The Los Angeles Times is reporting this morning that Janet Napolitano, “the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security and former governor of Arizona, is being named as the next president of the University of California system, in an unusual choice that brings a national-level politician to a position usually held by an academic.”
The appointment would mean that a woman would head up the nation’s premier public higher education system for the first time in its 145 year history.
“Napolitano’s nomination by a committee of UC regents came after a secretive process that insiders said focused on her early as a high-profile, although untraditional, candidate who has led large public agencies and shown a strong interest in improving education,” the Times reports. “UC officials believe that her Cabinet experiences — which include helping to lead responses to hurricanes and tornadoes and overseeing some anti-terrorism measures — will help UC administer its federal energy and nuclear weapons labs and aid its federally funded research in medicine and other areas.”
The Times quotes UC Regent Sherry Lansing: “While some may consider her to be an unconventional choice, Secretary Napolitano is without a doubt the right person at the right time to lead this incredible university.”
She continued, “She will bring fresh eyes and a new sensibility — not only to UC, but to all of California. She will stand as a vigorous advocate for faculty, students and staff at a time when great changes in our state, and across the globe, are presenting as many opportunities as challenges.”
The move figures to have mixed reactions. Ms. Napolitano, a Democrat, was appointed by former President Bill Clinton to be the US Attorney in Arizona, and was then elected by the voters as the State’s Attorney General before becoming governor from 2003 to 2009 before President Obama named her to lead Homeland Security.
The move will likely rankle those on the far left and in the Occupy movement suspicious of the tie between the national security apparatus and the crackdowns on students protesters in 2011 and 2012.
On the other hand, it may reassure more mainstream liberals of a commitment to higher education, while angering those on the right.
State Senator Leland Yee, a frequent critic of UC, released a guardedly optimistic statement this morning.
The Senator said, “Secretary Napolitano’s extensive experience at all levels of government will likely serve her well in the days ahead. I hope she keeps the needs of students, faculty and staff at the forefront after years of devastating tuition increases, questionable spending priorities and a general lack of transparency throughout the UC system. I will be happy to work with her in her efforts to keep the UC’s reputation as an affordable means of bringing quality education to all Californians.”
The Times notes, “She has been a strong voice in favor of immigration reform that would provide a path to citizenship for those in the country illegally, a stance that has angered some Republicans who contend she has not done enough to secure the nation’s borders.”
The Times sites an unidentified source that said, “Napolitano deliberated for a long time after the executive search firm hired by UC quietly contacted her.
“I think she loves working for President Obama and serving the American people, but at the same time, this is a unique opportunity,” he said. Napolitano knows “UC is probably the premier institution in the country. She is motivated by the fact that being a part of UC, she will be a part of educating future leaders of tomorrow and be part of a state that sets so much of the agenda nationally.”
Ms. Napolitano, 55, attended Santa Clara University before becoming the first woman valedictorian at the University of Virginia, where she earned a law degree.
The Times reports that the Regents are expected to approve her nomination next Thursday in San Francisco, and she would take control in September when Mark Yudof steps down.
While her proposed salary has not been released, the Times reports, “Since her Cabinet salary of about $200,000 is about a third of the annual $591,000 that current UC president Mark G. Yudof makes, the Regents presumably will be able to avoid a potential furor and not feel pressured to give her a big pay raise over Yudof’s.”
President Yudof will step down in August after five years as president, and plans to teach law at UC Berkeley.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
updated at 9:57 am with statement from Senator Leland Yee.
Good news = she’s no longer the U.S. secretary of Homeland Security
Bad news = she’s the next president of the University of California system
Could hardly be worse than Yudof
“Good news = she’s no longer the U.S. secretary of Homeland Security”
Why?
Unfortunately GI can never take off his partisan hat long enough to analyze the situation. Former AG, Former Governor, obviously the Regents are trying to create a counterweight to Governor Brown.
[quote]Unfortunately GI can never take off his partisan hat long enough to analyze the situation[/quote]
LOL, pot, kettle?
Washington’s gain is our loss.
Hardly. Just look at my work on pensions.
David wrote:
> Unfortunately GI can never take off his partisan hat
> long enough to analyze the situation.
It is hard to ague that she had no experience with homeland security before taking the job and no experience running a big public university (she didn’t even attend UC as an undergrad and went to a small Catholic university).
I agree that she may use her connections in DC to bring some cash to UC that may be good and she is a better pick than Robert Dynes who got the job a few years back thanks to cash paid (aka legally donated) to politicians from his (Republican) father in Warren Hellman (who also paid to get him forced out after he divorced his daughter)…
P.S. I hope David will let us know if he ever decides to take off his partisan hat for even a moment…
She is totally unqualified for this position. She has no academic background. This is a disaster for UC.
The very good news is the Yudof is stepping down.
The bad news…..well, I don’t know. How about giving Ms. Napolitano a chance before we judge her
performance ?
“Former AG, Former Governor, obviously the Regents are trying to create a counterweight to Governor Brown.”
And both attended Santa Clara University. But, only one attended Jesuit seminary.
She has academic background and no business background and no California background except for four years of undergraduate studies at Santa Clara University. Her father was the dean of the New Mexico School of Medicine.
In public office, she has quite a stack of embarrassments and failures to her name. She is about as ideologically left as a any Democrat politician and bureaucrat.
This will contribute nicely to the education bubble.
The good news is that it will help the UC system pop sooner.
And I’m sure it about her higher mission to serve and not the money.
[i]She has [b]no[/b] academic background [/i]
So let’s look at what this signals:
1. Political experience in state government
2. Experience running DHS
3. Limited academic experience
So what is UC’s goal here:
1. A counterweight to Governor Brown, someone with the experience and gravias to go toe to toe with the most powerful political figure in the state
2. Someone who knows how to work a legislature
3. Someone with political connections in Washington to help get grants and other funding sources
4. Someone who can raise funds
5. They can pay here $400K, she’d be getting a huge personal pay raise but the position would be getting a huge pay cut
Limitations:
1. She knows how to run a large department but not a university – can those shortcoming be overcome?
2. Limited academic background means deferring those decisions to underlings?
Bottom line, I don’t know how this works out. She’s not the first politician moved to running a university or university system. It’s a challenging time and there are key challenges that she is prepared to face, but others she is not.
I’d say the jury is out here.
[quote]How about giving Ms. Napolitano a chance before we judge her
performance ?[/quote]
It is not good management practice to hire an individual into an organization of which they know nothing and to the give them a [quote]chance[/quote].
UC is going through extremely challenging economic difficulties. Napolitano has no background in managing budgets through tight times, and no experience or background in the culture of a university. I predict this appointment will be seen as one of the worst ever made by a major university.
But JR: THey have budget gurus, so she’s not being put in place to manage the budget (although she did manage a budget with DHS. She’s being put in place there to help fundraise, deal with governor and legislature, and use connections in DC to get funding to system.
“The good news is that it will help the UC system pop sooner.”
Don’t hold your breath. Of course I wonder why you would want the best public university system in the country and the largest employer in the community where you live to fail. I find your statement above to be really weird?
She has absolutely no business background and no background in dealing with the financial challenges of a large enterprise. UCs main problem is financial.
