Ha Shove it Faculty...
- Thread starter diehard4dawgs
- Start date
At most Liberal Arts colleges, you have a bunch of 1960's campus radicals, Saul Alinsky-trained Marxists as college professors. However, I thought MState was pretty much immune to that ****, because we were more science-oriented. Now, I'm beginning to think the professors don't want Keenum because he was the top aide to a Republican Senator (albeit a Moderate one), while they loathed and despised Fogelsong because he was retired military.
Was visiting a Sunday School class one morning, when the teacher had a lesson about people who seemed smart, but were not wise (ie, pharisees and scribes). I piped up and said, "College Professors". Turns out, half the SS class was college professors. I just laughed and laughed..what were they gonna do? Kick my ***? If any of them wanted to get in my face, I'd have put them in a round room and told them to piss in the corner....that would've kept them busy for a few hours.
You ***** about liberal "1960's" professors while your beloved username is based on a the name of a liberal 1970s glam-rock band...or perhaps the more liberal 1960's novel.
You have a picture of Jesus following all your posts filled with unsubstantiated personal attacks and/or over-the-top foul language.
Don't get me wrong, I like your username and I am a fan of Jesus and superfluously foul language, but I always wonder if I am missing some ironic joke when I read your posts and then see "Jesus Laughing." Lately, it seems like every post you make is about the worthlessness of MSU faculty. Let it go, man. Or else provide some new and insightful justification. Were you physically and/or mentally abused by a faculty member or something? Did a PhD student get your girlfriend high and steal her away? I am of course just screwing with you.
I am a faculty member and I know several other faculty that read SixPack. Most of us do not know enough about Keenum to form an educated opinion about his qualifications for being president (though it sounds like a potentially great fit). I do know the Wichita State guy is grossly underqualified based on his written accomplishments. I think most faculty are scared that some unknown candidate will be brought in from nowhere (like Foglesong was) if the process is not more transparent. I don't think that most faculty have a problem with Keenum, but they do have a problem with the process. Everyone would prefer a quick placement, but I would prefer a good president even if it takes a bit longer.
You have a picture of Jesus following all your posts filled with unsubstantiated personal attacks and/or over-the-top foul language.
Don't get me wrong, I like your username and I am a fan of Jesus and superfluously foul language, but I always wonder if I am missing some ironic joke when I read your posts and then see "Jesus Laughing." Lately, it seems like every post you make is about the worthlessness of MSU faculty. Let it go, man. Or else provide some new and insightful justification. Were you physically and/or mentally abused by a faculty member or something? Did a PhD student get your girlfriend high and steal her away? I am of course just screwing with you.
I am a faculty member and I know several other faculty that read SixPack. Most of us do not know enough about Keenum to form an educated opinion about his qualifications for being president (though it sounds like a potentially great fit). I do know the Wichita State guy is grossly underqualified based on his written accomplishments. I think most faculty are scared that some unknown candidate will be brought in from nowhere (like Foglesong was) if the process is not more transparent. I don't think that most faculty have a problem with Keenum, but they do have a problem with the process. Everyone would prefer a quick placement, but I would prefer a good president even if it takes a bit longer.
Sarcasm and wit, along with the occasional bit of breaking news and farks by those who missed their artistic callings, are the reasons I keep coming back to this board.
You paint with a mighty wide brush. When was the last time you visited campus and talked to some of these "liberal" professors?
and I have never had anyone jump in my face about any of my comments at Sunday School, even if they were dumb ones. You are a real tough guy looking for a fight at Sunday School. All of the faculty I know at FUMC Starkville are good guys. You are pretty full of yourself. Keep coming back, you might learn something.
mutt's hypocricy has no bounds. it is rather impressive actually. he throws the faculty under the bus almost as much as C34 throws the football staff under the bus. that wide brush he is using must look strange as it paints a swath over the wildlife and fisheries or other ag departments where there are clearly a crapload of guys who only hunt because they get to hug a tree on the way up and the way down from their stands. the fisheries folks are simply there so that they can love on their fish. the ag people are there so that they can teach farmers how to get more handouts from the government. i could go on but i guess you get the point.
mutt i hate that you were so much smarter than every single professor that you ever had and that university education was a total waste of time for you.
mutt i hate that you were so much smarter than every single professor that you ever had and that university education was a total waste of time for you.
