Both links fail to account for the changes made to donations tied to ticket locations which had many OU people making 3 years’ worth of donations in 2017. At OU most donations are not coming from the extremely wealthy like those giving to many other charities that were not impacted by the tax law changes nearly as much as less well-off people.

Furthermore many donations at OU are made at the end of the year and are directly tied to the performance of the stock market and oil & NG. The last 1/3 or so of 2018 was very bad for the market and those links do not account for the market drop.

It’s very reasonable to see why donations would have dropped in 2018. Had Boren still been around he would have been dealing with the same tax law changes and a drop in donations.


You're not really helping your case here. Now you are arguing that a 40% drop totalling $34 million is because people front-loaded their donations in 2017. And yet OU foundation reports the 2017 donations totalled $104 million while in 2016 they were $126 million. Shouldn't they be up, not down, if people made all these extra donations in 2017 instead of 2018?

Based on zero evidence you're claiming OU is some black swan outlier of a survey of thousands of charities? That, unlike OU, their donors consists of mostly wealthy people who don't care or aren't savvy enough to front load their own donations? Show me actual evidence, or I don't buy it.

And you are arguing based on zero evidence that nearly half of all the money given to OU happens in the last few weeks of the year? And the people giving to OU check their brokerage balances before donating? Again, I doubt it had much effect. Even if some folks reduced their donation by the biggest drop in the market, that would only explain a small fraction of the reduction in donations.

And of course you're ignoring the main point of the linked article. The data shows clearly that folks' donations are little affected by whether or not they get a deduction for doing so. Donations are overwhelming driven by their support for the mission of the organization.

Or, "No, injection water doesn't create earthquakes"?

I agree most research is above board, but it doesn't take criminalizing a prof to manipulate the system. It is sort of like Pete's spotlight on writing favorable stories on advertisers. There are lots of straight up great journalists with integrity, but there are plenty that are opportunistic also. Let's not be too naive (or in my case, maybe too cynical :) )

I don't see how it couldn't if what they found wasn't what was reported. I mean l imagine injection water causes them, it makes sense but if research data handled properly doesn't support a certain outcome, but the project results are reported differently, the overseeing prof has to be bought off. You would probably have to have students in on it, too.

I don't see how it couldn't if what they found wasn't what was reported. I mean l imagine injection water causes them, it makes sense but if research data handled properly doesn't support a certain outcome, but the project results are reported differently, the overseeing prof has to be bought off. You would probably have to have students in on it, too.
And yet differing research shows differing results. Change a parameter here or there and ..... again, true facts can also be made to mislead. Funny how honest everyone is yet how predictable some things are.

It didn't seem right to me from the start to hire someone as in Gallogly, who had no experience, whatsoever, in running a university. At least Burns Hargis had a little bit of something from being a regent.

It didn't seem right to me from the start to hire someone as in Gallogly, who had no experience, whatsoever, in running a university. At least Burns Hargis had a little bit of something from being a regent.

How much prior experience did Boren have in running a university?

How much prior experience did Boren have in running a university?
While he didn’t run a University, he was a Rhodes Scholar and steeped in academic background. He had been Governor of OK and knew the way the state works, the BOR works, knew all the players, knew all the big money donors, and was very popular with most Oklahomans. Boren was a centerest who was known for an outstanding understanding of the world and has counseled many of the world’s leaders. He was a big thinker who knew that OU could be more than a provincial state school with low academic standards. He had a VISION for OU and was skilled at articulating it. He had proven to be a leader in very tough political environments and was successful in concensus gathering among very diversified groups. He led through intellect and persuasion, not by an organizational flow chart and spreadsheets.

And, he was willing to give up the power he had at his prime out of love for OU. He did not buy his way in after his days as a corporate leader were essentially over.

That is why he was a good pick as President.

There we go....took a while but the masking is coming off. Make America Great Again. Back when people knew their place.

Take back our universities from all those evil liberals who prize knowledge over opinion, facts over propaganda, diversity over purity of linage, knowledge growth over greed, multi-nationalism over white nationalism, globalism over protectionism. Take it back from the "intellectual" tea sippers.

Hmmm.. where have we heard this before?

On that note...Trump junior telling young people to take conservatism back to their "loser teachers"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHwodmoz1XQ

It won’t be long before Stitt starts forcing changes at OSU

Lol. How would Stitt start calling the shots at OSU?

It is an absolute train wreck in Norman right now. I doubt any university will be wanting to emulate that playbook anytime soon.

We all had heard rumors about things like this while we were in school. Many people were not surprised about this.

I don't hear gay rumors about other prominent Oklahoma politicians. So how did such rumors start about Boren? Did he have an encounter long ago with another gentleman in a state capitol elevator while it was stopped between floors, and it wasn't kept as a total secret?

Interesting how the rumors were so strong back in 1978 that Boren, during a political campaign in which an opponent accused him of being gay, swore out on oath on a white, family Bible, declaring "I know what homosexuals and bisexuals are. I further swear that I am not a homosexual or bisexual. And I further swear that I have never been a homosexual or bisexual." This according to Wiki.

Of course, some may say him being gay isn't the issue now that it's decades later, but rather did he sexually harass anybody?

Lol. How would Stitt start calling the shots at OSU?

It is an absolute train wreck in Norman right now. I doubt any university will be wanting to emulate that playbook anytime soon.
That certainly is the spin.