She may help increase donations so that the university system can build more ego shrines and continue to chase the old model of attempting to grow prestige as a way to fake out all those dysfunctional baby-boomer parents that their little darlings would get their self-confidence boosted by attending. Wait though… the children of the baby-boomers are all just about done with college. So what we have now is the next generation of parents lacking the resources of the generation before them… that are a bit wiser having watched that previous generation’s narcissistic and selfish pursuits destruct the economy and society like a swarm of locust to a field of grain.
Kids, wake up. You are getting screwed over and over by the very people that you have been brainwashed into thinking are your care providers. If you really care about your future, you would demand that ALL UC and CSU administrative leadership has significant academic credentials (demonstrating that, like you, they are an experienced customer of this industry) and a background in business.
Hiring Janet Napolitano should be considered and insult to you.
medwoman wrote:
> How about giving Ms. Napolitano a chance
> before we judge her performance ?
If Yolo County Sheriff Prieto was just appointed to become the head of Kaiser would you also write that we should “give Mr. Prieto a chance before we jusge his performance ?”
SOD: I don’t think the two are comparable. Napolitano has strengths that will help her do key parts of this job. Her weaknesses clearly will be covered by other officials in the UC system. Whether it works or not – like any hire remains to be seen.
Valedictorian at U. VA. Law is, if not academic, still pretty impressive. Governor of AZ and Secretary of Homeland Security put her in charge of organizations bigger than UC.
The worst thing she did in her career was leave AZ in the hands of the non-college educated and xenophobic Jan Brewer.
Mr. Toad. The sooner it pops, the quicker we can get to reform that helps the US maintain its advantage as having the best higher learning system in the world. If we stay with the current trajectory, the one being perpetuated by those having a financial stake in protecting the status quo, then it will self-destruct. It is just a matter of time.
[url]But JR: THey have budget gurus, so she’s not being put in place to manage the budget (although she did manage a budget with DHS. She’s being put in place there to help fundraise, deal with governor and legislature, and use connections in DC to get funding to system.[/url]
They have fundraisers too, and numerous lobbyists to deal with the governor and legislature.
The UC President needs to be someone who is respected by the faculty, students and citizens of California. Napolitano is hardly respected. She is known most for her supervision of the illegal spying activities of the NSA. Heading a spy, anti-terror and police organization are not good qualifications to bring to a university.
Your point that she can [quote] use connections in DC to get funding to system[/quote] indicates a lack of understanding of how UC is funded and the nature of federal research funds. Do you think she has a deep knowledge of how the National Institute of Health grant process operates? Or do you think she can arrange to get UC students on food stamps?
SOD
[quote]P.S. I hope David will let us know if he ever decides to take off his partisan hat for even a moment… [/quote]
Because we all know that David would’ve welcomed the former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and that Medwoman would be saying give him a chance.
here we go again… frankly trying to wedge everything on the planet into a business model. but then he suddenly admits he would rather see uc pop, which you to wonder whether his supposed prescriptive solution is sincere or designed to ensure the demise of uc.
uc is not a business.
“She may help increase donations so that the university system can build more ego shrines and continue to chase the old model of attempting to grow prestige as a way to fake out all those dysfunctional baby-boomer parents that their little darlings would get their self-confidence boosted by attending.”
what an ignorant comment. the purpose of bringing in money, endowments, grants are to grow research capacities in the system and help produce innovative research, cutting edge companies, etc.
is napolitano someone who can bring in that kind of capital from dc, sacramento, industry, and the like? i don’t know. what i do know is that frankly has no idea what the fuck he’s talking about and blindly shooting from the hip.
“Because we all know that David would’ve welcomed the former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and that Medwoman would be saying give him a chance. “
why would you bring in a republican to work with a democratic governor and legislature? you’re thinking is limited.
“They have fundraisers too, and numerous lobbyists to deal with the governor and legislature. “
maybe, but who better than a former governor to lead the way on that. my guess is yudof doesn’t manage the things you are concerned about either.
One would think that the UC students might protest her hiring due to her affiliation with government spying on American citizens. Or will they give her a pass simply because she’s a Democrat?
the students who would protest her hiring due to her affiliation with dhs are the occupy students, most of them hate obama and are not democrats. you really don’t understand politics at all.
[i]uc is not a business.[/i]
You are correct, and that is why it will decline.
You don’t have a clue about the coming train wreck due to the fact that the business model of the UC is a completely unsustainable mess. Have you been paying attention to the mounting student loan debt? Have you been paying attention to the unemployment and under-employment rates skyrocketing. Where will the parents of US students pay for a 4-year undergraduate degree that costs them hundreds of thousands of dollars when the parents can’t find work that pays well enough, and their kids cannot find a job that pays well enough for them to pay for all their student loans.
I suspect that you are or were an educator Davis Progressive. If so, I understand why you are so emotional about my points. But you are protecting the UC status quo at its own peril. As a consumer of the services provided by this declining institution, and someone that is well informed of the innovative alternatives being developed, if I were you I would jump off the old school bandwagon and get religious about the need for significant reform of the UC business model. The only thing that will save it from an UC employee perspective is to import more foreign students. But even that will fail as China and other emerging economies will certainly hit a wall of economic turn-down while they are building up their own education system.
This covers it pretty well. Janet Napolitano is the problem, certainly not the solution.
[quote]Since 1980, inflation- adjusted tuition at public universities has tripled; at private universities it has more than doubled. Compared to all other goods and services in the American economy, including medical care, only “cigarettes and other tobacco products” have seen prices rise faster than the cost of going to college. And for all that, parents who sign away ever-larger tuition checks can be forgiven for doubting whether universities are spending those additional funds in ways that make their kids’ educations better—to say nothing of three times better.
Between 1975 and 2005, total spending by American higher educational institutions, stated in constant dollars, tripled, to more than $325 billion per year. Over the same period, the faculty-to-student ratio has remained fairly constant, at approximately fifteen or sixteen students per instructor. One thing that has changed, dramatically, is the administrator-per-student ratio. In 1975, colleges employed one administrator for every eighty-four students and one professional staffer—admissions officers, information technology specialists, and the like—for every fifty students. By 2005, the administrator-to-student ratio had dropped to one administrator for every sixty-eight students while the ratio of professional staffers had dropped to one for every twenty-one students. [/quote]
[quote]Every year, hosts of administrators and staffers are added to college and university payrolls, even as schools claim to be battling budget crises that are forcing them to reduce the size of their full-time faculties. As a result, universities are now filled with armies of functionaries—vice presidents, associate vice presidents, assistant vice presidents, provosts, associate provosts, vice provosts, assistant provosts, deans, deanlets, and deanlings, all of whom command staffers and assistants—who, more and more, direct the operations of every school. If there is any hope of getting higher education costs in line, and improving its quality—and I think there is, though the hour is late—it begins with taking a pair of shears to the overgrown administrative bureaucracy. [/quote]
like GI, your ideology blinds you to analysis. uc is changing. the model is changing. the student protests are actually in response to the move away from the pure public model toward a hybrid public-private partnership model.
a lot of the money that uc gets is from industry looking to collaborate and invest in new technologies.
china can’t compete with that. they are still in the stone age.
look at the biggest companies in this area, they are all high tech and ag taech spinoffs. agraquest, shilling, mori seki.
you’re really living twenty years behind the curve. and you’re blindness is a problem, it even got you in trouble with your own business, but you failed to learn the less behind that other than to go with a psuedonym.