Just made an observation, and was wondering why some of them were looking at me cross-eyed after I said it. And, yes, today's college Professors are a bunch of common-sense-deprived, Leftist morons who couldn 't hold a job without tenure.
For the record, I have big internet muscles and internet frame that's 6' 6", 265 lbs., 32" waist, and can bench press 500 pounds.
For the record, I have big internet muscles and internet frame that's 6' 6", 265 lbs., 32" waist, and can bench press 500 pounds.
It's not because they are all liberal loons... it's simply because they don't want a boss. Plain and simple. That applies to teachers and professors from high school all the way up to university level. They want someone in the head spot that is one of them. They want someone that doesn't demand too much of them. There is where Doc got off on the wrong foot right away with them. That is why they wanted Watson in there and why they want someone else of their choosing now... cause Watson has been there and is one of them. God forbid anyone comes in and starts barking at them to put forth some more effort. Then they cant take their two hours for lunch and lock their offce door for all but an hour in the afternoon when they don't have class to keep everyone out when they want to. That is why they want an academian.
give me one single example of Doc barking an order at a faculty member that involved the main purpose of faculty which is research and teaching. it is a myth. period. he surely barked orders at those who were in administrative positions. there isn't much doubt about that but they typical faculty member is affected nearly zero by what he was doing.
i was working on campus and never once saw doc in our building. it simply doesn't happen where the president of the university has time to go around to "make sure the faculty are working." for what it is worth you aren't alone. most people seem to believe the same thing as you.
i liked doc. he has some strange ways about him but he got **** done. did he increase the teaching efforts and research efforts of faculty? nope. that is the job of the provost, not the president.
i was working on campus and never once saw doc in our building. it simply doesn't happen where the president of the university has time to go around to "make sure the faculty are working." for what it is worth you aren't alone. most people seem to believe the same thing as you.
i liked doc. he has some strange ways about him but he got **** done. did he increase the teaching efforts and research efforts of faculty? nope. that is the job of the provost, not the president.
leanings of academics in America. My guess is that the MSU faculty is a little less leftist than the entire population of academics, but I really don't have anything to base that on.
As for the faculty's request to extend or expand the search: I don't see what that accomplishes. I mean, the only unexpected event we have is that Watson is no longer a candidate. I don't know that he was going to get the job. And, frankly, I don't think he was going to get the job. So, what about the Watson reseignation would necessitate the extenstion or expansion of the search? Even if Watson was the choice, the search should have produced a 2nd choice that would be acceptable. I really don't have an opinion about the "we need to go ahead and get a leader" argument. I just don't see what the hell expanding an already lengthy search accomplishes. Hell, they pick the new CEO of Wal-Mart quicker than they pick the MSU President.</p>
As for the faculty's request to extend or expand the search: I don't see what that accomplishes. I mean, the only unexpected event we have is that Watson is no longer a candidate. I don't know that he was going to get the job. And, frankly, I don't think he was going to get the job. So, what about the Watson reseignation would necessitate the extenstion or expansion of the search? Even if Watson was the choice, the search should have produced a 2nd choice that would be acceptable. I really don't have an opinion about the "we need to go ahead and get a leader" argument. I just don't see what the hell expanding an already lengthy search accomplishes. Hell, they pick the new CEO of Wal-Mart quicker than they pick the MSU President.</p>
Hit a nerve, didn't I?
Jesus loved whores, ****, thieves, drunks, druggies, and his greatest prophet and greatest king were both murderers. Yet, there were two groups Jesus absolutely despised-Scribes and Pharisees. In other words, Preachers, Lawyers, and COLLEGE PROFESSORS.
College professors should be working their asses off helping young skulls full of mush how to think for themselves. Instead, you spend all your time on research while some Pakistani or Chinese Grad student teaches your classes...and that's if you're lucky. When you're ACTUALLY teaching a class, you're indoctrinating those students and trying to turn them into a bunch of angry Marxists. When you're not telling a joke about how "stupid" President Bush is (nevermind he's the first President with a Harvard MBA), you're trying to convince us Barack Obama is the smartest man in history (and he barely passed Columbia).
Jesus didn't like College Professors, and I always try to do the Lord's will.