Now at OSU it won’t be an issue because Burns is a died in the wool Republican banker and was part of the right wing “in” crowd.

That certainly is the spin.

Now at OSU it won’t be an issue because Burns is a died in the wool Republican banker and was part of the right wing “in” crowd.

Excellent point.

Factual doesn’t mean it isn’t misleading and dishonest.

Sorry so many SAEs had their feelings hurt. If they were really concerned they would have put forth a real solution to the perpetuation of racist traditions in their own society and maybe even disassociated voluntarily til they could prove they had extinguished that activity. Sometimes excommunication is the correct response. OUs African American population deserved swift and decisive action.

The defense of Gallogly on this board seems to be fueled by football conference affiliation, political ilk, and anger for racist activity retribution. I’ve yet to see discussion of real academic and student development.

Hey know it all, how could we have put forth a real solution to a problem that 99.9% of us who graduated prior to 2012 didn’t know existed? While i was there we had a multicultural chair and did events with the ethnic fraternities and sororities on campus or had a speaker once a month. We weren’t perfect by any means but it was hardly a racist organization. There was no institutional racism in our chapter and the issues that caused all of this were going on for 3 years out of 106 at OU. No one had even heard that chant at OU until the fall of 2011. That’s why so many of us were mad at how Boren handled it. The first time the sae board and the alumni were made aware that the actives had learned and were singing that was when it happened and we were being kicked off campus and we were as disgusted and disappointed as everyone else.

And the fraternity did voluntarily close...the national fraternity closed the chapter the night before Boren went on his over the top, grandstanding media rant the next day saying that he expelled a bunch of people who had withdrawn and was kicking sae off campus even though we had already voluntarily closed the chapter. Boren did what he needed to do to a point but we hate him for going out and literally calling all of us racists and going over the top without due process. We were kicked off campus for longer than a fraternity that literally let one of its pledges die of alcohol poisoning in the basement, do you realize how absurd that is?

As far as the thread title goes...call it what you want, it is fact. You don’t have to like it but that doesn’t make it any less true.

https://i.imgur.com/q7VuazS.png

Ok this was pretty funny

Hey know it all, how could we have put forth a real solution to a problem that 99.9% of us who graduated prior to 2012 didn’t know existed? While i was there we had a multicultural chair and did events with the ethnic fraternities and sororities on campus or had a speaker once a month. We weren’t perfect by any means but it was hardly a racist organization. There was no institutional racism in our chapter and the issues that caused all of this were going on for 3 years out of 106 at OU. No one had even heard that chant at OU until the fall of 2011. That’s why so many of us were mad at how Boren handled it. The first time the sae board and the alumni were made aware that the actives had learned and were singing that was when it happened and we were being kicked off campus and we were as disgusted and disappointed as everyone else.

And the fraternity did voluntarily close...the national fraternity closed the chapter the night before Boren went on his over the top, grandstanding media rant the next day saying that he expelled a bunch of people who had withdrawn and was kicking sae off campus even though we had already voluntarily closed the chapter. Boren did what he needed to do to a point but we hate him for going out and literally calling all of us racists and going over the top without due process. We were kicked off campus for longer than a fraternity that literally let one of its pledges die of alcohol poisoning in the basement, do you realize how absurd that is?

As far as the thread title goes...call it what you want, it is fact. You don’t have to like it but that doesn’t make it any less true.

I wanted to chime in that the SAEs I've talked with have all said the same thing. If I recall correctly, the infamous chant was learned by some pledges who were on a cruise with SAEs from a chapter house outside of Oklahoma?

This info is coming from trusted friends who were members of the house the same time I was in undergrad at OU 2006-2010.

I wanted to chime in that the SAEs I've talked with have all said the same thing. If I recall correctly, the infamous chant was learned by some pledges who were on a cruise with SAEs from a chapter house outside of Oklahoma?

This info is coming from trusted friends who were members of the house the same time I was in undergrad at OU 2006-2010.

Ah, so you're saying ALL of SAE should be shut down? Good idea man.

Ah, so you're saying ALL of SAE should be shut down? Good idea man.

Presenting an analogy using college football...that would be like saying that if guys from Texas tech’s football team told football players from OU about some illegal performance enhancing drugs that they had been using while together at a multi team football camp, then the OU guys took that knowledge back to the rest of their team and got 25% of the team hooked on them which then led to OU’s team being suspended by the NCAA for 5 seasons due to lack of institutional control...that not only should OU be suspended but so should every team in the NCAA because they were all obviously using PEDs since OU and Texas Tech were doing it and not only that but they were obviously being taught to do so by NCAA leadership. That is the type of dumb or ignorant logic you are using.

I wanted to chime in that the SAEs I've talked with have all said the same thing. If I recall correctly, the infamous chant was learned by some pledges who were on a cruise with SAEs from a chapter house outside of Oklahoma?

This info is coming from trusted friends who were members of the house the same time I was in undergrad at OU 2006-2010.

Yes, and those were the facts that Boren presented after his investigation as well. Also consistent with what came out of the chapter and nationwide internal investigations by SAE.

You are right to be frustrated that your point about the tax law wasn't taken seriously. There were projections that the change regarding deductions would indeed cause people to donate less. The projections I saw suggested it would cause a 3-5% cut:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/has-the-new-tax-law-stopped-people-from-giving-to-charity-2018-11-27

It turns out that to be even less. Most charities are flat or up this year:

https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2019/1/14/predictions-that-tax-reform-will-depress-giving-are-wrong-at-least-for-2018

Either way, it hardly explains OU's drop of 40% in donations.