Growth Izzue wrote:
> One would think that the UC students might protest
> her hiring due to her affiliation with government
> spying on American citizens. Or will they give her
> a pass simply because she’s a Democrat?
In the sad partisan world we live in most (but not all) Democrats will welcome a Democrat with no experience who has been spying on them (just like most (but not all) Republicans would welcome a Republican with no experience who has been spying on them…
“Janet Napolitano is the problem, certainly not the solution.”
you say that and then cite evidence that has nothing to do with napolitano.
[i]the students who would protest her hiring due to her affiliation with dhs are the occupy students, most of them hate obama and are not democrats. you really don’t understand politics at all.[/i]
I think I will just let you keep posting to disqualify yourself.
Are you joking?
And what makes you think I was addressing the Occupy activists in my comments?
“And what makes you think I was addressing the Occupy activists in my comments? “
since my comment was to gi, not you, nothing…
[i]In the sad partisan world we live in most (but not all) Democrats will welcome a Democrat with no experience who has been spying on them (just like most (but not all) Republicans would welcome a Republican with no experience who has been spying on them[/i]
Good point SOD. Sad, but true.
I really don’t care about their political bent as long as they have experience successfully running a business. These dolts that make the case that UC is not a business… I don’t think they have a clue.
[b]A business (also known as enterprise or firm) is an organization involved in the trade of goods, services, or both to consumers[/b]
I think the fact that the employees of the UC system argue that UC colleges are not businesses is telling for why the UC system is in a position of financial unsustainability.
looks like someone changed hats….lol
Davis Progressive, have you or do you work in the education system? It would be good to know. I don’t, but I have taught college courses before.
I’d be curious what most of you think the job description of the President of UC is.
Senator Yee put out a statement: “Secretary Napolitano’s extensive experience at all levels of government will likely serve her well in the days ahead. I hope she keeps the needs of students, faculty and staff at the forefront after years of devastating tuition increases, questionable spending priorities and a general lack of transparency throughout the UC system. I will be happy to work with her in her efforts to keep the UC’s reputation as an affordable means of bringing quality education to all Californians.”
My bet is that because of her ineptnous Obama told her to beat it and now California is stuck with her.
[i]I will be happy to work with her in her efforts to [b]keep the UC’s reputation as an affordable means of bringing quality education[/b] to all Californians.”[/i]
She has experience at doing neither.
David, what did you expect Sen. Lee to say?
Yee
Growth Izzue: “David, what did you expect Sen. Lee to say?”
About what he said unless he had strong objections to her. I recall he had strong objections to Yudof and Katehi, for example.
frankly: davis is a two company town despite belief to the contrary, i’m in the second company not the first. i’m not an academic. i did go to uc davis a long long time ago.
my objections to your comments arise out what the new high tech industry emerging, i think you are behind the times. and i think you let your partisan sleeve color your analysis too much. it’s okay to be partisan, but not everything’s about partisanship or ideology.
“My bet is that because of her ineptnous Obama told her to beat it and now California is stuck with her. “
that’s not the word from people close to her.
DP
[quote]and i think you let your partisan sleeve color your analysis too much. it’s okay to be partisan, but not everything’s about partisanship or ideology[/quote]
Another pot lecturing a kettle.
Ineptnous, wasn’t he a third dynasty Pharaoh?
My bet is she does a good job .
Biddlin ;>)/
[quote]These necessary leadership and management skills will be most effective in a President who has demonstrated an ability to anticipate and direct change; who has experience interacting successfully with both state and federal government, and is able to establish effective relationships with the Governor, the Legislature, federal officials, and all government agencies important to the success of the University, as well as with other public policymakers and California’s business community; who has the ability to increase public and private funding for the University; who has served as an effective representative and speaker in a variety of public settings; who has the ability to communicate effectively with the public and the media, the capacity to inspire all of UC’s internal constituent groups, the political acumen to develop, sustain, and encourage effective working relationships with the Regents, policymakers, the press, and stakeholder groups, including those who may oppose or be critical of administrative actions, and the intellectual stature to command the respect of the faculty.[/quote]
[url]http://presidentialsearch.universityofcalifornia.edu/selection-criteria.html[/url]
[i]my objections to your comments arise out what the new high tech industry emerging, i think you are behind the times. and i think you let your partisan sleeve color your analysis too much. it’s okay to be partisan, but not everything’s about partisanship or ideology. [/i]
Davis Progressive, when did “business” become partisan?
Answer that question honestly and you should recognize that it is not me being the partisan one.
Your point about the new high-tech industry emerging… you need to explain yourself better here. I don’t see any dots being connected with this comment. Are you suggesting that the UC system will start earning revenue from the technological inventions coming from its research efforts? If that is what you are talking about there is even a greater reason to demand an experienced technology business executive to lead the UC system.
And getting back to partisan, how would you have responded if Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina was selected for this position? Be honest now.
[i]why would you bring in a republican to work with a democratic governor and legislature? you’re thinking is limited. [/i]
More evidence of partisan kettle-calling pot-ness.
Talk about limited thinking.
@Davis Progressive
Kindly explain to us why we should regard you as being a political progressive?
“And getting back to partisan, how would you have responded if Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina was selected for this position? Be honest now. “
Meg is probably not on UC’s longest list of candidates. [u]I’d[/u] have no problem with Ms. Fiorina, though I doubt she would be a fit with UC’s “culture.”
Biddlin ;>)/
Don, I am certainly not going to argue that this is in fact the job description developed (although I would need to see all the revision made to determine if it had been recently wordsmithed to match the profile of the person that the governor wanted to hire). My point is that the job description is problematic in that it fails to address the leadership need for a UC system that will be less and less connected with the state and state politics because of funding realities, and more and more needing to stand on its own as a semi-private business enterprise.
One possible move that the state and the UC system can make to help perpetuate the UC system’s unsustainable business model… and I think this is on the drawing board… move more PEU/UC retirees to Obamacare insurance exchanges to relieve the budget-busting pressure caused by current public employee retiree healthcare costs.
My own answer would be that Meg Whitman might have brought the administrative skills, but clearly didn’t have the political skills — and those are an important part of the job. Probably would have been a good fund raiser.
Carly Fiorina is simply too abrasive.
I still think Mitt Romney would have been a good choice.
Meg Whitman – Not enough political skills
Carly Fiorina – Too abrasive, not fit with UC culture
See the trend here.
In other words, competency does not matter for this chief executive. We are more concerned that everyone thinks she is a good politician and does a good job ruffling as few liberal feathers as possible.
Based on that set of requirements, Janet Napolitano is certainly a fine choice. Good luck UC system. You will need buckets of it.
Davis Progressive, do I hear crickets? You have a couple of questions up and it would be good to see some attempt at an answer. I am holding out hope that I might learn something new from you.
“See the trend here.”
the trend i see is that other people are looking at individual skills while you are trying to ram party id as the only variable.
fiorina would have been interesting. romney as well. but would they have been able to work with Governor Brown and the democratic legislature?
“Kindly explain to us why we should regard you as being a political progressive? “
i never said i was. i am however a davis progressive.
