Any other alums who think their school has gone off the deep end?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SLAC has gone crazy left and doesn't even tolerate conservative or republican points of view. So I don't give. That doesn't mean much in of itself but there are sufficient alumni who feel this way such as it has really made the endowment suffer. The other problem is that the institution went from highly selective to almost 50% selectivity rate -
due to lack of quality applications - which just disgusts a lot of alums. It was once a great school but no longer is.

I'm having a hard time coming up with any SLACs that used to be highly selective but now have a 50% admission rate. So I'm going to call this one fake news.

Well, off the top of my head there's Occidental College. It used to be on the same level as Pomona and Stanford in California. Now it has a 45+% acceptance rate.

When was Occidental on the same level as Stanford and Pomona?

On and off since 1907. In 1907 Oxy produced its first Rhodes. Pomona then suggested they combine into one college. Oxy turned Pomona down. Oxy then produced 9 more Rhodes Scholars. In the early 70s it was highly competitive. Most students applied also to Pomona, Stanford as well as Oxy (fewer California students went east then so the selections in California for a top student were not as great as they are today) and UCLA. USC was considered a third-rate party school, and Pitzer even lower. The joke about USC was that the students stood in line the first day comparing notes as to their test scores and when UCLA turned them down. Much has changed.

So Occidental was last highly competitive (stats to verify that?) approximately 45 years ago, but it's fall has been the result of social awareness from the last 5-10 years?

That's not how that works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to Notre Dame for undergrad. No. In fact one of the things I liked most about it was that it's very politically diverse. Like, a 50/50 split which is pretty rare at colleges these days. I liked being in an environment where there really was people on all along the political spectrum not just "liberal" to "practically communist."

And then I went to Yale for law school and yeah...that one's gone a little far. No money to them.

I really respect the way some ND students walked out at graduation. They got to protest his policies, but let other students and their families appreciate the special day. Back in the day I saw it as a conservative school, but now I would encourage my children to attend.

It was rude and disrespectful. If you are going to do that, just don't go at all. Or do like the rest of us do, sit through interminable boring lefty speeches with a polite look on our faces. I know a number of ND families thought that move to be just too pointed and rude and I agree.

“How much did Mike Pence’s NFL walkout cost taxpayers?”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-much-did-mike-pences-nfl-walkout-cost-taxpayers-2017-10-08

Thank you.


What Pence got at ND was totally in line with the disrespect he's shown the nation and humanity.

Oh grow the f up. Vice President Pence is a fine man. You are an irrational person who can't deal with the fact that Hillary lost. GTFU.

Are you serous?! Pence is a fine man? Really? He is an ignorant, creepy, heartless and sadistic jesus freak. That is all he is.

Please document.

His opposition to abortion is a virtual obsession: He pushed Indiana’s new law, stayed by a federal judge, which bans abortion for disabled fetuses and requires women who’ve had abortions or miscarriages, no matter how early, to arrange for either burial or cremation of the remains.

Pence co-sponsored Todd Akin’s infamous anti-abortion bill that would have redefined rape as “forcible rape.” (It would have allowed hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women who would die without the care — and the only exception would have been cases of “forcible” rape.)

In a letter to the editor of Indianapolis Star, Pence argued that households with two working parents are under a spell of "the big lie that 'Mom doesn't matter.'" This expert asserted that having both parents work would lead to “stunted emotional growth” in their children.

As governor, Pence signed a contract to take $3.5 million from the state’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides aid to low-income families, and gave it to the Pennsylvania-based anti-abortion group “Real Alternatives,” that lies to women to “actively promote childbirth instead of abortion.” The contract is clear: It says reps from the anti-abortion group should spread its message to pregnancy centers, as well as adoption and social services agencies, "so more women can be served and fewer abortions chosen."

Pence was an up-and-coming politico who accepted campaign donations from big tobacco. He also wrote a short, incendiary op-ed titled "The Great American Smoke Out," which insisted that "smoking doesn't kill," while conceding that it is "not good for you." Here's the key excerpt: "Time for a quick reality check. Despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn't kill. In fact, 2 out of every three smokers does not die from a smoking related illness and 9 out of ten smokers do not contract lung cancer."

In 2002 Pence said that “...condoms are a very, very poor protection against sexually transmitted diseases,” and using condoms as a solution to STDs was “too modern.”

