UT President Fenves Sued

Ideally, since UT has not always been this horribly run and not all government agencies are horribly run (i once worked for a well run one, i know, it was like finding a unicorn), maybe one day Americans will try to fix education administration.
 
Htown77 said:
Ideally, since UT has not always been this horribly run and not all government agencies are horribly run (i once worked for a well run one, i know, it was like finding a unicorn), maybe one day Americans will try to fix education administration.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. There are good, well-run, and efficient government agencies. My wife's agency does a hell of a lot of work for how small it is and has a very noble mission. As rotten as the Postal Service is, I have seen some very good and well-run post offices.

However, I'd never cheer on those agencies, defend them when they're doing wrong, or give them any sort of inherent loyalty. And I sure as hell wouldn't donate money to them.
 
Deez,

I cannot disagree with your post, other than to say the recipient and amount of the donations can greatly vary. The athletic department, while very poorly run, and with parts being a cesspool that makes Fenves look like a choir boy, is self sufficient. After much consternation, Deloss allowed us to dictate where our donations would be used. With little Willie Cunningham's *** show, followed by Billie Powers' legacy tour, I long since cut my donations back to the minimum to keep my seats. Being grandfathered in, it is less than you would think. When and if we get a real administration without all the secrecy and agendas, I may choose to increase donations to The University, but not to the ***** that is MD Anderson, or anything affiliated with Catholic Healthcare Incompetence.

I am a realist. Yes, I attend football games, but that is to support the kids that are stuck with the changes. Like you, I am appalled when a Rowling drops $25 million to help Powers accelerate the decline. I am old and have seen some of the schools worst days, and enjoyed some great ones. There are things on the near horizon that could destroy our school, and the administration chooses to ignore them, as they have for 25 years. I voice my opinion no matter how unpleasant, and tell them that they will hear it from me face to face not a whisper behind their back. It amazes me that Fenves biggest supporter for the presidency is exactly as you described. Ultra conservative, right wing, born again, writing large checks to an administration that would forget his name ten seconds after he runs out of money.

I do take exception that any federal government agency is well run. Never seen or dealt with one of those.

As for politicians, when I testifying before a Senate committee several years ago, chairman of the committee (Minnesota I think), looked down at me and said, "I detect a note of disdain and disrespect in your voice".

"Senator, show me a politician that I have an ounce of respect for and I'll show you a dead man." That was followed by some stronger comments.

We may disagree on particulars, but at least you seem to grasp the situation, if not being privileged to the sorted details.

:beertoast:
 
SabreHorn said:
I cannot disagree with your post, other than to say the recipient and amount of the donations can greatly vary. The athletic department, while very poorly run, and with parts being a cesspool that makes Fenves look like a choir boy, is self sufficient. After much consternation, Deloss allowed us to dictate where our donations would be used. With little Willie Cunningham's *** show, followed by Billie Powers' legacy tour, I long since cut my donations back to the minimum to keep my seats. Being grandfathered in, it is less than you would think. When and if we get a real administration without all the secrecy and agendas, I may choose to increase donations to The University, but not to the ***** that is MD Anderson, or anything affiliated with Catholic Healthcare Incompetence.

I am a realist. Yes, I attend football games, but that is to support the kids that are stuck with the changes. Like you, I am appalled when a Rowling drops $25 million to help Powers accelerate the decline. I am old and have seen some of the schools worst days, and enjoyed some great ones. There are things on the near horizon that could destroy our school, and the administration chooses to ignore them, as they have for 25 years. I voice my opinion no matter how unpleasant, and tell them that they will hear it from me face to face not a whisper behind their back. It amazes me that Fenves biggest supporter for the presidency is exactly as you described. Ultra conservative, right wing, born again, writing large checks to an administration that would forget his name ten seconds after he runs out of money.
Click to expand...

Sabre, my criticism isn't specific to UT. It's to the idea of cheering on and donating money to a government agency of any kind. They get a large check from the Legislature, charge students and their parents thousands of dollars every year, and do little to control costs. You'd never do that for a DMV office and probably wouldn't do that for a local public school, but for some reason, you'll do it for an institution that promotes leftism. I don't get it. Is the football program really worth overlooking all that for? Call me crazy, but if you preach God-hating and Marxism, you're not getting my money voluntarily even if run a nice football program.

SabreHorn said:
I do take exception that any federal government agency is well run. Never seen or dealt with one of those.
Click to expand...

The ones you'd see or deal with usually aren't well-run. It's the smaller agencies that tend to be well-run, because the supervisor usually runs it on his own and takes pride in it. My wife's job is to help the children of US military personnel deployed overseas find English-language schooling options that meet their specific needs and help those kids and their parents adjust to those schools. It's a tough job that requires a lot of specialized knowledge, a lot of research, and means dealing with a lot of headaches when kids have problems.