Jesus loved whores, ****, thieves, drunks, druggies, and his greatest prophet and greatest king were both murderers. Yet, there were two groups Jesus absolutely despised-Scribes and Pharisees. In other words, Preachers, Lawyers, and COLLEGE PROFESSORS.
College professors should be working their asses off helping young skulls full of mush how to think for themselves. Instead, you spend all your time on research while some Pakistani or Chinese Grad student teaches your classes...and that's if you're lucky. When you're ACTUALLY teaching a class, you're indoctrinating those students and trying to turn them into a bunch of angry Marxists. When you're not telling a joke about how "stupid" President Bush is (nevermind he's the first President with a Harvard MBA), you're trying to convince us Barack Obama is the smartest man in history (and he barely passed Columbia).
Jesus didn't like College Professors, and I always try to do the Lord's will.
I don't think there are many 4 star generals that are idiots. I don't think there are many people that the president sends to negotiate a surrender in Bosnia that are idiots. If an idiot demands the best from everyone then there are a lot of idiots out there running things.DoubleDawgDare said:
every faculty member at MSU. I am a faculty member at a small college (and definitely not a liberal) but I'd like a to know that the President was at some point in his/her career an academic. Most professors whom I know (who are most liberals) just want to do a good job which includes teaching, research, and writing at a large place like MSU.
Everybody except the Professors want Mark Keenum to be the next MSU president. The last time we had an academic they loved on campus, we had Charles ":Special Ed" Lee, perhaps the least articulate head of an institution I've ever heard.
College Presidents aren't there to make sure there's enough tofu in the faculty lounge. They're there to raise money, cultivate connections in business and government, and to project the image of Mississippi State University to the rest of the State and Country. Charles Lee was embarrassing. Doc Fogelsong was great at this, although nobody liked him because he wouldn't accept mediocrity. Word is, Mark Keenum isn't slick but he's a good speaker, and his connections in Congress could help out MState with research....which is what most professors want to do anyway.
College Presidents aren't there to make sure there's enough tofu in the faculty lounge. They're there to raise money, cultivate connections in business and government, and to project the image of Mississippi State University to the rest of the State and Country. Charles Lee was embarrassing. Doc Fogelsong was great at this, although nobody liked him because he wouldn't accept mediocrity. Word is, Mark Keenum isn't slick but he's a good speaker, and his connections in Congress could help out MState with research....which is what most professors want to do anyway.
DerHntr said:
Where did I? no where. I simply said that they don't want a boss. And i said that was true all the way from public school all the way to university. I liked Doc too. You can take what I said any way you want to. but learn to read a post before you jump to conclusions.
(other than the lack of acceptannce of mediocrity by Doc).
Your statement contradicts your point about Doc "making" professors work harder. It isn't what they are hired to do.
Here is my take on why they didn't like Doc. First and foremost he was slipped in by the IHL with no one getting a chance to review what he was all about. If Doc had sucked as a president in your eyes then you would be just as pissed if not more pissed at the IHL for pulling such a move. The complaints on here to "DISBAND THE IHL!" are even more heartfealt by faculty. Second, bringing in someone who is a non-academic is very similar to the head of a hospital not having an MD. That person typically lacks legitimacy in the eyes of the doctors in the hospital. I personally disagree with this perception but I know it is present in the university system. The faculty want someone who has proven himself/herself as a researcher, teacher, and provider of service to the field because they think it is better to have someone who fully understands the mission of a university which is to provide those three things. In my opinion this is not necessary but I can understand why faculty think this. It is difficult to find someone who has the ability to do all of these things so I think you go with the person who is best suited to accomplish the goals of the presidency...which you listed above.
edit: i took this in the context of your post as the reason why they wanted Watson was because they didn't like the way Doc had acted since this was right before your statement...
my fault if that is not what you meant. but you have to admit that it could easily be taking that way.
...there are at a Liberal Arts school. The profs I had oriented towards Engineering. However, the Liberal Farts guys all wanted to get a cool job somewhere where they could expound on why America would be a better place if we only adopted the Soviet or Chinese Communist system of economics and government....then again, that could be my year at Millsaps.