You made a reasonable suggestion which was worth investigating. The numbers suggest that we should look for other explanations.
You're not really helping your case here. Now you are arguing that a 40% drop totalling $34 million is because people front-loaded their donations in 2017. And yet OU foundation reports the 2017 donations totalled $104 million while in 2016 they were $126 million. Shouldn't they be up, not down, if people made all these extra donations in 2017 instead of 2018?

Based on zero evidence you're claiming OU is some black swan outlier of a survey of thousands of charities? That, unlike OU, their donors consists of mostly wealthy people who don't care or aren't savvy enough to front load their own donations? Show me actual evidence, or I don't buy it.

And you are arguing based on zero evidence that nearly half of all the money given to OU happens in the last few weeks of the year? And the people giving to OU check their brokerage balances before donating? Again, I doubt it had much effect. Even if some folks reduced their donation by the biggest drop in the market, that would only explain a small fraction of the reduction in donations.

And of course you're ignoring the main point of the linked article. The data shows clearly that folks' donations are little affected by whether or not they get a deduction for doing so. Donations are overwhelming driven by their support for the mission of the organization.


I’m sure there are other factors but donations are impacted by the new tax rules
https://www.forbes.com/sites/martinshenkman/2018/09/23/charitable-giving-how-to-save-tax-deductions-despite-new-law/#7b25e53c6804
“Income Tax Changes Eliminate Tax Benefits for Most Donors”

“To understand the new face of charitable planning start with understanding the new rules. The 2017 Tax Act doubled the standard deduction thereby eliminating most tax benefits for charitable donations.

The standard deduction which taxpayers can claim on their income tax returns without itemizing has been approximately doubled from $12,000 to $24,000 (for married couples filing joint income tax returns). But other changes will exacerbate this. The $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions will limit those deductions for many taxpayers so state and local taxes will not push as many taxpayers over the standard deduction amount.

Finally, many deductions have simply been eliminated. The result is that most taxpayers will use the standard deduction, not itemize. That means no charitable contribution deduction unless those non-itemizing taxpayers plan”

“How much of an impact with these changes have? One estimate is that 30 million taxpayers itemized deductions and that figure will plummet to a mere 5 million”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since Oklahoma’s generally earn less money than the national average this would have an even larger impact on the amounts donated. People with smart tax preparers were aware of the new rules changes in late 2016 and would have had advised clients to make donations that could be carried over for 5 years.

https://20somethingfinance.com/irs-maximum-charitable-donation-limit/
“The amount you can deduct for charitable contributions can’t be more than 50% of your adjusted gross income. Your deduction may be further limited to 30% or 20% of your adjusted gross income, depending on the type of property you give and the type of organization you give it to.”

“You can carry over deductions from any year in which you surpass the IRS charitable donation deduction limits, up to a maximum of 5 years”

On that note...Trump junior telling young people to take conservatism back to their "loser teachers"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHwodmoz1XQ

While I would have taken the context of what Trump Jr said as aimed at the type of teacher that feels it is his/her duty to indoctrinate students, and not all teachers everywhere, it was a pretty stupid thing to say and easily manipulated by the left.

^

Growing up, I had a bunch of teachers preach about religion and their own morals and other crazy crap. I also remember the entire school being led in Christian prayer every morning over the intercom. This was at the state's largest public high school at the time.

I don't recall any progressive politicians advocating to stand up to those 'loser teachers'.


Somehow many in the Republican party (of which I have been a member for 40 years) has convinced a bunch of hysterics that education is now an evil force filled with people striving to corrupt the minds of young people and lead us all straight into socialism.

And frankly, Gallogly seems part of that movement.

Funny they didn't care when I had principals that openly exposed overtly religious rhetoric or other things that were entirely inappropriate.

^

Growing up, I had a bunch of teachers preach about religion and their own morals and other crazy crap. I also remember the entire school being led in Christian prayer every morning over the intercom. This was at the state's largest public high school at the time.

I don't recall any progressive politicians advocating to stand up to those 'loser teachers'.


Somehow the Republican party (of which I have been a member for 40 years) has convinced a bunch of hysterics that education is now an evil force filled with people striving to corrupt the minds of young people and lead us all straight into socialism.

And frankly, Gallogly seems part of that movement.

Funny they didn't care when I had principals that openly exposed overtly religious rhetoric or other things that were entirely inappropriate.

Pete, first, that was in another era. Second, I went to OKC public school and I don't recall a thing about overt religious teachings. ( I do recall a middle school class where we disected the Lord's Prayer as a lesson for how to interpret what is being read - like Beowulf vs. Eleanor Rigby). Second, I had many of my best OKC friends, including a wife, who went to your school at the same time and I never heard and thing about forced religious teachings (other than the Pledge of Allegience).

I would rather have my children taught about morals and ethics than taught to behave the way people behave to each other without those boundaries today. Humanity is such that guidelines can be given but then perverted to suit one's personal beliefs. Christianity teaches people not to judge others, yet Christians are some of the most judgemental people out there. At the same time, the left preaches inclusiveness and diversity yet the left despises anything oriented to the right. I see it in you just from your opening statement of "teaching morals and other crazy crap." The fact you don't go out murdering and raping come from taught morals. There are those who have grown up not having those guidelines and don't recognize that is is not cool to blow someone's head off with a .45 when it suits them.

