The Bobcat Nation

grizzh8r wrote:Score another win for Affirmative Action...

Quite ironic post, considering that it follows someone wondering aloud if we shouldn't just exclude any woman from consideration altogether just because they are a woman. Apparently we want affirmative action, but we just want it to proactively discriminate in favor of white males.

Bay Area Cat wrote:Why do you think people in Montana won't accept a female university president?

I mean, the state did elect a woman to the U.S. Congress almost 100 years ago ... has the state regressed since then?

Not at all, and I do think Montanans would accept a female university president, if she fit the university. I just see this as a "politically correct" choice, not the "best fit" choice. It speaks to how really skewed this country has become. Her qualifications and background do not seem to be at all in line with Montana State University, when compared to the other two candidates, and especially Dr. Leath. When I first saw the candidates, I just had this sneaking suspicion this would happen - the BOR trying to be cute and make a splash at the expense of the entire Institution. I too am extremely disappointed.

That being said, I too hope she proves me wrong.

grizzh8r wrote:

Bay Area Cat wrote:Why do you think people in Montana won't accept a female university president?

I mean, the state did elect a woman to the U.S. Congress almost 100 years ago ... has the state regressed since then?

Not at all, and I do think Montanans would accept a female university president, if she fit the university. I just see this as a "politically correct" choice, not the "best fit" choice. It speaks to how really skewed this country has become. Her qualifications and background do not seem to be at all in line with Montana State University, when compared to the other two candidates, and especially Dr. Leath. When I first saw the candidates, I just had this sneaking suspicion this would happen - the BOR trying to be cute and make a splash at the expense of the entire Institution. I too am extremely disappointed.

That being said, I too hope she proves me wrong.

Again, outside of having a vagina, how are her qualifications and background any different from our current President?

And by most all accounts, he appears to have done a great job for MSU.

Bay Area Cat wrote:

grizzh8r wrote:

Bay Area Cat wrote:Why do you think people in Montana won't accept a female university president?

I mean, the state did elect a woman to the U.S. Congress almost 100 years ago ... has the state regressed since then?

Not at all, and I do think Montanans would accept a female university president, if she fit the university. I just see this as a "politically correct" choice, not the "best fit" choice. It speaks to how really skewed this country has become. Her qualifications and background do not seem to be at all in line with Montana State University, when compared to the other two candidates, and especially Dr. Leath. When I first saw the candidates, I just had this sneaking suspicion this would happen - the BOR trying to be cute and make a splash at the expense of the entire Institution. I too am extremely disappointed.

That being said, I too hope she proves me wrong.

Again, outside of having a vagina, how is her background any different from our current President?

And by most all accounts, he appears to have done a great job for MSU.

That's a rather crass way of conveying a point - I'm disappointed in you, BAC.


To answer your question: Experience. Gamble had been-there, done-that. In all reality, I thought he was just an OK president. Nothing spectacular. Of course, we were spoiled to have Dr. Malone for such a long time. He was just before my time at MSU, but both my parents and other MSU grads always spoke very highly of him and his dedication to MSU. Gamble just seemed more like a caretaker, not a mover-and-shaker.

It looks like their experience (prior to MSU) is just about the same. Like I said, their backgrounds, except for anatomy, appear to be quite similar in most every way.

Answering your question earlier BAC and why my vote was for Cruzado-Salas is her outspoken activism for the STAFF of MSU. I think, and seems to be the consensus of most classified staff, that she will step up to the plate for them while still doing what is best for MSU.

My opinion is thatt Gamble was great for his first few years on campus. He has since then become a stagnant president and has turned into, as most eloquently put, more of a "caretaker" than a shaker.

The other two candidates are great candidates, however seem to me that they would put their feet exactly where Gambles were and move in the same direction he was going without thinking for themselves. MSU is at a point where it is good, but can become great. She will bring new ideas and new structure to MSU that will make it a more well rounded school.

I could really care less if she is male, female, or hermaphrodite. Black, white, red, or purple. She, in my opinion, is the best fit for MSU at this time. I do not think that affirmative action, or Griz Fans being on the search committee had anything to do with this decision.

edit: I hope to that she will support MSU Athletics. Crossing my fingers one of her first decisions will be to release PF.

Why would you want her to fire PF?

[quote="BearCat"]
Cruzado, 49, is currently executive vice president and provost of New Mexico State University. She holds a bachelor's in comparative literature from the University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez; a master's in Spanish from the University of Texas, Arlington; and a doctorate in humanities from the University of Texas, Arlington.


quote]

HOLY CRAP, SHE IS YOUNGER THAN ME!!! I SHOULD HAVE APPLIED.

grizzh8r wrote:

Bay Area Cat wrote:Why do you think people in Montana won't accept a female university president?

