President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 11, 2008 07:23 PM UTC

Bruce Ben$on's "Academic Freedom" Chutzpah

  • 49 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The CU Campus Press reports:

CU is looking to hire someone for a position unheard of in colleges and universities across the nation: an endowed chair in conservative thought and policy.

“It’s a little bit like if we’re hiring someone to teach French,” said CU Chancellor G.P. “Bud” Peterson. “They don’t have to be from France. Now you could make a case that someone from France could do a better job. So does it have to be a conservative? No. Is it likely that it will be? Probably.”

CU is currently developing a $9 million program which will bring nationally recognized conservative scholars to teach on the Boulder campus. The program will allow CU to create an endowment for a visiting chair in conservative thought.

The endowed chair in conservative thought and policy is said by CU officials to promote intellectual diversity on campus…

What’s funny about this is how the whole argument conservatives have been making for years about “academic freedom” is that there shouldn’t be “ideological bias” in the classroom. As in one way or the other–the David Horowitz crowd has always been very clear on this point, since to claim anything else would invite charges of hypocrisy.

That is, until Republicans take control of the university–then it’s okay to have a $9 million department of “ideological bias?” How does this not fly in the face of everything they’ve been prattling about since before Ward Churchill snarled his way onto the front page?

If that’s not enough irony for you, CU President Bruce “Not a GOP Kingpin Anymore” Benson published a guest editorial in the Denver Post today titled “Higher ed still must be fed”:

In the 2002 recession, CU’s state appropriation plummeted by $60 million, to $150 million. We’ve rebounded to 2002 levels, but we also educate 20 percent more students. Tuition backfilled a portion of the hole, yet that’s not our desired solution. But we invested it in financial aid and maintained access for Colorado students.

While tuition rises more than anyone wants, ours is still below that of national peers. The more state funding, the less tuition we charge. Unfortunately, revenues are not keeping up with costs. The state even imposes mandates we must meet, such as some salary increases and financial aid targets, without providing funding.

We continually work to control expenditures, but already run a tight ship. Overhead costs are about three-quarters of those of our national peers. There are no quick fixes…

He’s right that the colleges desperately need money of course (which was allegedly Benson’s big qualification for his job), but penning this on the same day as details come out about this quixotic “conservative studies” professorship? Is that what he’s spending his golden time raising money for?

We agree, Bruce, CU needs money–and helpfully, we just found $9 million extra dollars for you.

Tweet
Share

Comments

49 thoughts on “Bruce Ben$on’s “Academic Freedom” Chutzpah”

  1. I think we need some anarchists, syndicalists, communists (to name a few) to fill in Mr. Benson’s ideological rainbow.  

    “Benson is a great fund-raiser.”  

  5. also, will the B School have a chair endowed for “Socialist Philosophy?”  

    Let me be quick to say I do not think that the opposite of conservatism is socialism….I do think that so-called free market capitalism thought abounds in the B-school.

  6. that could be saved by not doing a major renovation to the University Club building.  They want to make it into a “Welcome Center,” probably to welcome the new Conservative Thought professor to his (or her–maybe they’re looking to hire Michelle Malkin?) permanently endowed chair.  Maybe they’re building a Throne Room there for him/her.

    What a farce.  This University has turned into a complete joke, and it has a President to match its current status.

    1. Cause you probably should, unless you haven’t been paying attention.

      Betsy “C Word is great” Hoffman was the WORST President CU has ever had. Period.

      1. And yes, I do mean over the last decade.  

        As bad as Hoffman was–and she was terrible, we’ll see whether Benson can surpass even the low bar set by her.

        I continue to think that CU should have made a strong push for either Gordon Gee or (former law school Dean) Gene Nichol.

  7. and the State Board of Ed are the very last Republican dominated elected groups in the state, and one of the regents, Jim Geddes from the 6th CD, was elected on a platform to do exactly what Benson and Peterson are proposing.