Debate could go on for years about exactly what morals are, but at the very least, they are rules of life to live by. Ethics classes are taught (though less and less) to teach people in business how to behave, what is right and what is not. If Ethics classes were taught more often, our corporate leaders might not be so married to greed and hoarding and more open to sharing with their employees

I am fully in favor of state and religion being separate. I am not the least bit religious but I values taught by religions of all types and the right of people to practice religion because that is why this country was created.

The right is as guilty of hypocritical rhetoric as you claim, but the left is just as guilty. The left has gone to a system where there are no principles. You can't do or say anything that is anti-female or racist - except where it comes to Jews. (Edit, referencing the freshman Congresswoman from Detroit). Being wealthy is a sin but the party is being bought by Bezos, Steyer and Bloomberg (edit, not making reference to their heritage, just their actions). Capitalism gave this country everything it has become, but the left is moving rapidly, and ignorantly in a race to socialism.

You're buying a weekly newspaper that (for Oklahoma) is outspoken in it's opinion. Do you think you'd be able to say anything but kiss the feet of the government in Venezuela? Do you think you'd be able to say some of the things said even in Europe?

My son's high school has several outspoken teachers who are overtly anti-capitalism. He is remarkably level-headed and I make a great effort not to criticize his teachers but I do make an effort to offset some of the things they teach by showing where they are simply wrong.

As for Gallogly, I don't know him but if OU is endangered financially, then he needs to fix it - no matter the reason, whether tax changes or decreased funding from the state. If he tries to turn it into a Southern Baptist Seminary, then I have a problem with it. If Boren is suspected of molesting or making sexual advances on some student then it should be investigated though he is now gone.

We are getting way too political here but it's hard to separate out those issues from Gallogly, the regents and what is driving all this at OU.

Lol did mugofbeer just complain that you can't be anti-female or racist anymore? Then complain about antisemitism by complaining that rich Jews are buying a political party? Fox News is a helluva drug.

Lol did mugofbeer just complain that you can't be anti-female or racist anymore? Then complain about antisemitism by complaining that rich Jews are buying a political party? Fox News is a helluva drug.

Yes he DID!

Hey know it all, how could we have put forth a real solution to a problem that 99.9% of us who graduated prior to 2012 didn’t know existed? While i was there we had a multicultural chair and did events with the ethnic fraternities and sororities on campus or had a speaker once a month. We weren’t perfect by any means but it was hardly a racist organization. There was no institutional racism in our chapter and the issues that caused all of this were going on for 3 years out of 106 at OU. No one had even heard that chant at OU until the fall of 2011. That’s why so many of us were mad at how Boren handled it. The first time the sae board and the alumni were made aware that the actives had learned and were singing that was when it happened and we were being kicked off campus and we were as disgusted and disappointed as everyone else.

And the fraternity did voluntarily close...the national fraternity closed the chapter the night before Boren went on his over the top, grandstanding media rant the next day saying that he expelled a bunch of people who had withdrawn and was kicking sae off campus even though we had already voluntarily closed the chapter. Boren did what he needed to do to a point but we hate him for going out and literally calling all of us racists and going over the top without due process. We were kicked off campus for longer than a fraternity that literally let one of its pledges die of alcohol poisoning in the basement, do you realize how absurd that is?

As far as the thread title goes...call it what you want, it is fact. You don’t have to like it but that doesn’t make it any less true.

As a member of said fraternity this is 100% false.

Yes he DID!

Sorry, I wrote that part badly, that isn't exactly how I meant it to come off. I will edit and stop the FoxNews crap. I don't even watch it. I've edited somewhat.

We are getting way too political here but it's hard to separate out those issues from Gallogly, the regents and what is driving all this at OU.

Possibly, but the debate is political. You're making it a right-wing, left-wing issue. He happens to be a conservative who has been given a job to do. If there is blame, blame the regents, the state and the tax law changes. This wouldn't be happening if there were adequate funding for the school.

This whole thing is a direct function of the strong polarizing political views; an obvious and deliberate backlash against the past president and a broader demonization of education and educators that has been strongly promoted by the current administration and his followers.

This is fact not a left/right issue but is being made into one.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is socialist lefty!"; no matter you are talking to a life-long Republican.

I'm sorry, Pete, but your entire post #740 is political. You didn't start it but, like me, you contributed then said we're getting way too political. I admit, I don't know the background happenings but from what I have seen here and read, I see Gallogly as being a hired hatchet man to do what needs to be done to get the school back on sound financial footings. I truly wish OU was like UT or Harvard or Stanford and had billions in donated funds, but we don't. I also see a beautiful campus with what seem to be wonderful facilities both in Norman and at OUHSC, I don't want to see that destroyed either, because starting this summer, I get to start paying into the system for my child. This seems to be more issues of a hatchet man, dislikable personality and financial problems. Not politics.

In Plato’s Republic, man is good when he uses reason to control his actions and turns bad when he discards reason. A man that ignores reason will become overcome by unchecked desires that can have detrimental consequences. By mastering our use of reason, we can better obtain harmony and self-control.

Similarly as said in the Apology, Socrates’ call to live examined lives allows our reasoning abilities to direct our thoughts and actions instead of relying simply on our impulses which can often lead us astray. Instead, by controlling our stubborn appetites through reason and acting accordingly for the common good, one would obtain eudaemonia.