I mean, the state did elect a woman to the U.S. Congress almost 100 years ago ... has the state regressed since then?

Not at all, and I do think Montanans would accept a female university president, if she fit the university. I just see this as a "politically correct" choice, not the "best fit" choice. It speaks to how really skewed this country has become. Her qualifications and background do not seem to be at all in line with Montana State University, when compared to the other two candidates, and especially Dr. Leath. When I first saw the candidates, I just had this sneaking suspicion this would happen - the BOR trying to be cute and make a splash at the expense of the entire Institution. I too am extremely disappointed.

That being said, I too hope she proves me wrong.

What he said.

To expand a bit - come on, BAC. You have got to just be looking for a reason to argue if you think Montana doesn't still have a bit of chauvinism in its collective mentality when compared to more progressive states in the nation. Not saying that's right or wrong, just it is what it is. I didn't say that I had a problem with her hiring BECAUSE she is a woman, I had a problem with it because of the other reasons I stated. Idaho is probably worse in that regard than Montana is, but I think that she may encounter some unspoken resistance - at least initially - because of her gender. Fair or not, PC or not, that's just the way I see things.

I will disagree pretty strongly with grizzh8r re: President Malone. He was a fantastic guy, but I thought he was a terrible president for MSU. I don't want to spend too much time speaking poorly of the deceased, but I thought there were a lot of things that came to light after his death that showed he made numerous poor decisions and did not provide good leadership for MSU during his tenure. I thought President Gamble did a terrific job during his tenure. MSU has grown by leaps and bounds during his time. Sure, there are more things I would have liked him to accomplish, but overall I think he has been a great prez for our school. He is leaving MSU in much better shape than he found it, and I hope we can say the same for our new president when her time comes.

I guess I just was under the impression that Montana was quite progressive in terms of its views of and respect for women in power. At least, that has been my personal experience. We even had a female Gov. recently ... and those who would tend to be the most likely to be chauvenistic ("social conservatives") generally seemed very excited about the idea of Sarah Palin being a heart attack from the Oval Office. So from what I have seen, I don't think it would be an issue. But maybe you have seen a lot of things I haven't that lead you to a different conclusion.

But if we were to assume that there are, indeed, a lot of chauvenistic people in Montana, is that a reason not to hire her, even if she is deemed to be the most qualified person for the job? Would her womanhood, combined with the irrational prejudices of some backwards folks in the state serve as a legitimate reason to deem her less qualified? This is a tough question to answer on a practical level, I guess. The pragmatic answer would be "yes," but the "right" and "just" answer would be a strong "no," in the minds of most.

Bay Area Cat wrote:I guess I just was under the impression that Montana was quite progressive in terms of its views of and respect for women in power. At least, that has been my personal experience. We even had a female Gov. recently ... and those who would tend to be the most likely to be chauvenistic ("social conservatives") generally seemed very excited about the idea of Sarah Palin being a heart attack from the Oval Office. So from what I have seen, I don't think it would be an issue. But maybe you have seen a lot of things I haven't that lead you to a different conclusion.

But if we were to assume that there are, indeed, a lot of chauvenistic people in Montana, is that a reason not to hire her, even if she is deemed to be the most qualified person for the job? Would her womanhood, combined with the irrational prejudices of some backwards folks in the state serve as a legitimate reason to deem her less qualified? This is a tough question to answer on a practical level, I guess. The pragmatic answer would be "yes," but the "right" and "just" answer would be a strong "no," in the minds of most.

Agree with this. Personally, I don't think using Gov. Martz is a ringing endorsement for women in power, she was a terrible governor! Palin - also a terrible person to use as an argument FOR women in power (not saying you are making this argument, just sayin'). Palin would have been 2nd in command though, which I think was a difference.

BwanaCat wrote:BTW, Sheila Sterns and Clayton Christian are two of the most rabid um supporters /jizz fans that I have ever been around. If you think these two had MSU's best interest next to their heart during this process you guys are dreaming or stoned.

so...are any of the regents Cat fans?

I'm not sure if Cruzado-Salas was or was not the board of Regent's first choice, but I do have it on pretty good authority that she was the only one willing to accept the salary that was offered. I think Leath and Angle both wanted at least $50,000/year more than what the BOR was willing to pay.