“Davis Progressive, when did “business” become partisan? “
the idea that a business model works in government is an age-hold belief of conservatives. you should know that.
Frankly, I said I’d have no problem with her. I don’t do the hiring. When I did, I considered a candidate’s ability to mesh smoothly with others in the organisation.
Biddlin ;>)/
@Davis Progressive
I see. So then you are basically admitting that you are a fraud? Forgive me for using harsh language, but it seems that this is actually what *you* are saying, not me.
Official news release:
[quote]Regents’ special committee nominates Janet Napolitano for next UC president
By UC Office of the President July 12, 2013
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has been nominated for appointment as the 20th president of the University of California, it was announced today (July 12).
Regent Sherry Lansing, chair of a 10-member special search committee, said Napolitano rose to the top from a large field of candidates and was recommended on a unanimous vote.
The full Board of Regents will act on the recommendation Thursday, July 18, during a special meeting following the board’s regular bimonthly meeting in San Francisco.
“Secretary Napolitano is a distinguished and dedicated public servant who has earned trust at the highest, most critical levels of our country’s government,” Lansing said in a statement. “She has proven herself to be a dynamic, hard-working and transformative leader.
“As governor of Arizona, she was an effective advocate for public education, and a champion for the life-changing opportunities that education provides…Those who know her best say that a passion for education is in her DNA.”
She added: “As Secretary of Homeland Security, she has been an ardent advocate for the federal Dream Act and the architect of a policy that protects from deportation young undocumented immigrants who are pursuing a college education.”
Board Chair Bruce Varner, who served as vice chair of the search committee, noted in a separate statement: “Throughout her noteworthy career, Secretary Napolitano has built a track record for taking on and tackling the toughest of challenges. She has a reputation for seeing things through, no matter how difficult the effort.
“She has the intellectual curiosity, leadership qualities, personal charm and discipline needed to navigate any future challenges that await this university.
“I anticipate learning much from Secretary Napolitano, given her experience leading large, complex organizations.”
Robert Powell, chair of UC’s systemwide Academic Senate and a faculty representative on the Board of Regents, praised the choice: “In my discussions with her, Secretary Napolitano clearly articulated the view that the University of California must do all it can to ensure not only that it remains the greatest public university in the world in the 21st century, but also that it moves to new heights.[/quote]
Part 2
[quote]”She has deep respect for the faculty, and she will listen to what we say. She knows that, as the core of what makes UC great, the faculty must have an environment in which they can thrive as scholars and teachers.”
If the regents approve the appointment, Napolitano would become the first woman in the university’s 145-year history to serve as president. She would succeed Mark G. Yudof, who announced in January that he would step down at the end of August after serving for more than five years.
As the twice-elected governor of Arizona, serving from 2003 to 2009, Napolitano was a consistent champion of public education, protecting funding of the state’s universities even as she addressed a $1 billion deficit upon assuming office. By 2006, she had turned the deficit into a $300 million surplus without raising taxes.
Chosen by President Barack Obama to serve as the third Secretary of Homeland Security, Napolitano leads a complex array of efforts to safeguard the nation – counterterrorism, border security, immigration enforcement, cybersecurity and disaster preparedness, response and recovery. Homeland Security is the third largest federal department, with a budget of $60 billion, 240,000 employees and 22 agencies and directorates, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Customs and Border Protection, Citizenship and Immigration Services, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and Secret Service.
“I am both honored and excited by the prospect of serving as president of the University of California,” said Napolitano.
“I recognize that I am a non-traditional candidate,” she added. “In my experience, whether preparing to govern a state or to lead an agency as critical and complex as Homeland Security, I have found the best way to start is simply to listen.
“If appointed, I intend to reach out and listen to chancellors, to faculty, to students, to the state’s political leaders, to regents, to the heads of the other public higher education systems and, of course, to President Yudof and his team, who have done so much to steer the University of California through some extremely rough waters.”
As UC president, she would lead a system of 10 campuses, five medical centers, three affiliated national laboratories and a statewide agriculture and natural resources program. The UC system has more than 234,000 students, about 208,000 faculty and staff, more than 1.6 million living alumni and an annual operating budget of more than $24 billion.[/quote]
Part 3
[quote]
Napolitano, 55, was born in New York City and grew up in Pittsburgh, Pa., and Albuquerque, N.M., before coming to California for her college education. She was graduated from Santa Clara University with a bachelor’s degree in political science. She was selected as the university’s first female valedictorian, and also won a Truman Scholarship, a prestigious fellowship for college students who possess leadership potential and an interest in government or public service.
After earning her law degree from the University of Virginia, she went to Arizona in 1983 to serve as a clerk for Judge Mary M. Schroeder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and later practiced law in Phoenix at the firm of Lewis and Roca, where she became a partner in 1989. She was the first female Attorney General of Arizona, from 1998 to 2003, and served as U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona from 1993 to 1997.
Napolitano was named one of the top five governors in the country by Time magazine. As the first woman to chair the National Governors Association, she launched the “Innovation America” initiative to align K-12 and higher education curricula to better prepare students for a global economy and strengthen the nation’s competitiveness by improving its capacity to innovate.
At the Department of Homeland Security, she has championed cutting-edge research and development, investing more than $2.2 billion in state-of-the-art solutions at national labs and universities across the country to protect people and critical infrastructure.
Under her leadership, Homeland Security also has strengthened its outreach efforts to academic institutions through the establishment of the Office of Academic Engagement, and she created the Homeland Security Academic Advisory Council, involving leadership from more than 20 universities and colleges around the country.
She has repeatedly testified about the need for comprehensive immigration reform and, earlier this year, she served as the Administration’s sole witness in the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on the Senate’s comprehensive immigration reform bill. She also testified before the Senate in support of the Dream Act and defended the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals process in a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee.
The Special Committee to Consider the Selection of a President, assisted by the national executive search firm Issacson, Miller, was involved in recruiting, screening and interviewing candidates. More than 300 possible candidates were considered.
In addition to Varner and Lansing, the immediate past Board of Regents chair, the committee members were Regents Richard Blum, Russell S. Gould, George Kieffer, Bonnie Reiss, and Fred Ruiz. Jonathan Stein (the student regent) and Ronald Rubenstein (the alumni regent) also served on the committee. Gov. Jerry Brown was an ex officio member. An Academic Advisory Committee was appointed to assist the regents’ Special Committee. Student, staff and alumni advisory committees joined the Academic Advisory Committee in making recommendations on selection criteria.[/quote]
Brian: what’s your issue with DP?
David says don’t mess with DP.
David, did you just infringe on copyright laws?
Both Whitman and Fiorina didn’t have much luck running H.P.
“i never said i was. i am however a davis progressive.”
Yes, exactly, as I have been arguing for years, Davis progressives are not progressive.
[quote]Whitman joined eBay on March 1998, when it had 30 employees[24] and revenues of approximately $4 million. During her time as CEO, the company grew to approximately 15,000 employees and $8 billion in annual revenue by 2008.[/quote]
Please stay on topic, folks.
[i]the idea that a business model works in government is an age-hold belief of conservatives. you should know that.[/i]
You see the UC system as “government”? If so then I understand your points and it gives me even greater hope that the bubble will pop soon so the system can be reformed.
I would prefer to view it as a public-private partnership.
