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:
Is your point DBT that this a great candidate that is getting railroaded for being a conservative?
Click to expand...
No. I don’t have any idea if he’s a great candidate or not. But Benson, by all accounts, did a very good job and is definitely a conservative. In today’s climate would he have been nominated and/or confirmed? I don’t know the answer. I definitely believe this candidate is under attack for his conservative views. For sure.
 
Last edited:
DBT said:
No. I don’t have any idea if he’s a great candidate or not. But Benson, by all accounts, did a very good job and is definitely a conservative. In today’s climate would he have been nominated and/or confirmed? I don’t know the answer. I definitely believe this candidate is under attack for his conservative views. For sure.
Click to expand...
Benson did a great job at fund raising. He did OK in other areas.

This choice won’t get over the finish line. Process is against him. Qualifications is against him. Politics is against him. You can survive one, maybe two, not all three.
 
hawg1 said:
Benson did a great job at fund raising. He did OK in other areas.

This choice won’t get over the finish line. Process is against him. Qualifications is against him. Politics is against him. You can survive one, maybe two, not all three.
Click to expand...
Well, apparently the Republican Regents demanded that the candidate be a Republican.... So, they might just plow ahead
 
dio said:
Well, apparently the Republican Regents demanded that the candidate be a Republican.... So, they might just plow ahead
Click to expand...
To reveal that the Regrants are abjectly political driven is sickening. Even if they are, you should never reveal this.
 
DBT said:
No. I don’t have any idea if he’s a great candidate or not. But Benson, by all accounts, did a very good job and is definitely a conservative. In today’s climate would he have been nominated and/or confirmed? I don’t know the answer. I definitely believe this candidate is under attack for his conservative views. For sure.
Click to expand...

So you have no opinion of him outside of him being a Republican?
 
DBT said:
Duff, I know barely anything about the man and I don’t feel like it matters whether I have an opinion or not.
Click to expand...

So you posted in this thread to give no opinion, other than he is unfairly attacked because he is conservative?
 
Duff Man said:
So you posted in this thread to give no opinion, other than he is unfairly attacked because he is conservative?
Click to expand...
My post was only about how things have changed when selecting people for a public position and that the things that motivate people to criticize this guy probably have little to do with how he will be as a President of the Colorado system. At least that is what I was trying to say. Anything I post related to politics seems to be a lightning rod. :ROFLMAO:
 
Buffnik said:
All kidding aside, if you say that politics are irrelevant to you then you're saying you'd hire a David Duke type if you knew he could bring in money. The politics matters. I'm saying that if you can adequately address the politics so that you're confident that it won't negatively impact the ability to do the job and won't drive an unwelcome shift in organizational culture, then we can move on to the abilities and qualifications for the specific job responsibilities.
Click to expand...
That’s an extreme example, and obviously untrue. I’ll meet you halfway- I’ll agree that if the politics would interfere with his ability to lead (which would certainly be the case with David Duke), then it is a valid concern. I’m not convinced that’s the case here. My concerns with Kennedy go way beyond his politics.
 
DBT said:
My post was only about how things have changed when selecting people for a public position and that the things that motivate people to criticize this guy probably have little to do with how he will be as a President of the Colorado system. At least that is what I was trying to say. Anything I post related to politics seems to be a lightning rod. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

I see plenty of posts criticizing his background in general, not just his political stances. Oddly enough, he was more willing to address those concerns in a more straightforward manner than those offended on his behalf.
 
hawg1 said:
To reveal that the Regrants are abjectly political driven is sickening. Even if they are, you should never reveal this.
Click to expand...

You can thank Linda Shoemakerfor for revealing that the Board of Regents is partisan. Not surprisingly, she is despised by other members of the Board. She is the cuurent version of Cindy Carlisle.
 
