would best be marketed by UCCS or UCD. Trade degrees don't really fit any CU system school. Perhaps maybe UCCS or UCD for IT type trade degrees, but that would be it. Anything else should be the domain of the BOE run schools including all of the community colleges.
 
Denver_sc said:
I actually do not find his personal political stances to be extremely troubling, insofar as most of them would be irrelevant to the position. I like to think that intelligent people can evolve in their thinking, and I'll take his word when he says that he's done so with regard to same-sex couples. I suppose I'm a bit more concerned about his anti-abortion stance since it could have a trickle-down effect on research direction and/or healthcare choices made by the university for employees and students, but I think there would be significant mitigating factors to prevent either of those things from happening.

However, his current philosophy that is clearly anti-affirmative action is extremely troubling to me not just from a moral point of view, but also a legal point of view. Putting someone in charge with that kind of philosophy carries with it significant risk factor for the university IMO.

The other thing I'm extremely troubled about from his interview is that the subtext for his discussion about technology is clearly about two things:
  • An enhanced focus on on-line degree and certificate offerings
  • A broadened offering of trade degrees
I could be in the minority, but I view a strategy based upon either or both of those things to fly in the face of CU's vision as a tier-one research university. I suppose I could see those things as components to the success of something like CU-Denver.

the main thing I come back to, however, is that he's not impressive in any facet. His CV is lackluster for a president, he's not very inspirational, and he doesn't seem to be very aspirational, either. He talks about the CU job as a career capstone for him- his ambition seems to go no further than to just be CU president, not to take CU further or to act as a steward of CU for future students and a future president.
Click to expand...

I can’t argue with much of that. And, yes, the online and trade degree emphasis, screamed ASU to me.
 
Buffalo Brad said:
What a dip****. Every single Regent voted to pass him thru as a finalist. Not one single no vote. Seems to me that they were not split
Click to expand...

There is a split now with at least one Regent saying that they didn't receive all the information. I think that is what he is referring to
 
dio said:
There is a split now with at least one Regent saying that they didn't receive all the information. I think that is what he is referring to
Click to expand...

I get that they are now changing their stories because they did not do their jobs. The Gov needs to stay out of it, he will not improve the process at all
 
dio said:
There is a split now with at least one Regent saying that they didn't receive all the information. I think that is what he is referring to
Click to expand...

Yup. Im amazed they didnt google his name and figure out he was going to be a problem. I have a suspicion that there are leaders and followers on the BOR and suddenly the followers are breaking from the leader now that there is public decent that can hide behind.

How is it that a guy this old from such a smaller program got this far to begin with? If he were in his early 40s and considered a rising star I could see perhaps considering him. Instead he's some other states version of Hank Brown with seemingly less intangibles than Brown had. Is there really not a campus Chancellor in the Univ of California system or some other research intensive system that could be found?
 
dio said:
There is a split now with at least one Regent saying that they didn't receive all the information. I think that is what he is referring to
Click to expand...
If someone didn't get all the info, they should not have voted to pass him through as the sole candidate for the job. That's on them not doing their jobs.
 
Buffalo Brad said:
I get that they are now changing their stories because they did not do their jobs. The Gov needs to stay out of it, he will not improve the process at all
Click to expand...

Polis' comment was pretty benign, I don't understand the concern.
 
dio said:
Polis' comment was pretty benign, I don't understand the concern.
Click to expand...
Talk about starting to politicize the situation. He will not make it better and really should steer clear.

This is not about supporting Kennedy at all, I think he is a horrible finalist. Polis does not have a role here and by stepping into the disucssion, has a huge potential for making this worse than it is for CU and the inept BOR
 
Well, it wasn't the final vote, clearly as there is still a 14 day evaluation process. Also, the Daily Camera Higher Reporter is claiming that the search committee is working on the direction of the GOP majority on the BoR - so who knows what information is actually getting to the whole board....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top