See the following:
[img]http://www.cscdc.org/miscjeff/ucfunding.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.cscdc.org/miscjeff/ucfees.jpg[/img]
The trend is clear. How is Janet Napolitano going to fix this?
“David, did you just infringe on copyright laws? “
No – It’s a press release.
[quote]I would prefer to view it as a public-private partnership.
[/quote]
It is, and UC also has a surprising degree of autonomy from legislative oversight. I don’t know how Napolitano would ‘fix’ it. I don’t know what Yudof did to ‘fix’ anything. More privatization, more corporate fund-raising, and more foreign students are the only things I’m aware of. Certainly that’s the plan at UC Davis.
@Davis Progressive
So your moniker is meant as farce?
[i]Please stay on topic![/i]
Don, I agree with you that UC is a public-private partnership. What the trend lines demonstrate is that the private part is going to have to expand because the public part is shrinking. Yet, they hire someone without any private-side business. Bad mistake.
What the UC system needs is a Louis Vincent Gerstner, not a career politician and political bureaucrat. In terms of diplomatic skill, Janet Napolitano has racked up quite a list of public blunders and mistakes. I think this was a very bad choice.
“I think this was a very bad choice.”
Unlike Jerry Brown, who is a UC Regent, Frankly doesn’t have a vote on the matter.
What’s your point Toad? Of course I don’t have a vote. I also don’t have any accountability for the mess. Do you? One thing we both have is an opinion… something that is routinely given on these things we call “blogs”.
@Don Shor,
Don, who are you talking to? I was answering David’s question.
LA Times Poll with 10,000 votes had 76% that say Janet Napolitano is a bad choice to head the UC system.
not sure what i did to piss on brian, but it illustrates my point that the left isn’t going to like this…
here’s a daily cal article, ignore the article, read the comments to get a flavor of what the left thinks, maybe this will give growth izzue a clue about the difference between liberals and democrats…
[quote]http://www.dailycal.org/2013/07/12/janet-napolitano-nominated-as-next-uc-president/[/quote]
“LA Times Poll with 10,000 votes had 76% that say Janet Napolitano is a bad choice to head the UC system.”
random sample, scientific poll?
messed up the link
[url]http://www.dailycal.org/2013/07/12/janet-napolitano-nominated-as-next-uc-president[/url]
[quote]random sample, scientific poll? [/quote]
LOL, the other day you cited a whole article about small business owners backing global warming based on a liberal group’s poll that only had 500 samples.
[quote]@Don Shor,
Don, who are you talking to?[/quote]
Everybody.
@Davis Progressive,
Am I misconstruing your comments, DP? You seem to be playing the role of apologist for the power elite. Tell me if I’m wrong.
gi: not i
br: i’m not in favor of the power elite, i was trying to explain politics to growth izzue
DP don’t bother trying to explain any politics to me or anyone else for that matter because you obviously don’t have a clue.
[quote]
Don Shor
07/06/13 – 11:28 AM
…
Personally, I’ve never heard of the American Sustainable Business Council, and with a sample size of about 500 I’m not sure how meaningful this survey is.
Davis Progressive
07/06/13 – 11:34 AM
…
500 is not considered a small sample size
[/quote]
long week. forgot about that exchange. 500 sample size is fine [u][b]if[/b][/u] it’s a random sample. if it’s just an internet poll, it’s self-selecting, anyone can respond, and people who know how to use cookies, can respond more than a few times.
“DP don’t bother trying to explain any politics to me or anyone else for that matter because you obviously don’t have a clue.”
did you hit the link? no, i didn’t think so.
GI, give up. Even if you published a study with similar results that came from the NYT, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and Huffington Post, they would still find a way to dismiss it as not being good enough. However just wait until they find a George Soros-owned “news” source that reports that her appointment is approved by the majority of Americans and they will vigorously claim it is the de facto fact.
That’s a poll I’d believe. I’m guessing she isn’t the most popular cabinet official.
This is interesting: [quote]”The search for a new leader for UC was extensive, with more than 300 potential nominees reviewed. Secretary Napolitano rose to the top and received a unanimous vote of recommendation from the Special Committee,” UC Regent Sherry Lansing said in a statement.[/quote]
So I’d be really curious who were some of the other 300. But I’m guessing we’ll never know.
it would really helped if growth izzue would’ve just answered the question as to what he was referring to
[quote]The news of her departure apparently caught Napolitano’s staff by surprise[/quote]
[quote]Officials, though, said the view among many at the department is that Napolitano has been “out of sight, out of mind” for a while — particularly since she declared “the system worked” after a terrorist tried, unsuccessfully, to set off a bomb on a Detroit-bound flight in 2009. She came under criticism for that comment, and again for saying several months later that the attempted bombing in Times Square was merely a “one-off.”[/quote]
Hmm… I wonder if President Obama called Jerry Brown to do some horse trading. Or may JN left because of disagreement as the Democrats push their immigration plan to bring in more reliable left voters to replace those in labor that they are losing as they continue to destroy the economy. As a past governor of the illegal immigrant-infested state of AZ, and the top federal administrator with a primary role of preventing terrorist acts on US soil, I would guess that JN has some difficulty frog-marking to the liberal Democrat agenda for letting everyone come in illegally and get a free green card and a ticket to citizenship in was what once the greatest nation on God’s green earth.
“One would think that the UC students might protest her hiring due to her affiliation with government spying on American citizens. Or will they give her a pass simply because she’s a Democrat? “
so it appears based on early returns that the answer is that they are protesting the appointment
Frankly, one thing I think we can almost assuredly count on when Big Sis takes over. There’s going to be a substantial increase in Illegal aliens enrolled at our UC campuses.
Frankly
[quote]the quicker we can get to reform that helps the US maintain its advantage as having the best higher learning system in the world.[/quote]
This, to me, is a somewhat troubling comment from a poster who has repeatedly maintained the claim that the United States has the best health care system in the world despite many confounding statistics posted over time on multiple threads by Don Shor and others indicating that this is far from the truth.
My concern is that if you view the health care “system” in the US as the world’s best, what might you envision as
“world’s best” educational system ?
apples and oranges
medwoman, That is a great question.
I tend to be always forward looking. I have been that way for most of my life, but most of my adult working life has been in positions where I have been responsible for developing strategy, plans and then executing plans.
When I look at healthcare, I see a quality system that is growing in quality through innovation. The problems are high costs and access.
When I look at the education system, in terms of our public K12 school system, I see generally very crappy quality (with a small number of barely adequate schools and districts in some areas). In addition to the poor quality I see a global economy that is kicking our ass and an a huge opportunity cost being spent by not grasping that we should be investing hugely in the type of innovation that would blow the doors off the old education model. I keep thinking of all these poor minority kids stuck in their crappy schools that are still modeled after a system that was already failing 60 years ago, and how their lives could be so drastically improved. Education is the platform, but it is significantly inadequate to meet their needs and the needs of a growing hyper-competitive global economy.
In terms of higher learning, I still see a world-leading system, but in decline. Like for the public school point, the model is all old and tweed and failing to keep up with the time and the needs. But more importantly for higher learning, I see a broken and declining value proposition. It is far too expensive for the quality of product. It is far too expensive for the jobs that are available. And, it continues to grow more expensive at the same trajectory. Instead of trimming and doing more with less, the schools have just ramped up their financial aid to prop up the broken business model. Higher learning is the new bubble that is replacing the tech stock bubble and the real estate / financial market bubble before it. It has all the hallmarks of the same.