The program has about 3,800 kids throughout the world, and it employs six specialists. That's a lot of kids for each one of them to juggle, and many of them are special ed kids, who bring all kinds of difficulties. And these are not your typical government employees. They put in a full day's work and then telework at night and on weekends quite a bit to make sure deadlines are met and that the work gets done. As federal employees, they don't have to do all that. They could just stop working at 5:00 p.m. and let the chips fall where they may. However, they genuinely care about the kids and believe in what their parents are doing and will basically do whatever it takes to help them. The job does pay well, but these specialists truly earn the money they make.

Is this program the norm for government service? Hell no, but do agencies like this exist? Yes.
 
I wonder what Fenves cost the school to settle this and keep Fenves off the witness stand?

Whatever, a bunch more than it would cost to send his sorry *** back to Berzerkley. Maybe we could get a twofer, send him and Powers together.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8d48830c54d_story.html?utm_term=.1f193786950f

You know Fenves was going to accept donations from the Communist Party of China in exchange for letting them influence UT curriculum before Ted Cruz stepped in.

He really needed to form a committee and have a two month investigation to figure out that partnering with a Red China propaganda program was a bad idea?

The man will do anything for a buck. If you have the wealth, UT is at its most bribable right now.
 
Fenves put together a secret committee made up of non UT, non Texas people to pull off his "midnight raid". rather than gathering input from Texas supporters.

This looks like something that was a deal done on Friday night by two money grubbing, money grabbing, self serving bureaucrats, and it blew up in their face.

Thank you, Ted, for saving our University, while Joanie Cornyn was playing "switch" and trying to figure out how to get them to donate to his campaign fund. Watch your back.
 
Why do I feel like the committee that spent weeks “investigating” whether it was a good idea to partner up with the propaganda wing of the Communist Party of China was really supposed to come up with a justification for accepting the money?
 
Htown77 said:
Why do I feel like the committee that spent weeks “investigating” whether it was a good idea to partner up with the propaganda wing of the Communist Party of China was really supposed to come up with a justification for accepting the money?
Click to expand...

Probably because the person in the president's office of The University of Texas is a Berzerkley reject named Greg Fenves, whom I trust to do the right thing and represent The University with honor and integrity as far as I can throw our entire defensive line.

:hookem2:
 
As much as I dislike Fenves and his "opaque transparency", this is a ridiculous rule that I think needs to be changed. They must fly coach, but stay in a $5,000/night suite? All the regents live in Texas, but meetings at The Broadmoor?

I flew Continental from El Paso to Houston and was seated in 1B. John Mackovic got on the plane and had to sit in coach. No one on this board disliked Mackovis more than I, but I told CAL Red Coat Gary Scott to put Mackovic in First Class and I'd take the next flight. (Not because First was full, but because I wouldn't sit that close to him.) Gary said Mackovic appreciated the gesture but declined. (He probably was afraid of being that close to me.)

Reveille flies first class, but our "President" and head coach cannot? Hell, one of the most enjoyable flights I ever has was sitting in 1E on Continental from NOLA to Houston. The guy in 1F was RC Slocum. Buck up and put our "dignitaries" in First.
 
I think Fenves makes enough that if he wants to upgrade, he can use his own salary. Admittedly, this probably isnt the biggest area of waste at UT by a longshot, but as long as UT’s admins waste as much as they do, it is all open to criticism.
 
I agree that where Fenves is concerned, this is a baby flee on an elephant's ***, but anytime he wants to go "home" to Berzerkley and not come back, I'll pay for his first class, one-way airfare to SFO; again, as long as he doesn't return to The Great Republic.

I just think our hierarchy should sit up front.

Is the audit asking him to give back the miles earned and the hotel points?
 
https://misruleoflaw.com/2018/03/11/an-open-letter-to-my-alumni-association/

I do not agree with everything he says, and I am not really as concerned with the first part of his letter, but he does bring up some good points about Fenves and the Texas Exes. I do not know when the Texas Exes turned into cheerleaders for bad leadership at UT instead of alumni advocates, but the Texas Exes is quickly becoming a joke. I have ceased encouraging alumni to join anymore because I am not sure what the organization is anymore other than cheerleaders for bad leadership. A puff piece on the worst president in UT history is a joke.
 
Last edited:
So, over on Instapundit, I saw a story about the other UT (Tennessee) firing their Chancellor after only one year. This is Glenn Reynolds' (owner of Instapundit site and also a Univ of Tennessee law professor) response:

I have nothing of substance to say on this decision, but I’ll note that lately we’ve tended to hire outsiders for senior administrative positions via a professional search firm and it hasn’t worked out especially well. When we promoted people internally it seemed to go better.
Click to expand...