In Plato’s Republic, four virtues lead to harmony in an ideal society. These four cardinal virtues were: wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice.
Individuals, those who lack self-restraint will not achieve a flourishing life because their excesses and lack of self-regulation will lead to a life full of vice and chaos.

It is no surprise that modern psychology research finds that people who lack temperance have worse academic performance, more likely to abuse alcohol and drugs, are more likely to have mental illnesses, and have more conflicts in relationships.

Aristotle said that intellectual virtues could be taught, but the virtue of character required an individual to act it out to make it a habit. If you do the right things over and over, you will develop and possess these virtuous traits

https://bzandmd.blog/2018/01/28/how-to-live-a-flourishing-life-according-to-plato-and-aristotle/
“not exact, but: the two most important questions are; who will teach the children? what they teach them?”― Plato
40 years ago children /students were taught to conform to standards or face serious consequences...This wasn’t always fun or even justified but at the other end of this are the standards for behavior in our schools that have become much lower according to many older educators.

What they are being taught is not the same, in part because the education of the younger educators has substantially been watered down. As a result kids are not the same... they are too often not made to do the right things over and over.... we are teaching more kids than ever how to be a snowflake and that its ok if you are... some of them post here, some of them have graduated from a college in recent years.

When the head educators cannot practice self-restraint / self-regulation, the results are seen with sky rocketing education cost, massive student debt, out of control waist. and more...This is occurring at most universities. Students and facility are so addicted that say they want more of it...Usually this comes from the people who are lacking in logic and are in the degree programs who have some of the very poorest job prospects. Our entire educational system is basically broken we see a large amount of denial and dishonesty about it and not just here...


PS: I hope the changes that OKCPS are about to make will contribute to a turning of the tide in this broken system.

It's a political issue. It shouldn't be, but it is. Lifelong Republican here.

As I said earlier in the thread somewhere, it's pretty clear that Gallogly has been sent in with a mission to smash Boren's legacy. It's being done because some movers and shakers see Boren (who was always a moderate Democrat) as being in league with the far left. They hate that and they want to vilify him.

It's terrible for the university, and I wish they would stop it.

Now, unlike most of the Boren defenders in this thread, I say that there is a problem nationwide. There's a growing trend of ultra-lefties pushing ultra-lefty ideas in many public universities. It has really flared up in the last couple years, and has been covered by conservative media sources (and yes, it's real, and not made up). While it doesn't appear to be happening at OU, I think Boren was seen by some people as sympathetic to it. And that's what gave us Gallogly. It's a severe over-reaction, but that's why it happened.

It's a political issue. It shouldn't be, but it is. Lifelong Republican here.

As I said earlier in the thread somewhere, it's pretty clear that Gallogly has been sent in with a mission to smash Boren's legacy. It's being done because some movers and shakers see Boren (who was always a moderate Democrat) as being in league with the far left. They hate that and they want to vilify him.

It's terrible for the university, and I wish they would stop it.

Now, unlike most of the Boren defenders in this thread, I say that there is a problem nationwide. There's a growing trend of ultra-lefties pushing ultra-lefty ideas in many public universities. It has really flared up in the last couple years, and has been covered by conservative media sources (and yes, it's real, and not made up). While it doesn't appear to be happening at OU, I think Boren was seen by some people as sympathetic to it. And that's what gave us Gallogly. It's a severe over-reaction, but that's why it happened.

Nah, only Oklahoma. Hah jk

I have not read all this thread, but I do not believe you can ignore the fact that some very prominent and well connected parents of SAE students (now former students) truly hate Boren for his handling of that situation. I am not saying this is the biggest or only reason for the current situation, but I have a hard time believing it’s not a factor.

Looks like the people saying that Gallogly was behind the Boren investigation are going to need to find a new avenue of attack.
The OU BOR is in “complete support of Jim Gallogly as president of the university.” Due to their support and the strong support of others in elected office and major figures in the Oklahoma business community, Gallogly is in no danger of being removed from his job. He will IMHO leave OU only when he damn good and ready and long after most of his detractors have left OU.

https://newsok.com//article/5623510/university-of-oklahoma-regents-meet-in-closed-session-regarding-ongoing-personnel-issues?newsletter=&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=70104097&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8knuABlS8X3rBlkBEZetKWtFGEYA6i9JwrRMYUXgUlsYHcaE1J jQjYRKk8JzOUZ8Uwa8_s8NaqPIb1WgqcPjrMU6vM3A&_hsmi=70104097

The University of Oklahoma Board of Regents met in closed session for 2 1/2 hours Wednesday morning regarding "ongoing personnel issues" of a sensitive nature.

After the meeting, Chairman Leslie Rainbolt-Forbes said: "Our goal is to ensure the investigation’s integrity and any comment would be highly inappropriate, but what I can do and what
I specifically want to do is affirm this board’s complete support of Jim Gallogly as president of the university.

"Also let me make it clear that he did not initiate nor is he involved in this investigation, which is being conducted by an independent third party," Rainbolt-Forbes said.