It's not because they are all liberal loons... it's simply because they don't want a boss. Plain and simple. That applies to teachers and professors from high school all the way up to university level. They want someone in the head spot that is one of them. They want someone that doesn't demand too much of them<font size="4">.(<-<-<-<-<- you see anywhere here where I said that Doc was jumping on anyone? I said demand too much of them)</font> There is where Doc got off on the wrong foot right away with them.DerHntr said:
That is why they wanted Watson in there and why they want someone else of their choosing now... cause Watson has been there and is one of them. God forbid anyone <font size="7">comes</font> in and starts barking at them to put forth some more effort. <font size="4">(So Doc is coming back?)</font> Then they cant take their two hours for lunch and lock their offce door for all but an hour in the afternoon when they don't have class to keep everyone out when they want to. That is why they want an academian.
look if you can't see how someone would read the following...
1. They want someone who doesn't demand much of them.
2. Demanding too much is where Doc started on wrong foot.
3. That (meaning the above) is why they wanted Watson because he is one of them (meaning he wouldn't demand much).
4. Followed by God forbid anyone comes in and starts barking orders.
.... and logically says that maybe, just maybe, that Doc was also barking orders and they don't want someone like Doc...not like Watson...then I don't know what else to say.
So I interpreted it wrong from what you stated. Big deal..I am wrong at least 100 times a da. My bad. The point still stands that university presidents don't go around barking at faculty to put forth more effort. They raise money, promote the university, try to increase enrollment, etc. They don't have time for what you said. They leave that to their provost. If the provost were to stop granting tenure then the effort would go up.
1. They want someone who doesn't demand much of them.
2. Demanding too much is where Doc started on wrong foot.
3. That (meaning the above) is why they wanted Watson because he is one of them (meaning he wouldn't demand much).
4. Followed by God forbid anyone comes in and starts barking orders.
.... and logically says that maybe, just maybe, that Doc was also barking orders and they don't want someone like Doc...not like Watson...then I don't know what else to say.
So I interpreted it wrong from what you stated. Big deal..I am wrong at least 100 times a da. My bad. The point still stands that university presidents don't go around barking at faculty to put forth more effort. They raise money, promote the university, try to increase enrollment, etc. They don't have time for what you said. They leave that to their provost. If the provost were to stop granting tenure then the effort would go up.
card holding member of the communist-socialist party. Had him for some urban sociology class. Total idiot.
His quote, in fall of 1982 to our class
" Pres-e-deeeent (tongue roll)Rrrrregeen will cause the ruination of America, America will rue de dey dhey vuted heem in offeece"
About all I remember from the class except for Sandy, Will McCraney's smokin' hot future wife was sittin' beside me.
His quote, in fall of 1982 to our class
" Pres-e-deeeent (tongue roll)Rrrrregeen will cause the ruination of America, America will rue de dey dhey vuted heem in offeece"
About all I remember from the class except for Sandy, Will McCraney's smokin' hot future wife was sittin' beside me.
That he demanded the best from everyone. And i think no one here will say that he didn't. Hell my statement about barking orders wasn't really meant to be taken literally. It was meant to be seen as what a faculty member would think if an outsider (of academics) would come in and do in their heads. Same for anyone else that ever thought they had a boss outside of the loop that they are currently used to. They wanted Watson and now they wanted Schultz (sp?) since they know how they want to keep playing the game. That is the whole reason to start the search was to put his name back in the hat. The faculty didn't give a rat's *** about getting anymore names from anywhere else.
outside from that.. raising money.. promoting the university... and increasing enrollment would come next. If anyone thinks that wrong.. then i would ask why the faculty was not warm to Zacharias or Fogelsong but thought a lot of Lee.
outside from that.. raising money.. promoting the university... and increasing enrollment would come next. If anyone thinks that wrong.. then i would ask why the faculty was not warm to Zacharias or Fogelsong but thought a lot of Lee.
because I believe they are misguided and think that someone at the top needs to have academic legitimacy first and presidential leadership ability second. i disagree with them on this. if we can find someone with both...great. if not, then i would rather the politician. also as i stated in another post, the faculty having doc slipped in on them by the IHL was ********. if doc hadn't been good at all of those things that most of us around here liked then we would all be even more pissed at the IHL. we are very lucky that he did some good while here.
all in all it is strange that the employees have input on who is going to be the head guy and that is most likely why we all disagree/discuss it so much. it is pretty ***-backwards.