    The regents have a Republican 5-4 majority, with the ousting to Pat Hayes in favor of Democrat Monisha Merchant.

    However, four of the Republicans on the board: Lucero, Hybl, Bosley and Geddes, are very conservative. Bosley supported Amendment 46, not allowing the board to even vote on it because it would not have been unanimous.

    With that said, I think the regents are in a hurry to get this business dealt with and in place before the 2010 elections. Why?

    Two regents, Bosley and Carrigan, are up for re-election in 2010. Bosley’s re-election will be key since he is in at at-large (i.e. statewide) seat, and given the state’s swing to the left, it’s unlikely someone so conservative would appeal to unaffiliated voters or even moderate Republicans.

    Carrigan will easily win re-election if he chooses to run, being a Democrat from the 1st CD.

    Lucero is term-limited in 2010; he’s from the 3rd CD, which as we know just elected a Democrat to congress. This also could be a possible pick-up for the Democrats.

    If Bosley and Lucero’s seats went D, that would leave the board with a 6-3 Democratic majority.  

    1. Lucero was the key player behind Amendment 54 Clean Government. That is another reason the union bosses and corporate establishment, et. al. will go after him.

    1. can have an Center for Illegal Thought.

      Come to think of it, there oughta be a number of potential endowed chairs looking for work there in another month or so.

  9. Let the so called “conservatives” have their rotating chair for conservative thought. It is meaningless. The right-wing thinks that having this will somehow transform CU from what they consider a left-wing institution into a balanced forum of political discourse. The right-wingers need to realize that most students graduating from college today are far more conservative than my generation (the 60’s) even though the universities may be stacked with so called “liberals.”

    The right wingers operate under the false assumption that somehow the present faculty at our colleges and universities are somehow polluting the minds of our children and turning out raving liberals with each graduation ceremony. It is a baseless assumption focused on mindless fear. Most children follow in their parents footsteps and most children are more liberal in their youth than they are later in life for many reasons.

    The right wingers think that we are loosing our western traditions. Again, this is based on their unspoken assumption that only their philosphy (so called present day conservative political philosphy) represents traditional western culture and values (which it doesn’t).

    It is amusing because the right-wingers are going to have a much more difficult time than they think in defining what is conservative and what isn’t. They will find that to a very great extent liberal and conservative philosophy are based on the same western culture and values. They  represent different vairations and interpretations of the western tradition. And they will find these values are already inherent in the course work taught at CU and other colleges and universities.

    1. If the left is indoctrinating college students they are doing a really lousy job as the college educated have been going Republican so reliably that the fact that Obama took the white college educated demo was major news.  And, regardless of all the angst about him supposedly running as a lefty and now leaving the left in the lurch, Obama’s message has always been more centrist than lefty, the reason why Edwards, not Obama, was the darling of progressives early on.

      The fact is, Republicans are less likely to go into academia and teaching than into business so while college staff tends to be more liberal the students, most of whom are there because they want to qualify for higher paying jobs, are doing a great job of avoiding being  brainwashed into being liberals. It’s a solution in search of a problem.  

      1. I am a recent graduate of CU (it took a few years) and I can definitely vouch for the overarching liberalness of the faculty. I can even honestly say that many of these faculty members use their position as a pulpit from which to preach their views.

        However, as has been pointed out here, the college-educated tend to end up conservative in pretty reliable numbers. Is this an intelligence issue? I like to think so. (I’m kidding).

        I think the observation of a solution looking for a problem is an apt one. Even students who do become indoctrinated into socialism or far-left liberalism will generally run into reality at some point soon after graduation, and this will cause them to rethink their political allegiances. And despite what I saw posted above, reality does, in fact, have a decidedly conservative slant to it.

        There are better uses of $9 million than this. Especially if the university is facing economic hardships, as President Benson claims. The “conservative” answer to such a crisis is not to initiate unnecessary new spending; that answer is the domain of liberalism. Time for Bruce to start practicing what he preaches.