Looks like the people saying that Gallogly was behind the Boren investigation are going to need to find a new avenue of attack.
The OU BOR is in “complete support of Jim Gallogly as president of the university.” Due to their support and the strong support of others in elected office and major figures in the Oklahoma business community, Gallogly is in no danger of being removed from his job. He will IMHO leave OU only when he damn good and ready and long after most of his detractors have left OU.

https://newsok.com//article/5623510/university-of-oklahoma-regents-meet-in-closed-session-regarding-ongoing-personnel-issues?newsletter=&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=70104097&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8knuABlS8X3rBlkBEZetKWtFGEYA6i9JwrRMYUXgUlsYHcaE1J jQjYRKk8JzOUZ8Uwa8_s8NaqPIb1WgqcPjrMU6vM3A&_hsmi=70104097

The University of Oklahoma Board of Regents met in closed session for 2 1/2 hours Wednesday morning regarding "ongoing personnel issues" of a sensitive nature.

After the meeting, Chairman Leslie Rainbolt-Forbes said: "Our goal is to ensure the investigation’s integrity and any comment would be highly inappropriate, but what I can do and what
I specifically want to do is affirm this board’s complete support of Jim Gallogly as president of the university.

"Also let me make it clear that he did not initiate nor is he involved in this investigation, which is being conducted by an independent third party," Rainbolt-Forbes said.

To be fair to them, what else would the board say?

I'm sorry, Pete, but your entire post #740 is political. You didn't start it but, like me, you contributed then said we're getting way too political. I admit, I don't know the background happenings but from what I have seen here and read, I see Gallogly as being a hired hatchet man to do what needs to be done to get the school back on sound financial footings. I truly wish OU was like UT or Harvard or Stanford and had billions in donated funds, but we don't. I also see a beautiful campus with what seem to be wonderful facilities both in Norman and at OUHSC, I don't want to see that destroyed either, because starting this summer, I get to start paying into the system for my child. This seems to be more issues of a hatchet man, dislikable personality and financial problems. Not politics.

I get what you mean but OU is no pauper either with a $1.65 billion endowment (second only to UT in the Big 12)

There's a growing trend of ultra-lefties pushing ultra-lefty ideas in many public universities. It has really flared up in the last couple years, and has been covered by conservative media sources (and yes, it's real, and not made up). While it doesn't appear to be happening at OU, I think Boren was seen by some people as sympathetic to it. And that's what gave us Gallogly. It's a severe over-reaction, but that's why it happened.

The only thing that's changed is right-wing media infatuation and amplification of this issue. And conservatives are buying it and spreading it more. Universities have always had a left bent. Always. This is literally nothing new. But there are also conservative strongholds on most campuses (e.g., business, sciences). And guess what, I've seen liberal professors completely excluded from these departments, which often completely lack diversity. Have you ever asked black scholars what it's like on university campuses? Their views and lives are constantly challenged and results in high turnover. These notions of censorship of conservative views are absurd. I work at a university with lots of conservatives. I've worked in conservative dominated departments that actually did revolt to liberal views, including deeply racist behaviors. I had a colleague who is a professor say "we're not hiring blacks because we did that once and it didn't work out." My administration is conservative. Donald Trump Jr. just spoke at our university in the midst of all these controversies. Quit spreading this nonsense.

To be fair to them, what else would the board say?

To be fair to them..... These are very capable, highly intelligent, honest and extremely reputable people who I would fully expect to indicate exactly how they feel on such matters....in the appropriate form.

Much to the chagrin of some here they fully did that. They aren’t changing their minds and neither will any of the new members of the OU BOR for decades to come!

To be fair to them..... These are very capable, highly intelligent, honest and extremely reputable people who I would fully expect to indicate exactly how they feel on such matters....in the appropriate form.

Much to the chagrin of some here they fully did that. They aren’t changing their minds and neither will any of the new members of the OU BOR for decades to come!

Really Laugh out Loud.!!! Those adjectives you use to describe those bafoon are hilarious

The only thing that's changed is right-wing media infatuation and amplification of this issue. And conservatives are buying it and spreading it more. Universities have always had a left bent. Always. This is literally nothing new. But there are also conservative strongholds on most campuses (e.g., business, sciences). And guess what, I've seen liberal professors completely excluded from these departments, which often completely lack diversity. Have you ever asked black scholars what it's like on university campuses? Their views and lives are constantly challenged and results in high turnover. These notions of censorship of conservative views are absurd. I work at a university with lots of conservatives. I've worked in conservative dominated departments that actually did revolt to liberal views, including deeply racist behaviors. I had a colleague who is a professor say "we're not hiring blacks because we did that once and it didn't work out." My administration is conservative. Donald Trump Jr. just spoke at our university in the midst of all these controversies. Quit spreading this nonsense.
+1

More bad news everyday... it feels like the Gallogly administration is the Titanic and the Board of Regents have accepted (or are cheering on) the sinking ship: https://kfor.com/2019/02/20/ou-professor-resigns-from-toxic-environment-after-requesting-the-same-pay-as-male-colleague/amp/

BTW, if true, this is some BS.

More bad news everyday... it feels like the Gallogly administration is the Titanic and the Board of Regents have accepted (or are cheering on) the sinking ship: https://kfor.com/2019/02/20/ou-professor-resigns-from-toxic-environment-after-requesting-the-same-pay-as-male-colleague/amp/

BTW, if true, this is some BS.

So let me get this straight...

So its Gallogly's fault that she was underpaid during Boren's tenure....