Not Sure said:
That’s an extreme example, and obviously untrue. I’ll meet you halfway- I’ll agree that if the politics would interfere with his ability to lead (which would certainly be the case with David Duke), then it is a valid concern. I’m not convinced that’s the case here. My concerns with Kennedy go way beyond his politics.
Click to expand...
I find it interesting that you believe his historic position on gay marriage wouldn’t impact his ability to lead a gay, married person, or attract those demographics he’s voted against to the university.

I’ve personally seen that go wrong.

I do appreciate his efforts to clarify, though.

Like you, I have other concerns as well.
 
in the age of extreme polarization and competing "facts", i guess i shouldn't be shocked that party affiliation would be determinative in the selection. but, i am. i would like to see a great fund-raiser; a proven attractor of academic talent; someone who understands community and that we need to grow our representation of the state of colorado as the flagship institution; and someone who values and understands the role of athletics.

i don't care what letter they have after their name.
 
Liver said:
in the age of extreme polarization and competing "facts", i guess i shouldn't be shocked that party affiliation would be determinative in the selection. but, i am. i would like to see a great fund-raiser; a proven attractor of academic talent; someone who understands community and that we need to grow our representation of the state of colorado as the flagship institution; and someone who values and understands the role of athletics.

i don't care what letter they have after their name.
Click to expand...
I’d be surprised if anyone on this board disagreed
 
Uncle Ken said:
I find it interesting that you believe his historic position on gay marriage wouldn’t impact his ability to lead a gay, married person, or attract those demographics he’s voted against to the university.

I’ve personally seen that go wrong.

I do appreciate his efforts to clarify, though.

Like you, I have other concerns as well.
Click to expand...
So the letter of recommendation from Roberto Izurieta above, a gay colleague of his, doesn’t assuage your concerns?
 
DBT said:
So the letter of recommendation from Roberto Izurieta above, a gay colleague of his, doesn’t assuage your concerns?
Click to expand...
It certainly helps, as does his afdressal of the matter, as I already acknowledge.

However, the “it doesn’t matter” remarks were made before the appearance of the letter. I was addressing that belief, not the 20/20 perspective you’re presenting
 
If we are going to allow politics to be a factor, we need to disqualify anybody who has ever served in Congress, because anybody who has ever voted on anything, any time, will have pissed off somebody.

Maybe that’s a good thing.
 
Not Sure said:
If we are going to allow politics to be a factor, we need to disqualify anybody who has ever served in Congress, because anybody who has ever voted on anything, any time, will have pissed off somebody.

Maybe that’s a good thing.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anybody was talking about disqualification for politics. More it was a concern to be addressed. There’s a pretty big gap between those things.
 
His voting record isn’t much of a concern to me as people do change stances over time, and he reflected that he has changed those stances from 15-20 years ago.

The fact that he pissed off the major donors and the fact that everyone is rejoicing that he’s gone from his current school is far, far more concerning.

Think ‘The Dan Hawkins of college Presidents.’

*Shudder*
 
Some day Colorado will initiate statewide election for all regents. All regents will be democrats. Democrat regents will eliminate football. Allbuffs will be solely a basketball board. Tad has to start recruiting better.
 
How about giving the Regent bashing a break? It's tremendously unfair, as absolutely none of you were involved in this process have no idea what you're talking about.

Primary research was handled by a 17-member search committee.The committee was made up of bipartisan members of the community and all of the campuses with Griego and Ganahl serving as co-chairs, guidance only, offering no input. Nobody on the Board of Regents suggested this individual., or had any political input whatsoever. This was a 5 month, comprehensive effort that had over a hundred applicants that were all vetted very well. At the point of the board vote, every one of these discussions about his background and political votes were known by the entire Board of Regents. Every one of those issues were discuss in detail during the 2 hour interview. Any Regent who says otherwise is lying.

As far as fundraising goes, He doubled the donations while at George Washington, and has increased donations at North Dakota. He also ran successful political campaigns, where the key to success is fundraising.

How about going to one of his events and see what he has to say in person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top