Gee, that sounds an awful lot like our UT. Birds of a feather, I suppose.
 
the guy had sex with a woman he barely knew and she said she was too drunk to consent and he said she was not. He lost and gets to play around in the real world for five semesters as a reward. BFD.

He's a snowflake who thinks the world should revolve around his preferences. He needs to learn now that the world does not work that way. Most of us figure it out while we are teenagers but it is taking him a little longer----but wait, he doesn't get it at all. He is going to court to force his way back into the school and has enough pull with some lawyer to get the matter filed. I smell a frat party here. Waaaaa!!!
 
huisache said:
the guy had sex with a woman he barely knew and she said she was too drunk to consent and he said she was not. He lost and gets to play around in the real world for five semesters as a reward. BFD.

He's a snowflake who thinks the world should revolve around his preferences. He needs to learn now that the world does not work that way. Most of us figure it out while we are teenagers but it is taking him a little longer----but wait, he doesn't get it at all. He is going to court to force his way back into the school and has enough pull with some lawyer to get the matter filed. I smell a frat party here. Waaaaa!!!
Click to expand...

So you think it's ok for someone to be found guilty without proper evidence and because he filed a lawsuit he's a snowflake? Last I checked we are innocent until PROVEN guilty. I'm not a lawsuit person, but this dude will win in spades with this one.
 
If being drunk means that women lack the capacity to give consent then most men have committed multiple rapes in their lifetimes.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say most, but a very large number of men probably have had sex with a woman who didn't want to have sex but was drunk enough that she had trouble communicating this - in many cases while knowing full well that the woman in question didn't want to and taking advantage of the fact that she would have said no if she were sober, and at best simply not knowing and not caring.

The problem is when the laws/rules/codes are written such that simply being drunk at all supposedly makes any sexual contact into assault. Two people are both into each other, both want it, both pretty sure the other one wants it, and they get drunk and have sex. Then the man is accused of rape even though both of them did the exact same thing and so either nobody was raped, or each of them was simultaneously raping the other one.
 
Statalyzer said:
I wouldn't say most, but a very large number of men probably have had sex with a woman who didn't want to have sex but was drunk enough that she had trouble communicating this - in many cases while knowing full well that the woman in question didn't want to and taking advantage of the fact that she would have said no if she were sober, and at best simply not knowing and not caring.

The problem is when the laws/rules/codes are written such that simply being drunk at all supposedly makes any sexual contact into assault. Two people are both into each other, both want it, both pretty sure the other one wants it, and they get drunk and have sex. Then the man is accused of rape even though both of them did the exact same thing and so either nobody was raped, or each of them was simultaneously raping the other one.
Click to expand...
If the woman is that drunk, I think I would send her home in an Uber, grab a "Glamour" magazine, and ......
 
4th_floor said:
If the woman is that drunk, I think I would send her home in an Uber, grab a "Glamour" magazine, and ......
Click to expand...


If the woman is drunk and you aren't, that's an easy call. You drive her home, and you don't do anything. Where it gets dicey is when both the guy and the girl are drunk and stupid. When that happens, who has the duty to show restraint? Who is responsible for for his or her actions and who is not?
 
Mr. Deez said:
If the woman is drunk and you aren't, that's an easy call. You drive her home, and you don't do anything. Where it gets dicey is when both the guy and the girl are drunk and stupid. When that happens, who has the duty to show restraint? Who is responsible for for his or her actions and who is not?
Click to expand...
The boy in these cases need to counter-claim that he was raped and taken advantage of. Plus, sue for defamation.
 
Monahorns said:
Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery. Simple and keeps you away from such murky situations and decisions.
Click to expand...

Of course, but we're not allowed to be judgmental about that sort of thing. Telling someone to show any degree of sexual self-control or discipline is considered horrifically unreasonable. Most cases in which something "goes wrong" involve a string of stupid decisions by both parties that we're not allowed to raise or discuss.

In fact, we ridicule people who take steps to avoid making a stupid decision. For example, Mike Pence isn't willing to be alone with a woman who isn't his wife. He got trashed for that, but it's actually a smart move. He knows that anyone is capable of doing something foolish if tempted enough and in a moment of weakness. It's true, and he's showing great wisdom. But instead of being commended for having good judgment, he's laughed at.
 
I agree with you Deez. But I am thankful that I haven't had to make the type of difficult judgments discussed on this thread because the bar was further away in my brain. There is no way I could be drunk(ish) with a woman who was drunk(ish) and make any type of wise decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top