More bad news everyday... it feels like the Gallogly administration is the Titanic and the Board of Regents have accepted (or are cheering on) the sinking ship: https://kfor.com/2019/02/20/ou-professor-resigns-from-toxic-environment-after-requesting-the-same-pay-as-male-colleague/amp/

BTW, if true, this is some BS.

Sounds like she should’ve been given a raise but at the same time, she’s been at the school for a long time and only 6 months of that have been under Gallogly. Boren was supposedly the king of fairness, so why wasn’t she being paid equal to her male counter parts under his administration. Why did she just now decide to ask for a raise under a new administration that it’s seems was basically brought in to balance the books?

This is the kind of thing that makes it difficult for me to side with the academic types at OU right now. Just like Grillott...everything is big bad Gallogly’s fault.

So let me get this straight...

So its Gallogly's fault that she was underpaid during Boren's tenure....

Where are you pulling that info out of?

^

What is absolutely, 100% Gallogly's fault is presenting himself as a complete jackass and airing a lot of dirty laundry in public.

Regardless of any problems that need fixing (and that is always, always the case when someone new takes over a large institution after decades under one regime) the guy is completely ruining the reputation of the university.

It's very clear that the regents and Gallogly are more concerned about tearing down Boren and his legacy than doing what is right for the school. And that was obvious before he ever even took office and that point was raised then and there by many of us.

And look where we are now. ALL of this could be handled much better and almost every single week there is yet another public scandal dragging down the rep of the university.

To be fair to them..... These are very capable, highly intelligent, honest and extremely reputable people who I would fully expect to indicate exactly how they feel on such matters....in the appropriate form.

Much to the chagrin of some here they fully did that. They aren’t changing their minds and neither will any of the new members of the OU BOR for decades to come!

They read the statements prepared by the legal counsel very well. What else would they say? It will be the consistent talking point...until it isn’t.

Really Laugh out Loud.!!! Those adjectives you use to describe those bafoon are hilarious
I am embarrassed for you.^

^

What is absolutely, 100% Gallogly's fault is presenting himself as a complete jackass and airing a lot of dirty laundry in public.

Regardless of any problems that need fixing (and that is always, always the case when someone new takes over a large institution after decades under one regime) the guy is completely ruining the reputation of the university.

It's very clear that the regents and Gallogly are more concerned about tearing down Boren and his legacy than doing what is right for the school. And that was obvious before he ever even took office and that point was raised then and there by many of us.

And look where we are now. ALL of this could be handled much better and almost every single week there is yet another public scandal dragging down the rep of the university.

Remember .... when Gallogly was interview he promised complete transparency to the OU BOR and others within legal boundaries. This has been publicly reaffirmed several times since...This was a major reason why he was hired. Transparency is exactly what we are now witnessing.

Exposure of a system’s excesses that did not maximize OU’s potential value to our state builds an environment where reform and corrections can be better made. This is what the OU power brokers want at virtually all major levels and with a lot more to come it’s what they will be receiving....like it or not!

^

Every bit of that could be accomplished without dragging the university and it's hard-ended rep down into the mud.

And frankly, this 'like or not' mantra is absurd. OU is a public university and has hundreds of thousands of alumni and people who give and care about it. It's not a dictatorship, and this type of authorianism thinking is dangerous and anti-democratic, no matter it may accomplish some pesonal short-term goals.

It's a political issue. It shouldn't be, but it is. Lifelong Republican here.

As I said earlier in the thread somewhere, it's pretty clear that Gallogly has been sent in with a mission to smash Boren's legacy. It's being done because some movers and shakers see Boren (who was always a moderate Democrat) as being in league with the far left. They hate that and they want to vilify him.

It's terrible for the university, and I wish they would stop it.

Now, unlike most of the Boren defenders in this thread, I say that there is a problem nationwide. There's a growing trend of ultra-lefties pushing ultra-lefty ideas in many public universities. It has really flared up in the last couple years, and has been covered by conservative media sources (and yes, it's real, and not made up). While it doesn't appear to be happening at OU, I think Boren was seen by some people as sympathetic to it. And that's what gave us Gallogly. It's a severe over-reaction, but that's why it happened.


If this is really happening and not made up, why are you not able to point to any examples of the types of ultra-lefty ideas and policies you are referring to or give any examples of universities where those policies are being implemented? This is at least the third time you have brought up something about "ultra-lefty ideas" or a "hard slant to the left" in this thread. What are you talking about?

What ultra-left policies? Where are they being implemented?

So let me get this straight...

So its Gallogly's fault that she was underpaid during Boren's tenure....

That's fine and all, but for all we know she could have been hired at a higher wage than her male counterparts under Boren. I/we have no idea. All of that is pure speculation.

What ISNT speculation is that her mistreatment DID happen under Gallogly. Its not hard. She deserves to paid equally, assuming she is equally qualified. Done. Pay her.

But they, Gallogly, didn't okay that. That wasn't Boren. This is all where my frustration with Gallogly comes from. It's just all of this dirty laundry is being aired under him. By him and against him. I fully understand and am aware of why he was made President but it's been a total misfire.

Another interesting update in this saga as well:

http://www.oudaily.com/news/former-dean-pursuing-litigation-against-ou-for-violation-of-first/article_8cf1c394-35f4-11e9-830d-0791dd77d096.html

15166

If this is really happening and not made up, why are you not able to point to any examples of the types of ultra-lefty ideas and policies you are referring to or give any examples of universities where those policies are being implemented? This is at least the third time you have brought up something about "ultra-lefty ideas" or a "hard slant to the left" in this thread. What are you talking about?