I am unsatisfied sitting still. However, I don’t support destroying a good and quality system just to fix some of the problems with it. I would prefer that we just address the cost and access issues with our healthcare system without destroying quality and access to quality. Likewise, I don’t advocate blowing up our higher learning system. But I see that it is going to do it to itself. Appointing JN as the leader of the UC system is more proof that the system cannot yet, and probably will not, prevents its own bubble-collapse from an unsustainable decline in value.
[i]There’s going to be a substantial increase in Illegal aliens enrolled at our UC campuses.[/i]
GI, I know you are right. But it will depend on funding for how much they push for this. With the Dream Act and other goodies that Democrats are handing out and planning to hand out to those future reliable Dem voters that happen to be here illegally today and talk funny, it will probably mean that the schools will prefer these students to all those clear-speaking middle class kids that don’t get the goodies and whose moms and dads are already struggling to make ends meet because of a crappy economy exacerbated by the piss-poor economic policies from those business-hating ideologues of the left.
But when you add those helped kids, and those given education visas by demonstrating wads of cash made by stealing our trade secrets and intellectual property and selling us trinkets, it is clear that all those middle-class clear-speaking kids will need to find better alternatives. And they will. And then the other kids will want that too. And the UC system will start to shrink and then scramble to try and catch up to this alternative higher value education model that our declining number of employers are clamoring to hire from. But then it will be too late.
“Talk funny”? “Clear-speaking”? What is the matter with you? Seriously.
Not to mention berating kids who work hard to get into our best schools while being dismissive of them for seeking better opportunities.
Although I have been one of the ones to complain about the nonsustainable costs of early government retirement; can’t we as taxpayers just pay off this woman with a very generous early retirement; to slow down further damage to the UC System?
” What is the matter with you? Seriously. “
Ah, c’mon Don. You know. Is it taboo to use the “r” word ?
Biddlin ;>)/
[img]http://www.davisenterprise.com/files/2012/06/DHSnooseW-300×370.jpg[/img]
Frankly: [i]Talk funny….clear-speaking[/i]
Being as I am married to an immigrant who “talks funny”, I see your comments as revealing a significant amount of ignorance. Can you speak a second language fluently without a horribly thick accent? Every one of those “funny talking” foreign students are bilingual.
I think everyone would be a little better off if they approached life a little more like immigrants rather than whiny and entitled “natives”.
Everyone of those “funny talking” foreign students [s]are[/s] is bilingual.
Mr Shor, Biddlin’s post of the noose needs to be removed.
Just a reminder, intended to make some uncomfortable, GI,those who always deny the validity of others’ suffering, the ones who make backhanded racist comments about the president and politicise every topic, the ones who turn a blind eye to or possibly participate in the activities that have come to characterise your town for many residents and outside viewers.
The photo of the noose should be familiar to Vanguard readers as should these:
[b]Swastika Burned Into Holmes Jr. High Picnic Table
Tensions Heighten as Swastika and “N” Word Found Spray Painted Under I-80 Underpass
Students Speak Out As Yet Another Hate Incident Hits UC Davis Campus[/b]
You will, most likely, get your wish, given The Vanguards timidity in using the ‘r’ word and history of coddling bigots.
Biddlin ;>)/
[quote]Mr Shor, Biddlin’s post of the noose needs to be removed.[/quote]
When someone refers to part of our population as an ‘infestation’ and says they ‘talk funny’, comparing that to others who are ‘clear-speaking’, it isn’t surprising that others might find that language to be racist or bigoted.
Okay, that’s fine. Like I’ve said before, I just want to know the rules and that they apply to everyone equally. It’s good to know that if I find a post which I feel is innapropriate that I can post pictures and cartoons to make my point even though they might be off topic.
“There’s going to be a substantial increase in Illegal aliens enrolled at our UC campuses.”
Don’t like being called out on your xenophobia there is an easy solution.
By the way UC is already full of immigrants and without regard to their immigration status they are all dreamers. Dreamers of a better, richer, more fulfilled life. So your problem with them is what?
How did we get from Napolitano being the new UC president to a photo of a noose at Davis High? I still don’t get it.
[quote]How did we get from Napolitano being the new UC president to a photo of a noose at Davis High? I still don’t get it. [/quote]
My same question Skip.
The fact that you’d compare the photo of the noose to a cartoon speaks for itself . We got here because certain right-wingers cannot step out from their partisan caves . Ms Napolitano’s qualifications were questioned because she is from the wrong political party,without consideration of or research into the facts, perhaps not surprisingly from those who don’t read the articles before comment.
Biddlin ;>)/
[quote]By the way UC is already full of immigrants and without regard to their immigration status they are all dreamers. Dreamers of a better, richer, more fulfilled life. So your problem with them is what? [/quote]
If they’re legal immigrants I welcome them with open arms. But how many illegal immigrants have taken an enrollment spot away from a legal tax paying citizen that also had dreams of a better, richer, more fulfilled life?
It depends on how you want to define an illegal immigrant.
In terms of people actually coming over the board as adults, few to none.
In terms of children raised in the country whose parents brought them to this country without documentation, probably still a small number. On the other hand, do you really want to exclude a young person who otherwise qualifies to be enrolled in college because of something their parents did probably a long time ago?
[quote]The fact that you’d compare the photo of the noose to a cartoon speaks for itself . We got here because certain right-wingers cannot step out from their partisan caves . Ms Napolitano’s qualifications were questioned because she is from the wrong political party,without consideration of or research into the facts, perhaps not surprisingly from those who don’t read the articles before comment.
Biddlin ;>)/ [/quote]
Oh spare me, the only reason you back her is that she’s from the party you identify with. Big Sis has no academic background and headed an agency that’s been under fire for spying on American citizens. The only reason you back her is because you live in that partisan cave that you talk of.
David, do you feel the pic of the noose is appropriate and on topic?
I’d prefer the pictures be removed, it’s a drag on the server anyway.
G.I.: [i]But how many illegal immigrants have taken an enrollment spot away from a legal tax paying citizen that also had dreams of a better, richer, more fulfilled life?[/i]
If immigrants of whatever status can come here and get work, we have a social obligation to offer their children the same social services we offer children of citizens — education, food stamps, etc.
As for competitive enrollment in higher education, I have no problem with that, especially the “dreamers”. I have personally met several who show evidence of skills and abilities deserving of a chance to make a positive contribution to America, moreso than a number of “natives”. At some point in life you actually have to demonstrate your ability to produce. And anyone can enroll in a community college.
I’d prefer to see the racist comments that prompted the posting of the picture removed.
[quote]I’d prefer the pictures be removed, it’s a drag on the server anyway.[/quote]
Ok, it’s a link now.
[i]”When someone refers to part of our population as an ‘infestation’ and says they ‘talk funny’, comparing that to others who are ‘clear-speaking’, it isn’t surprising that others might find that language to be racist or bigoted.”[/i]
Don, again, why do you and others with a left-leaning political bent see damn hyper-sensitive and prone to race-baiting certain topics? Can’t you just focus on the points without getting your underwear in a bunch over your projection of the meaning of a word?