      2. “It’s a solution in search of a problem.”  

        Like most so called conservative policy proposals, they focus on something that has no real meaning because they can’t focus on things like infrastructure because to do so would require them to admit the government needs more revenue (a tax increase) and it is ironclad conservative ideology that taxes can never be increased, including when we go to war.  Because of that and other silly “principles” disguised in conservative garb, the right wingers can’t focus on real problems because the facts on the ground dictate a solution contrary to their ideology; and in their minds ideology is always more important than reality. When that kind of mind set is working, real problems and real solutions are ignored. It also translates into political defeat.  

  10. As a Political Science student at CU, I can assure you that Benson is full of shit. The political science classes here do not push one ideology or the other; most psci classes are designed to make students take an empirical approach to studying politics, not a partisan one. By adding a partisan element to the department, he’s really shifting the focus towards partisanship rather than away from it.

    This is just a giant boondoggle.  

  11. When I go on rants about this state not caring about higher ed, dumb shit reporting like this is why.

    Yes, this is a dumb idea.  Let me get that out of the way.  It was also a dumb idea SEVEN MOTHER FLIPPIN’ MONTHS AGO when Bud Peterson came up with the idea and started fundraising for it!

    This isn’t Benson’s baby, and if you guys had ANY contact with the guy actually running the show up here in Boulder, you’d know that.  It’s Bud Peterson. But hey, don’t let reality get in the way of smearing Ben$on.  At the very least blame the guy who’s actually responsible.

    And perhaps you missed how endowments work.  We won’t just have “$9 million extra dollars” by not doing this.  People who give toward a specific cause have this crazy desire to see it used for a specific purpose.  For some reason they’d get mad if we say, “thanks for the cash, now we’re going to use it for something else because some folks are mad.”  Wacky how people are like that…

    So, way to go folks.  Glad to see your outrage on another University related issue that you’re only about seven months late to the party on.  And the anger at Benson is hilarious.  Point some of your belated hate over to Chancellor Peterson’s office, please.  it’s much more appropriate there.

    Poll Question:  How many of you knew GP “Bud” Peterson was the Chancellor of your state’s flagship institution before today?

    OK, rant over.

    Really though, thanks to those of you who care…just try and pay attention to this stuff within, say, 6 months of it happening…

    3. It got just about the same reception then, too.

      Only this time, Benson is claiming credit? Well, maybe it’ll help with fund raising.

      I expect it’ll end up being like Stanford’s Hoover Institute, only lamer.

    4. Man, what an asshole that Bruce Benson is !  How long has he had this idea, and why weren’t we informed earlier ? And what programs are going to be cut to put up this 9 million ?  I am outraged damnit ! I’m calling Peterson now to ask him to talk some sense into Benson !

    5. If they want to have one of the Poli-Sci full professor positions labeled “Conservative Thought” and they then are expected to give 4 – 6 general lectures/year – that would be good.

      But 9 million for some special chair from which they do – what??? This is a waste of Peterson’s efforts when he could be investing that time in more useful efforts.

      1. they’re spending $9 mil on this.  It’s an endowment.  You invest it and then fund the professorship from its returns.  If that’s what people want to donate money to, I applaud Peterson for tapping an overlooked market.  

          1. I forget to say that I completely agree that there are better uses for his time.  

            Peterson’s response would probably be that they already have one of the 271 vice-chancellors working on those issues.  🙂

    6. That can all be true and Benson can still be blamed for not stopping it. Does he not have the power to do that? If he does, why should he escape criticism?

      You’d think as a Republican Benson would understand the negative PR value of bemoaning CU’s fundraising headaches while pursuing millions for this stupid partisan duckspeaking “professorship.”