What ultra-left policies? Where are they being implemented?
The truth! You want the truth? SON, YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
😎

^

What is absolutely, 100% Gallogly's fault is presenting himself as a complete jackass and airing a lot of dirty laundry in public.

Regardless of any problems that need fixing (and that is always, always the case when someone new takes over a large institution after decades under one regime) the guy is completely ruining the reputation of the university.

It's very clear that the regents and Gallogly are more concerned about tearing down Boren and his legacy than doing what is right for the school. And that was obvious before he ever even took office and that point was raised then and there by many of us.

And look where we are now. ALL of this could be handled much better and almost every single week there is yet another public scandal dragging down the rep of the university.

Exactly

^

Every bit of that could be accomplished without dragging the university and it's hard-ended rep down into the mud.

And frankly, this 'like or not' mantra is absurd. OU is a public university and has hundreds of thousands of alumni and people who give and care about it. It's not a dictatorship, and this type of authorianism thinking is dangerous and anti-democratic, no matter it may accomplish some pesonal short-term goals.

You are correct in that OU is a public university and has hundreds of thousands of alumni and friends who give and care about it. It’s fortunate however IMO that a strong majority of these people + OU leadership at several levels want OU operating with more integrity than what Boren had OU operating OU with.

OU is now far less of a dictatorship. Everyone paying attention now knows far more about how poorly OU had been operated. They now see changes and golds more clearly defined.

They see better financial management in place with more on the way. They see far more attention to detail
It would be exceptionally naive to believe the needed major changes to the states most loved entity could occur in a vacuum...Honest people working on behalf of the public always want as much transparency as the rules/ laws allow.

This is no short term deal. I am told there are people at other universities who are closely watching events at OU in hopes of discovering ways of implementing major reforms at their own universities.

The more everyone including the voting public understands why OU needs to make major changes the more effective and lasting these changes are likely to be..... Thus increasing the rate of return to the state, community, students and even facility..... This would be pretty tough without transparency by OU leaders.

It’s a pure shame that OU is forced to go through this mess but one thing that is unmistakably clear....Had Boren been performing his duties well, particularly in his last 10 years people like you wouldn’t be embarrassed. Sadly, this is very much a.... like it or not type of deal.

It's a political issue. It shouldn't be, but it is. Lifelong Republican here.

As I said earlier in the thread somewhere, it's pretty clear that Gallogly has been sent in with a mission to smash Boren's legacy. It's being done because some movers and shakers see Boren (who was always a moderate Democrat) as being in league with the far left. They hate that and they want to vilify him.

It's terrible for the university, and I wish they would stop it.

Now, unlike most of the Boren defenders in this thread, I say that there is a problem nationwide. There's a growing trend of ultra-lefties pushing ultra-lefty ideas in many public universities. It has really flared up in the last couple years, and has been covered by conservative media sources (and yes, it's real, and not made up). While it doesn't appear to be happening at OU, I think Boren was seen by some people as sympathetic to it. And that's what gave us Gallogly. It's a severe over-reaction, but that's why it happened.




If this is really happening and not made up, why are you not able to point to any examples of the types of ultra-lefty ideas and policies you are referring to or give any examples of universities where those policies are being implemented? This is at least the third time you have brought up something about "ultra-lefty ideas" or a "hard slant to the left" in this thread. What are you talking about?

What ultra-left policies? Where are they being implemented?


The truth! You want the truth? SON, YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
😎

Haha! These universities with ultra-left policies must exist in the same universe as the ultra-right universities that force students into manual labor to maintain the campus landscaping.

Soonerheart,

AGAIN, this all could be done without the grandstanding, chest-beating, finger-pointing and general ham-handedness.

All of that is completely contrary to the ostensible goals of making OU better.


It's very clear you have some personal stake in all of this and for integrity's sake, you should reveal what that is.

So let me get this straight...

So its Gallogly's fault that she was underpaid during Boren's tenure....

I didn't say whose fault it was, but just that there's bad news coming out of OU everyday. I have no doubt there was sexism under Boren and Gallogly because unless an administration is really intentional, and most aren't, sexism and racism reign under college and departmental leadership. Just more bad news that paints OU in a bad light. That's all I was saying. I should have been clearer about that point.

Soonerheart,

AGAIN, this all could be done without the grandstanding, chest-beating, finger-pointing and general ham-handedness.

All of that is completely contrary to the ostensible goals of making OU better.


It's very clear you have some personal stake in all of this and for integrity's sake, you should reveal what that is.
This has become totally personal for Soonerheart. He obviously is a spokesperson for Gallogy and/or the Uber right wing political group in this state. Take it for what it is... propaganda. He is Gallogly’s Baghdad Bob. He is feeling emboldened and hoping the investigation turns up something awful to rally the base against those commies at OU.

If this is really happening and not made up, why are you not able to point to any examples of the types of ultra-lefty ideas and policies you are referring to or give any examples of universities where those policies are being implemented? This is at least the third time you have brought up something about "ultra-lefty ideas" or a "hard slant to the left" in this thread. What are you talking about?

What ultra-left policies? Where are they being implemented?

If I haven't responded to someone's question, it's probably because I've got about half the people in this thread on ignore. Sometimes there'll be like 9 posts in a row that are blacked out. But the answer to your question really belongs in the politics subforum, not here.