My point had nothing to do with race, I was making a point about the left preferring we help recent immigrants, both legal and illegal, even while our policies cause less help to go to second, third, forth, fifth, sixth, etc… immigrants. We are all immigrants. But there are limited resources. I prefer we direct more of our resource to those that have been here longer and are more established… and yes, that have learned to speak the primary language of the land.
Frankly, [u]you [/u]called them an [i]infestation[/i] and made derogatory comments about them. Don’t try to project your bigoted comments back on me. This is yours. You make bigoted comments, people are going to call you on it.
[u]We[/u] aren’t race-baiting. [u]You’re the one[/u] who referred to an [i]’infestation'[/i] and said they [i]’talk funny’.[/i] That’s race-baiting. [u]You did it.[/u] It’s not “hyper-sensitive” to make [u]you[/u] aware that [u]YOU[/u] are making racially derogatory comments. It’s not my [i]”projection.[/i]” [u]You did it.[/u]
Maybe [u]you[/u] could [i]”focus on the points”[/i] without insulting and attacking liberals, gay parents, and now immigrants.
What Don said, 11:15.
A recent headline from The Onion:
“U.S. Border Patrol Increases Staff By Hiring Cheap Immigrant Labor”
Satire, but it says a lot about the current state of things.
[quote] I was making a point about the left preferring we help recent immigrants.[/quote]
Then why didn’t you just say that instead of classifying and insulting people because of how they speak?
[quote]… and yes, that have learned to speak the primary language of the land.[/quote]
So are these funny talking people speaking a different language? Or are they attempting to actually do what you think they should and attempt to speak English.
Frankly: I’d expect you’d appreciate Napolitano a little more than you do. After all, she has been responsible for greater enforcement of border crossing and deportation than most predecessors. I suspect that your criticisms of her may actually have more to do with her proximity to Obama than anything else.
[quote]Your point about the new high-tech industry emerging… you need to explain yourself better here. I don’t see any dots being connected with this comment. Are you suggesting that the UC system will start earning revenue from the technological inventions coming from its research efforts? If that is what you are talking about there is even a greater reason to demand an experienced technology business executive to lead the UC system.
[/quote]
The UC system is not going to “start earning revenue” from these inventions, but it’s been earning this revenue for years, and if you don’t know this, then you really do need to bone up the history of tech transfer in the UC system (and nationwide).
UC Davis generates millions of dollars or revenue every year on licensing the inventions of its faculty, and through various start-up companies that this technology spins off. The University does have a number of “experienced technology business executive[s]” leading the relevant campus units, and their expertise and work is leading to these efforts being ever more lucrative each year.
Take a look at the UCOP (University Office of the President) website, and look for their Tech Transfer report. UC Davis has several of the top 20 highest-grossing inventions in the entire system. It might help to update the notions you seem to have about how the University runs.
Oh no….Not sure what happened with that last post and the strikethrough formatting. That was completely unintended. 🙁
You put an ‘s’ in brackets: [i]executive(s)[/i]. Use parentheses instead. Brackets create a tag.
Thanks, Don. I just noticed the mistake. 🙂
It never ceases to amaze me that people post stuff here about Davis, pointing out all the warts that the city has. Often time they don’t even live here but they are self-proclaimed experts about the town. I have lived here over 50 years and have seen a lot of good and a lot of bad things happen here, more good than bad. I reacted to the noose photo not because it was something being drudged up as some thinly related item to the subject of the article, Janet Napolitano. I know people who have had family hanged in the south and I grew up in areas of the country that make Davis seem like a utopia regarding race relations. Guess I’m just sensitive to those types of photos being bandied about from one anonymous poster to annoy another anonymous poster.
Here’s another take on Big Sis and what a failure she has been:
[url]http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/071213-663607-political-hack-janet-napolitano-would-be-bad-for-university-of-california.htm[/url]
[i]”Frankly, you called them an infestation and made derogatory comments about them. Don’t try to project your bigoted comments back on me.”[/i]
Illegal immigration HAS caused an infestation. Our border states are realing with budget, drug and crime problems that are directly attributable to this. Like I have pointed out, it would not matter if our neighbor was some old Solvient block third-world country with 90% white European poor folk lacking education and speaking funny. Pllease repeat what I have just wrote over and over again so you don’t forget it. I don’t give a shit about the color of a person’s skin. It is you and others with your worldview that are stuck on classism, racism, every other human ism… you just can’t seem to get off that treaemill that people are not equal and there are protected goups that we all need to save.
It is YOU Don that are projecting racism into this. You and wdf1 that are so stuck on this template and so hyper sensitive to trigger words that you maintain in your own ideologocal dictionary. Seek counseling please.
But back to the point, you and others with your worldview are making first generation immigrants your project. And, you are doing so at the expense of the immigrants that came before them. Shame on you and others for that.
Don, you and wdf1 owe me an apology.
Skip:
[quote]Often time they don’t even live here but they are self-proclaimed experts about the town.[/quote]
Boy, did you hit that one out of the park.
[quote]It is YOU Don that are projecting racism into this. You and wdf1 that are so stuck on this template and so hyper sensitive to trigger words that you maintain in your own ideologocal dictionary. Seek counseling please. [/quote]That is complete nonsense. You simply will not take responsibility for your own behavior.
[quote]Don, you and wdf1 owe me an apology.[/quote]
There is zero chance that you will get that. You are responsible for the bigoted, racist comments you made. Zero chance.
Frankly, I’m still wondering why you chose to refer to immigrants as people who “talk funny”? Could you not have made your point without this inflammatory description?
[quote]Guess I’m just sensitive to those types of photos being bandied about from one anonymous poster to annoy another anonymous poster.[/quote]
Skip I appreciate where you are coming from. I don’t know the motives, but my impression is that the photo was posted to illuminate the racist comments made, not to annoy.
Frankly: [i]Don, you and wdf1 owe me an apology.[/i]
I think I will just let you keep posting to disqualify yourself.
Skip, here’s where many of the students of colour from UCD with whom I speak and work seem to have a problem. It seems white Davisites are so proud of their eglitarian paradise, they can’t hear what the anyone who feels differently is saying over such self serving platitudes.
“…and yes, that have learned to speak the primary language of the land.”
“Like I have pointed out, it would not matter if our neighbor was some old Solvient block third-world country with 90% white European poor folk lacking education and speaking funny. Pllease repeat what I have just wrote over and over again so you don’t forget it”
Thanks, I can skip the purgative, now.
Biddlin ;>)/
B. Nice – The “talk funny” point exceeds the emotional intelligence of some posters here to understand. It is in fact their bias. It was meant to invoke some discussion, not the childish tantrum of the emotional hyper-sensitive. Note that those same posters will not respond to the point about white, poor and uneducated people from an Eastern European country getting my same comments. I would say the same about folks from Great Britain, Ireland and Scotland. How does this point help them prop up their racism claims. They won’t comment because they know they stepped in it. And they belong to a group the fears being made to admit they are wrong more than they fear the destruction of society around them.
They like throwing around labels of racist because it makes them feel superior. They feel they are the chosen people to care for all those them deem worthy. Their habit of throwing around the label is one of the their most disgusting traits and identifies them as unable to carry their end of a conversation.
