[BostonCard]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=12253.msg120632#msg120632 date=1434321321]
I think it's a shame that someone with her impressive credentials can be dismissed, or marginalized, because of prejudices stemming from distortions of her record.  Reasonable disagreements can arise with regard to her depicted role(s) in the Bush Administration, but I do not believe anyone can credibly argue that she was incompetent.  On the contrary, I personally think more highly of her for the way in which she handled herself.  She demonstrated integrity and forthrightness, among other admirable traits in what was surely a seriously stressful environment.  Why can't we all just get along?  :(

Most of the reasons that she's controversial among faculty predate her time in the Bush Administration, and have absolutely nothing to do with national politics.  She made many enemies during her time as provost at Stanford.  Depending on whom you talk with, you'll hear very different stories about why that is.  Some faculty will say that anyone who makes tough decisions makes enemies.  Some will say that she was autocratic, didn't listen, and made bad decisions.  I don't know enough to judge, though I will say that I've heard more complaints about her than about any Stanford provost before or since.
[/quote]

Yes, I agree.  As a student at the time, she was not exactly loved by the students. She was certainly a polarizing figure, beyond her political perspective. That may not have been her fault; the President and Provost sometimes have to play good cop/bad cop, and Casper left a lot to be desired as President.  I will say this for Condi, she's been a steadfast supporter of Stanford athletics in general and football in particular.  She also is most certainly qualified, former provost, former Secretary of State, and a long and distinguished academic career.  The job of University President would almost certainly test her diplomatic mettle.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=12253.msg120632#msg120632 date=1434321321]
I think it's a shame that someone with her impressive credentials can be dismissed, or marginalized, because of prejudices stemming from distortions of her record.  Reasonable disagreements can arise with regard to her depicted role(s) in the Bush Administration, but I do not believe anyone can credibly argue that she was incompetent.  On the contrary, I personally think more highly of her for the way in which she handled herself.  She demonstrated integrity and forthrightness, among other admirable traits in what was surely a seriously stressful environment.  Why can't we all just get along?  :(

Most of the reasons that she's controversial among faculty predate her time in the Bush Administration, and have absolutely nothing to do with national politics.  She made many enemies during her time as provost at Stanford.  Depending on whom you talk with, you'll hear very different stories about why that is.  Some faculty will say that anyone who makes tough decisions makes enemies.  Some will say that she was autocratic, didn't listen, and made bad decisions.  I don't know enough to judge, though I will say that I've heard more complaints about her than about any Stanford provost before or since.
[/quote]

Yes, I agree.  As a student at the time, she was not exactly loved by the students. She was certainly a polarizing figure, beyond her political perspective. That may not have been her fault; the President and Provost sometimes have to play good cop/bad cop, and Casper left a lot to be desired as President.  I will say this for Condi, she's been a steadfast supporter of Stanford athletics in general and football in particular.  She also is most certainly qualified, former provost, former Secretary of State, and a long and distinguished academic career.  The job of University President would almost certainly test her diplomatic mettle.

BC