As governor, Pence signed a law to legalize discrimination against LGBTQ people: The “religious freedom” law gave businesses the green light to discriminate against LGBTQ people on religious grounds. The law was criticized around the country: High-profile groups withdrew events from the state in protest, and businesses like Apple and Marriott condemned the law. Pence “revised” the law, but the controversy still cost the state at least $60 million.

In 2011, he led the fight to shut down the government over funding for Planned Parenthood, and as governor he cut Planned Parenthood funding in half from 2005 levels; that resulted in the closing of five non-abortion clinics that provided STD testing, and that helped fuel a rise in HIV infections so staggering it required federal intervention.

Np. I’m in full support of all of this. Still waiting for your claims that he pence is ignorant or evil or whatever else you said, just because he doesn’t agree with little you.

By the way, Hillary lost!!!

Not the same poster but he/she just gave you many examples of what you asked for. It is not a matter of whether we agree with him or not. His actions are evil and have caused unnecessary pain and anguish to many people who have done nothing wrong and are not harming anyone else. Just because you agree with them doesnt make them less evil and inhumane.

If you support all of this then you are just the same, rotten to the core and lacking basic humanity. You people are selfish and don't care that your absurd ideology inflicts great pain on others. No one is telling you how to live your life, but Pence and by extension you are essentially dictating to others just that. It doesn't affect you or concern you so back off. The hypocrisy is astounding.

Come off it with Hillary, it has been over a year. You got nothing better to say? Any accomplishments of Mr. Trump you wanna brag about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to Notre Dame for undergrad. No. In fact one of the things I liked most about it was that it's very politically diverse. Like, a 50/50 split which is pretty rare at colleges these days. I liked being in an environment where there really was people on all along the political spectrum not just "liberal" to "practically communist."

And then I went to Yale for law school and yeah...that one's gone a little far. No money to them.

I really respect the way some ND students walked out at graduation. They got to protest his policies, but let other students and their families appreciate the special day. Back in the day I saw it as a conservative school, but now I would encourage my children to attend.

It was rude and disrespectful. If you are going to do that, just don't go at all. Or do like the rest of us do, sit through interminable boring lefty speeches with a polite look on our faces. I know a number of ND families thought that move to be just too pointed and rude and I agree.

“How much did Mike Pence’s NFL walkout cost taxpayers?”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-much-did-mike-pences-nfl-walkout-cost-taxpayers-2017-10-08

Thank you.


What Pence got at ND was totally in line with the disrespect he's shown the nation and humanity.

Oh grow the f up. Vice President Pence is a fine man. You are an irrational person who can't deal with the fact that Hillary lost. GTFU.

Are you serous?! Pence is a fine man? Really? He is an ignorant, creepy, heartless and sadistic jesus freak. That is all he is.

Please document.

His opposition to abortion is a virtual obsession: He pushed Indiana’s new law, stayed by a federal judge, which bans abortion for disabled fetuses and requires women who’ve had abortions or miscarriages, no matter how early, to arrange for either burial or cremation of the remains.

Pence co-sponsored Todd Akin’s infamous anti-abortion bill that would have redefined rape as “forcible rape.” (It would have allowed hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women who would die without the care — and the only exception would have been cases of “forcible” rape.)

In a letter to the editor of Indianapolis Star, Pence argued that households with two working parents are under a spell of "the big lie that 'Mom doesn't matter.'" This expert asserted that having both parents work would lead to “stunted emotional growth” in their children.

As governor, Pence signed a contract to take $3.5 million from the state’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides aid to low-income families, and gave it to the Pennsylvania-based anti-abortion group “Real Alternatives,” that lies to women to “actively promote childbirth instead of abortion.” The contract is clear: It says reps from the anti-abortion group should spread its message to pregnancy centers, as well as adoption and social services agencies, "so more women can be served and fewer abortions chosen."

Pence was an up-and-coming politico who accepted campaign donations from big tobacco. He also wrote a short, incendiary op-ed titled "The Great American Smoke Out," which insisted that "smoking doesn't kill," while conceding that it is "not good for you." Here's the key excerpt: "Time for a quick reality check. Despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn't kill. In fact, 2 out of every three smokers does not die from a smoking related illness and 9 out of ten smokers do not contract lung cancer."