I think everyone knew that the salary was going to be a major hurdle coming in, but the good news is that it looks like we have a new leader and I hope everyone does their part in making her feel welcome in Bozeman and across the state of Montana.

So for all of you bashing the BOR's decision, it really had less to do with who they thought was the best candidate of the three, and more to do with who would accept the proposed salary. Hopefully it all works out for the best...

To follow up on my previous point...

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/ar ... 100msu.txt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Leath sounds like a bit of a cry baby...not sure how that would go over with the legislature.

As a female I've never experience honest chauvinism, I've never gone into a job interview expecting to be judged any differently because I'm female nor have I ever hoped to receive favoritism because of it. And I worked in a field that is still mostly male. Unfortunately in my experience the worst offenders of "sexism" were women. I may have mentioned before how much that ticks me off

IMHO the sooner we quick focusing on it, talking about it, and accusing people of such the better off we'll all be. I've just as often seen two white males apply for jobs and the weaker appearing candidate there get it.

I hope our new President does wonderful things for MSU, keep it on the top for a high quality education.

BelgradeBobcat wrote:

BwanaCat wrote:BTW, Sheila Sterns and Clayton Christian are two of the most rabid um supporters /jizz fans that I have ever been around. If you think these two had MSU's best interest next to their heart during this process you guys are dreaming or stoned.

so...are any of the regents Cat fans?

todd buchanan, former bobcat qb, might be one

wbtfg wrote:To follow up on my previous point...

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/ar ... 100msu.txt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Leath sounds like a bit of a cry baby...not sure how that would go over with the legislature.

Really? I thought this makes our BOR look really bad and not able to finalize a hiring. First Leath said they called him on Friday saying they wanted to negotiate with him and one other candidate. Then they ask him to name his price! What kind of hiring negotiations are these people trained in? Was the BOR just looking to not make a choice between the two and instead find the one that would work for the cheapest?

And then there was this quote from Sheila Stearns: "Anyone close to this search knows that it attracted truly outstanding candidates and finalists, and that the board and I had a difficult decision to make. After several days of conversation, it was clear by Tuesday that Dr. Cruzado was the best fit for the MSU presidency. We remain very honored by the interest and top-notch credentials of the other finalists." Basically admitting that they were try to work with both instead of making a choice and moving forward.

I'm disappointed in how the BOR and the recruiting firm handled this. I've worked as a recruiter in the past and they should have been mediating negotiations and making sure not to screw it up at this level. It sounds like they weren't even involved and let the BOR trip all over themselves. I'm sad to say it, but I think Montana State and the Bozeman Economy missed out on a golden opportunity to bring Leath in. He had a clear vision and plan on how to build the university to the next level and our BOR wasn't able to even handle a proper negotiation.

didn't we elect Ma "dont worry i'll wash your clothes" Martz?

It would appear as though those responding to the article tend to agree with wbtfg: Sour Grapes; and the correct decision was made.

rtb wrote:

wbtfg wrote:To follow up on my previous point...

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/ar ... 100msu.txt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Leath sounds like a bit of a cry baby...not sure how that would go over with the legislature.

Really? I thought this makes our BOR look really bad and not able to finalize a hiring. First Leath said they called him on Friday saying they wanted to negotiate with him and one other candidate. Then they ask him to name his price! What kind of hiring negotiations are these people trained in? Was the BOR just looking to not make a choice between the two and instead find the one that would work for the cheapest?

And then there was this quote from Sheila Stearns: "Anyone close to this search knows that it attracted truly outstanding candidates and finalists, and that the board and I had a difficult decision to make. After several days of conversation, it was clear by Tuesday that Dr. Cruzado was the best fit for the MSU presidency. We remain very honored by the interest and top-notch credentials of the other finalists." Basically admitting that they were try to work with both instead of making a choice and moving forward.

I'm disappointed in how the BOR and the recruiting firm handled this. I've worked as a recruiter in the past and they should have been mediating negotiations and making sure not to screw it up at this level. It sounds like they weren't even involved and let the BOR trip all over themselves. I'm sad to say it, but I think Montana State and the Bozeman Economy missed out on a golden opportunity to bring Leath in. He had a clear vision and plan on how to build the university to the next level and our BOR wasn't able to even handle a proper negotiation.

I think there’s probably a lot of truth to your assessment, and don’t necessarily disagree with anything you said. However, whether or not the hiring team dropped the ball, I don’t think it was cool for a prospective university president to go with the “They didn’t dump me, I dumped them” approach.

To me, that reeks of ego and drama…those are qualities that are last thing we need in a university president.