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:
Let's also not forget the pandering of Trumper Heidi Ganahl to try and score points to win a shot at the Governors mansion, or Sue Sharkey pandering to ultra-conservative Douglas County
Click to expand...
Sue Sharkey is from ultra conservative Weld County, but point taken.
 
You sure? I could swear she was in the 4th district.

Maybe Castle Rock is part of the 4th now, but that would seem odd.
 
dio said:
Let's also not forget the pandering of Trumper Heidi Ganahl to try and score points to win a shot at the Governors mansion, or Sue Sharkey pandering to ultra-conservative Douglas County
Click to expand...
I missed the pandering by those 2. What did they say?
 
dio said:
Click to expand...

She's not wrong. Just because you like what Polis is doing doesn't mean it's not very partisan in nature.

Colorado voted no on Prop 112 decisively. And what is one of the first things Polis does after he takes office? He signs SB-181 which does a lot of what 112 would have done. That's not pandering to ultra-conservative Douglas County. 55% of the state said no to 112.
 
buff4bcs1985 said:
lone tree sure is... which sucks #****kenbuck
Click to expand...
Meh. Of all the Republicans you could end up with from the 4th district, Ken Buck is probably better than most. Figure it’ll be a Republican regardless, so when you view it through that lens, he isn’t too bad.
 
SuperiorBuff said:
Pandering, yeah. I guess I missed her announcement to run for Governor.
Click to expand...

: shrug :

She was all over the news as a rising GOP star in the state and vocal and outspoken at the recent Republican state convention. She clearly is being groomed for higher state office, and then she chooses to takes partisan swipes at the current Colorado Governor over his very mild comments about making sure the CU President was unifying (which he clearly is not).

But you like her, and only Democrat Regents can pander to their constituents.

Buffarino said:
She's not wrong. Just because you like what Polis is doing doesn't mean it's not very partisan in nature.

Colorado voted no on Prop 112 decisively. And what is one of the first things Polis does after he takes office? He signs SB-181 which does a lot of what 112 would have done. That's not pandering to ultra-conservative Douglas County. 55% of the state said no to 112.
Click to expand...

We can take it to the ballot initiative thread, but 181 and 112 aren't remotely the same. Like, not even close. One is all about setbacks, and the other is freeing up local control. Hell, 181 was so heavily amended that the O&G industry doesn't even seem to mind it much. I know you want to paint them with the same brush, but there is a chunk of that 55% who voted no on 112 who just thought the setbacks were too aggressive, but thought some regulation would be fine and likely support 181. Apples and oranges.
 
Not Sure said:
Meh. Of all the Republicans you could end up with from the 4th district, Ken Buck is probably better than most. Figure it’ll be a Republican regardless, so when you view it through that lens, he isn’t too bad.
Click to expand...
Ken Buck? The guy is a freakin crackpot, not to get too political.
 
dio said:
: shrug :

She was all over the news as a rising GOP star in the state and vocal and outspoken at the recent Republican state convention. She clearly is being groomed for higher state office, and then she chooses to takes partisan swipes at the current Colorado Governor over his very mild comments about making sure the CU President was unifying (which he clearly is not).

But you like her, and only Democrat Regents can pander to their constituents.



We can take it to the ballot initiative thread, but 181 and 112 aren't remotely the same. Like, not even close. One is all about setbacks, and the other is freeing up local control. Hell, 181 was so heavily amended that the O&G industry doesn't even seem to mind it much. I know you want to paint them with the same brush, but there is a chunk of that 55% who voted no on 112 who just thought the setbacks were too aggressive, but thought some regulation would be fine and likely support 181. Apples and oranges.
Click to expand...
I believe that I agreed that it was pandering. I honestly was wondering if she had announced about running for Gov and I missed it.
 
dio said:
Yikes

Click to expand...


The company we keep:

These are the other schools that have elected regents with party loyalties competing for attention with non-partisan university governance:

University of Michigan
University of Nebraska
University of Nevada
 
  • Like
Reactions: DBT


Some bits from the Facebook post from this Regent that I thought were nice. You can see the tactics that the GOP will deploy going forth for everyone (reminds me of the Kavanaugh hearings).

Of course, if the Regents had appointed Obama as the CU presidential finalist, the very same detractors—mostly liberals from Boulder and Denver—would be doing cartwheels. But because Mr. Kennedy has an “R” after his name, the Far Leftists cannot handle it. With all of their purported progressive enlightenment and so-called open-mindedness, they cannot tolerate the notion of a Republican occasionally challenging their liberal college fiefdoms where people suffer real negative consequences if they dare challenge the Leftist orthodoxy that dominates campus culture.