In 2002 Pence said that “...condoms are a very, very poor protection against sexually transmitted diseases,” and using condoms as a solution to STDs was “too modern.”

As governor, Pence signed a law to legalize discrimination against LGBTQ people: The “religious freedom” law gave businesses the green light to discriminate against LGBTQ people on religious grounds. The law was criticized around the country: High-profile groups withdrew events from the state in protest, and businesses like Apple and Marriott condemned the law. Pence “revised” the law, but the controversy still cost the state at least $60 million.

In 2011, he led the fight to shut down the government over funding for Planned Parenthood, and as governor he cut Planned Parenthood funding in half from 2005 levels; that resulted in the closing of five non-abortion clinics that provided STD testing, and that helped fuel a rise in HIV infections so staggering it required federal intervention.

Np. I’m in full support of all of this. Still waiting for your claims that he pence is ignorant or evil or whatever else you said, just because he doesn’t agree with little you.

By the way, Hillary lost!!!

Not the same poster but he/she just gave you many examples of what you asked for. It is not a matter of whether we agree with him or not. His actions are evil and have caused unnecessary pain and anguish to many people who have done nothing wrong and are not harming anyone else. Just because you agree with them doesnt make them less evil and inhumane.

If you support all of this then you are just the same, rotten to the core and lacking basic humanity. You people are selfish and don't care that your absurd ideology inflicts great pain on others. No one is telling you how to live your life, but Pence and by extension you are essentially dictating to others just that. It doesn't affect you or concern you so back off. The hypocrisy is astounding.

Come off it with Hillary, it has been over a year. You got nothing better to say? Any accomplishments of Mr. Trump you wanna brag about?

No need, the charming Mr. Pence has that covered: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/12/20/in-cabinet-meeting-pence-praises-trump-once-every-12-seconds-for-3-minutes-straight/?utm_term=.62daa3792a52

What a tool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scripps! Ultra-super lefty now. Gender studies everywhere.

Considering there was only 1 Gender Studies major in the recent graduating class of 205, I take it that you must not be very acquainted with your alma mater. Sad, really.

I went to Scripps. I feel like it’s always been consistently very very left

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SLAC has gone crazy left and doesn't even tolerate conservative or republican points of view. So I don't give. That doesn't mean much in of itself but there are sufficient alumni who feel this way such as it has really made the endowment suffer. The other problem is that the institution went from highly selective to almost 50% selectivity rate -
due to lack of quality applications - which just disgusts a lot of alums. It was once a great school but no longer is.

I'm having a hard time coming up with any SLACs that used to be highly selective but now have a 50% admission rate. So I'm going to call this one fake news.

Well, off the top of my head there's Occidental College. It used to be on the same level as Pomona and Stanford in California. Now it has a 45+% acceptance rate.

When was Occidental on the same level as Stanford and Pomona?

On and off since 1907. In 1907 Oxy produced its first Rhodes. Pomona then suggested they combine into one college. Oxy turned Pomona down. Oxy then produced 9 more Rhodes Scholars. In the early 70s it was highly competitive. Most students applied also to Pomona, Stanford as well as Oxy (fewer California students went east then so the selections in California for a top student were not as great as they are today) and UCLA. USC was considered a third-rate party school, and Pitzer even lower. The joke about USC was that the students stood in line the first day comparing notes as to their test scores and when UCLA turned them down. Much has changed.

So Occidental was last highly competitive (stats to verify that?) approximately 45 years ago, but it's fall has been the result of social awareness from the last 5-10 years?

That's not how that works.

Ignore PP.

Occidental has never remotely been a first tier CA school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to Notre Dame for undergrad. No. In fact one of the things I liked most about it was that it's very politically diverse. Like, a 50/50 split which is pretty rare at colleges these days. I liked being in an environment where there really was people on all along the political spectrum not just "liberal" to "practically communist."

And then I went to Yale for law school and yeah...that one's gone a little far. No money to them.

I really respect the way some ND students walked out at graduation. They got to protest his policies, but let other students and their families appreciate the special day. Back in the day I saw it as a conservative school, but now I would encourage my children to attend.

It was rude and disrespectful. If you are going to do that, just don't go at all. Or do like the rest of us do, sit through interminable boring lefty speeches with a polite look on our faces. I know a number of ND families thought that move to be just too pointed and rude and I agree.