      1. Benson has been very clear he’s not going to meddle with the day to day operation of the campuses.  Endowed professorships/scholarships/chairs/deans are dealt with on a campus level.  If this was a system-wide initiative you’d have a point…but it’s not.  It’s Boulder’s plan and Peterson’s desire.

        I don’t want the President of the system determining what’s best for each campus’ academics.  Neither does the Board of Regents.  That’s why Hank Brown didn’t throw himself into the fray when Adrienne Anderson and Phil Mitchell were fired (or “didn’t have their contracts renewed.”)  it’s not the president’s job.  The buck doesn’t stop there in this case.

        Criticize the guy that deserves criticism, not the one who’s political party you don’t like.

        1. Hank Brown supporting Adrienne Anderson. True enough, that’s rich.

          Flowchart this into confusion all you want–maybe the buck stops nowhere? Evidently not with anybody when it comes to stupid ideas that embarrass the institution or amount to a waste of millions of dollars.

          And haven’t you defended Benson from all comers ever since he became the “sole finalist?”

          1. in the sense that he’s exactly what the University wanted in a president.  It’s not his fault CU wanted a cash cow, and not an academic, to run things.

            A lot of us saw that coming when the Regents put out their “job description” to replace Brown…but no one cared.  Hell, even some of the more liberal Regents didn’t care (thanks Cindy Carlisle).  Thus, when Benson was the sole finalist, IMO it was time to move on.  We fought, we lost…and then everyone got upset.

            I don’t like the fact that he’s the president, and when he’s to blame for actual screw-ups I’m all in favor of flaming him; but when he’s not actually screwing the pooch, I say leave him alone.

  12. for your tepid support of Amendment 58.  At least we’d have $200mm + going in to the state-run university coffers starting next year if your buddies hadn’t outbid the proponents with their $16mm….and those wonderfully scripted Polly Page lies….

  13. As a CU student I have some serious objections to this idea.  I understand and recognize that CU is a rather liberal school, and I would love to see a more vibrant discourse on campus.  Recently the CU College Repblicans President remarked college age republicans are the most discriminated group in the nation, and while i disagree, it is true that there is not a particularly equal represenatation.  The major problem with this solution is that it only solves half of the problem.  If the goal is to simultaneously create a strong, fair discussion, while trying to lead the politics out of other classrooms, then this will fail.  As a student you currently cant register for a “liberal ideology course”.  you cant register for “progressive thinking from 1900-1960”  these classes dont exist.  If you insist on balancing the discussion then simply add the courses courses to the political science department.  let liberals teach their ideology, let conservatives teach theirs.  take $9,000,000 and give a few more students scholarships.  

    1. Sure you can.  It’s called PSCI 2004 w/ Horst Mewes.  The same is true of 7004.  Or 4731, and anything with Doug (or his wife) Costain.  The flip side of that is taking anything Mike Kanner teaches…

      OK, so I’m kidding…but only sort of.  Those courses aren’t meant to be basically “liberal ideology courses,” but IMO they are.

      Anyway, I like your take on the issue…

      1. remind me never to send you an informal email, text message, or post on your facebook wall (ha, you with a fbook page makes me laugh…).  i dont use caps or punctuation usually.  omg my bff lolz.  ur so funny.

      2. If only you had any venom left over for the Republicans.

        But I understand the temptation. I make people cry over their stupid grammar.

        You formed a sentence and started the second half of it with a capital letter, then you referenced words you weren’t actually using without putting them in quotation marks.

        No surprise, as I’ve never seen a person on the internet correct someone’s errors without making some serious mistakes in his own post.

  14. CU: Lurching from Ward Churchill to Lincoln Rockwell.

    First we have an asinine intellectual fraudulent fake Indian ranting from the left. Now we’re seeing a $9 million endowment to fund some right-winger.

    Maybe Jessica Peck Corry or Jon Caldara will apply for the professorship.

    Professor Tom Tancredo?

    Professor Wayne Allard?

    Professor Bob Schaffer?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

227 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!