You tell me, what is the criteria would use to identify immigrants in need of extra protection and care? How do we define who is worthy? Are the people of the Appellation mountains or those is poor rural communities in the Mid West worthy? The way I see it, they don’t talk funny enough so they are excluded from consideration of needed help.
There is reverse xenophobia present in these folks that decide the criteria for who is a politically-correct subject worth saving. They are afraid that they will have to accept an American culture and so identify everything that reminds them of something else as worthy of their attention so they don’t have to. Language is a key criteria for them. Speak English and poorly and get attention. Speak it well and you are on your own.
That was the point.
And when I visit my family in Texas and tell them they talk funny they laugh and say they do. But then they are not American culture xenophobes and they are not hyper-sensitive.
And if you want to make a point that this conversation has gotten off track, go back and read to discover that it was the very blog moderator that took it in that direction. And also note that neither Don nor wdf1 actually responded to any points, they are happy to just ignore the discussion and attack the messenger. That is what they do well.
Frankly, 7/12,
[quote] And if you want to make a point that this conversation has gotten off track, go back and read to discover that it was the very blog moderator that took it in that direction.[/quote]
Here’s where it began:
[quote]3:15 pm:As a past governor of the illegal immigrant-infested state of AZ
4:36 pm: goodies that Democrats are handing out and planning to hand out to those future reliable Dem voters that happen to be here illegally today and talk funny, it will probably mean that the schools will prefer these students to all those clear-speaking middle class kids that don’t get the goodies…[/quote]
I responded to that at 5:34 pm.
[quote] Note that those same posters will not respond to the point about white, poor and uneducated people from an Eastern European country getting my same comments.[/quote]
That’s just you backing and filling from your earlier comments. Which were clearly referring to illegal immigrants, who are clearly Hispanics by your pejorative, so your absurd attempt at dissembling doesn’t merit any reply. You’re still trying to pretend you didn’t make comments that were bigoted. As wdf said, at this point I think I’ll just let you keep posting to make my point for me in that regard.
[quote] They are afraid that they will have to accept an American culture[/quote]
My culture is American. So’s yours. What point are you trying to make?
Don, you are way off topic, let’s get on topic please!
[quote]Officials close to the presidential search said that the committee reviewed more than 300 candidates and that Napolitano’s name came up early as a remote possibility because no one knew if she would be interested.
But the executive search firm hired by UC secretly contacted her and found her willing to at least entertain the idea. While other candidates both inside and outside UC were possibilities, discussions focused on Napolitano once she agreed to a series of interviews and background checks. [/quote] — L.A. Times
Interesting that they lobbied her for this job.
[quote]Note that those same posters will not respond to the point about white, poor and uneducated people from an Eastern European country getting my same comments. I would say the same about folks from Great Britain, Ireland and Scotland. How does this point help them prop up their racism claims.[/quote]
One of the problems I have with your comment is that you are making assumptions about peoples immigration status and what they do and do not deserve based on how the speak, (by implying that people who speak clearly are more deserving, which may or may not reflect their citizen status) This might not technically be “racist” but it comes from the same destructive place.
It’s also a demeaning sentiment.
The fact that your negative sentiments extend to white, poor, and uneducated people from any country does not make it any less offensive to me.
A big question now facing the Republicans is whether they can survive as a national party without passing immigration reform? Sean Trende has written about how the Republicans can win by turning out more white voters without passing immigration reform. However there is a problem. Ever since Pete Wilson demonized illegal immigrants the Democrats have had a lock on California electoral politics and will continue to do so as long as the Republican party is full of racism and xenophobia as expressed by people like Frankly and Growth Issue here in these comments. If Congressional Republicans pander to people like that the fortunes of the Republican party in California will not change.
California is our most populous state and controls the largest block of electoral votes. As such it is difficult to win the presidency without winning in California. In the 41 presidential election since the admission of California the state has gone for the winner 36 times. So keep harping about illegals Frankly. As the grandson of illegal aliens i can tell you the Democrats welcomed my family and supported the union job my grandfather had cutting suits at Hart, Scaffner and Marx. We have been Democrats ever since. So will all the citizens whose relatives you want to deport be Democrats, so will California, and as a consequence, so will the Presidency.
Frankly: to clarify, the sentiment is demeaning because saying someone “talks funny” implies to me that you think their is something wrong, or inferior, with the way they speak. It creates a sense that that person is not as worthy as those that “speak clearly”, for no other reason then they speak differently . Joking around with your relatives is not the same as demeaning broad groups of people because of their accents. Which is what I feel your comment did.
B. Nice – As your name implies, I appreciate your points, but you too are projecting, assuming, making mountains out of nothing, are demonstrating irrational hyper sensitivity like our noderator. He went right to implying racism. I urge you to check yourself for joining that same sorry tendency.
I assume you are politically left based on previous posts. I will assume that you voted for Obama and Pelosi; two of the most powerful politicians in the nation… both having made clearly hateful and hurtful comments directed a whites in the red state areas. And these are our political leaders making these statements to the national press. Much worse has been said and continues to be said. So are you going too be like Don and wdf1 and only demonstrate one-sided indignation. White guilt is really quite a sickening display because it foments racism by making a political and social issue out of race.
I really don’t care that someone might feel demeaned because they cannot speak English when I say they talk funny. I have had much worse delivered to me while spending time in Mexico, and I deserved every bit of it. I believe English should be the national language in this country and I think multi-culturalism is a big mistake being played out in every country were liberals have demanded it.
Reagan approved amnesty based on the promise from Democrats that they would secure the border and never do it again. What have we learned… to never trust Democrats… especially the liberal ones… because for them the means always justifies the end.
Back to the topic, I am sure we are going to be reading the real story about Big Sis. This was an inside Democrat political network move. It has political corruption smeared all over it.
” I think multi-culturalism is a big mistake being played out in every country were liberals have demanded it. “
The marketplace demanded it, as it will here.
” This was an inside Democrat political network move. It has political corruption smeared all over it. “
No evidence, so I’m sure you’ve concocted a fascinating scenario as to how this was accomplished.
I smell some kind of smear, alright .
Biddlin ;>)/
Frankly, in order to respect the stay on topic rule I addressed your comments on the Bulletin Board, under the title “Napolitano Side Bar Conversation”, in case you, or anyone else is interested in reading them.
Frankly: On immigration, it’s really beyond rational discussion with you. Grover Norquist makes as cogent an argument for immigration reform that I’ve heard. You probably won’t take in any argument I lay out about it, but you might listen to Grover.
Rahm Emanuel and Grover Norquist Debate Immigration Reform ([url]http://www.c-spanvideo.org/event/221548[/url])
Also posted on bulletin board here ([url]https://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=view&catid=2&id=1412&Itemid=192[/url])
I would just point out that the anti-immigration case that you make is similar to what organized labor has embraced at various times in the past.
“Note that those same posters will not respond to the point about white, poor and uneducated people from an Eastern European country getting my same comments. I would say the same about folks from Great Britain, Ireland and Scotland.”
But I did address that argument I pointed out it was xenophobia in a short post that needed little explaining to anyone who understands the meaning of the word. And what was your response you went on a tantrum about how i didn’t expand on my name calling without you realizing that sometimes few words are required to make a point.