Obviously, the Leftist hypocrisy is staggering—and underscores all the more the need for leaders like Mark Kennedy who may not conform to the liberal mold regarding every nuance of every issue. Colleges are supposed to be places that foster the exploration of different worldviews where students learn how to challenge others and are exposed to a range of opinions across a broad menu of intellectual options. But that culture is hard to promote if conservatives are marginalized or outright attacked simply because of their right-of-center views (including those expressed nearly two decades ago).
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, some Democrat Regents have been frantically looking for any possible way to backpedal at the first sign of opposition from their liberal base, finding ways to seek cover so that they can justify changing their initial Yes votes to No votes. In some instances they have provided misinformation to the press. Their approach also has entailed their clinging to the pretense that Mr. Kennedy’s previous status as a Republican lawmaker took them by surprise—hoping that their liberal base is uninformed enough to believe that Regents never conducted their own independent research on each finalist. They are doing so because some or all of them will almost certainly cave. Not exactly profiles in courage.
But despite my receiving nasty, hateful emails from ill-informed liberals for the past two weeks, this is my pledge to you: I will not budge. Now more than ever, I continue to believe that Mark Kennedy will be a great CU President. He has my full support. In fact, this entire episode proves that we need more like him in higher education and highlights the realities I described throughout my campaign: Far Leftists are incredibly intolerant and hypocritical; they defame those who disagree with them; and they resort to intimidation against anyone who does not conform. And they will stop at nothing to destroy those who push back against extreme political correctness, which stifles free speech and diversity of thought on campus. (I’m referring to Far Leftists… not all Democrats.)
The sad truth is that Far Leftists have hijacked the word “diversity.” Oh, make no mistake: they pretend to honor its value—that is, until you disagree with them. Then, they bring out their knives.
Well, try that approach with someone else.
Come Hell or high water, I will proudly and unapologetically vote Yes this Thursday to appoint Mark Kennedy as our next CU President. Whether he is confirmed or not remains to be seen. But I will not reward a small, well-orchestrated Far Leftist mob—who in my opinion represents a mentality as dangerous to this nation’s future as any foreign threat we face.
The Far Left has deployed shameful tactics in this context. And as long as the Far Left engages in this bullying behavior, we must confront them. Perhaps some day we will demonstrate that they cannot win through intimidation. It’s up to us.
Until then, my name is Chance Hill. I am your CU Regent. And I will always fight for the best interests of CU and the 5th!
Click to expand...
 
It's the same thing that I've heard from others who support this guy: we need "diversity of thought" so the President needs to be a conservative because CU is filled with liberals. But then they also say that his voting record in congress is irrelevant. As is the fact that he worked on Tim Pawlenty's campaign while in academia. I liked this reply:

Mr. Hill, I'm sorry, but this is incredibly embarrassing. The University of Colorado is not a political institution, yet you're turning the selection of its next president into a partisan issue, rather than listening to the very serious concerns from CU faculty, students, and alumni regarding Mark Kennedy's academic qualifications for this position.

As a professor with collaborators at CU, and a CU alumnus (PhD 2018), I'm imploring you to put your partisan politics aside, and act in the best interest of CU by putting forward a new candidate whose track record and qualifications brings the CU community TOGETHER rather than causing completely-avoidable division.- Jedidiah McClurg
Click to expand...

PS how is that not a made-up name?
 
Very, very disappointing that party politics is apparently even a consideration.
 
I wonder if had the initial resistance to Kennedy been centered around his actual qualifications as opposed to his politics if we would still be seeing this kind of entrenchment.

What a clusterfuk.
 
Kennedy is a terrible choice as CU president, for so many reasons

A bigger picture problem is that the BoR has such an important role in managing CU and in picking this important position. The regents are voted in by residents of CO and typically on party lines. The state now contributes only 4.5% to the general fund of the system. Why do the voters and the state has so much power over CU Boulder and the other three schools?

Why do they then also make such big decisions on the athletic budget and salary, when CU Boulder only contributes a small portion, about $10M of the $90M expenses -- therefore the state makes the final decision, contributing only 4.5% of about 11% (amounts I don't know for sure).

It's a legacy thing, but state funding has fallen greatly and the state controls and decides too much.
 
Last edited:
dio said:


Some bits from the Facebook post from this Regent that I thought were nice. You can see the tactics that the GOP will deploy going forth for everyone (reminds me of the Kavanaugh hearings).
Click to expand...

"But I will not reward a small, well-orchestrated Far Leftist mob—who in my opinion represents a mentality as dangerous to this nation’s future as any foreign threat we face."

Holy **** that is bad... Just embarrassing that he represents this University.
 
It’s personally disgusting to me that this has devolved into a political football. Each “team” hell bent and determined to win, or at least inflict damage to the other side. Nobody is, you know, looking out for the best interests of the school. Sickening.
 
RollTad21 said:
"But I will not reward a small, well-orchestrated Far Leftist mob—who in my opinion represents a mentality as dangerous to this nation’s future as any foreign threat we face."

Holy **** that is bad... Just embarrassing that he represents this University.
Click to expand...
Bad? Really bad. Some might even say dangerous and potentially incendiary. I’ve told many of my friends over the past 4 years or so that this political climate is analogous to a semi tractor-trailer that begins to fishtail. Once it starts, it’s almost impossible to stop safely. It usually ends badly.
 
Bliff Cranch said:
Bad? Really bad. Some might even say dangerous and potentially incendiary. I’ve told many of my friends over the past 4 years or so that this political climate is analogous to a semi tractor-trailer that begins to fishtail. Once it starts, it’s almost impossible to stop safely. It usually ends badly.
Click to expand...
It's a bit of a disgusting belief. I just could not find an accurate word to describe. For those that said it doesn't matter if Kennedy is a Republican it is clear to the Regents that is all that mattered. And to be fair there are likely some regents on who would not support even a qualified republican candidate. There is no reason for this to be a political selection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top