“How much did Mike Pence’s NFL walkout cost taxpayers?”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-much-did-mike-pences-nfl-walkout-cost-taxpayers-2017-10-08

Thank you.


What Pence got at ND was totally in line with the disrespect he's shown the nation and humanity.

Oh grow the f up. Vice President Pence is a fine man. You are an irrational person who can't deal with the fact that Hillary lost. GTFU.

Yep, the man who admits he is utterly incapable of controlling himself around a woman if he's alone with her is a very fine man indeed.

If only Bill Clinton had been half as smart.

[Anonymous]

^Billy is not a jesus freak who dictates to other people how they should live their lives.That is good enough for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Billy is not a jesus freak who dictates to other people how they should live their lives.That is good enough for me.

No, he's just responsible for putting millions of black people in prison for life. Yay mass incarceration!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SLAC has gone crazy left and doesn't even tolerate conservative or republican points of view. So I don't give. That doesn't mean much in of itself but there are sufficient alumni who feel this way such as it has really made the endowment suffer. The other problem is that the institution went from highly selective to almost 50% selectivity rate -
due to lack of quality applications - which just disgusts a lot of alums. It was once a great school but no longer is.

I'm having a hard time coming up with any SLACs that used to be highly selective but now have a 50% admission rate. So I'm going to call this one fake news.

Well, off the top of my head there's Occidental College. It used to be on the same level as Pomona and Stanford in California. Now it has a 45+% acceptance rate.

When was Occidental on the same level as Stanford and Pomona?

On and off since 1907. In 1907 Oxy produced its first Rhodes. Pomona then suggested they combine into one college. Oxy turned Pomona down. Oxy then produced 9 more Rhodes Scholars. In the early 70s it was highly competitive. Most students applied also to Pomona, Stanford as well as Oxy (fewer California students went east then so the selections in California for a top student were not as great as they are today) and UCLA. USC was considered a third-rate party school, and Pitzer even lower. The joke about USC was that the students stood in line the first day comparing notes as to their test scores and when UCLA turned them down. Much has changed.

So Occidental was last highly competitive (stats to verify that?) approximately 45 years ago, but it's fall has been the result of social awareness from the last 5-10 years?

That's not how that works.

Ignore PP.

Occidental has never remotely been a first tier CA school.

The Occidental-Pomona gap has always been so interesting to me. One would think that Occidental, located an urban location in Los Angeles compared to boring suburban Claremont, would be more selective, but the differences are so stark between the two in most factors. They were both found in 1887 as co-ed schools with religious founders seeking to create a liberal arts college on the West Coast, and also designed by the same architect. Both are known for left-leaning student bodies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Billy is not a jesus freak who dictates to other people how they should live their lives.That is good enough for me.

No, he's just responsible for putting millions of black people in prison for life. Yay mass incarceration!

You think that may have something to do with the dramatic decline in murder rates under his watch?

Libs have gone so crazy left that apparently Clinton = Reagan in their little minds.

[Anonymous]

[b]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scripps! Ultra-super lefty now. Gender studies everywhere.

Considering there was only 1 Gender Studies major in the recent graduating class of 205, I take it that you must not be very acquainted with your alma mater. Sad, really.

I went to Scripps. I feel like it’s always been consistently very very left

I went there too, but it's gone way further left. When people invited to campus can't speak because of protests then it's time for me to stop giving money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SLAC has gone crazy left and doesn't even tolerate conservative or republican points of view. So I don't give. That doesn't mean much in of itself but there are sufficient alumni who feel this way such as it has really made the endowment suffer. The other problem is that the institution went from highly selective to almost 50% selectivity rate -
due to lack of quality applications - which just disgusts a lot of alums. It was once a great school but no longer is.

I'm having a hard time coming up with any SLACs that used to be highly selective but now have a 50% admission rate. So I'm going to call this one fake news.

Well, off the top of my head there's Occidental College. It used to be on the same level as Pomona and Stanford in California. Now it has a 45+% acceptance rate.

When was Occidental on the same level as Stanford and Pomona?

On and off since 1907. In 1907 Oxy produced its first Rhodes. Pomona then suggested they combine into one college. Oxy turned Pomona down. Oxy then produced 9 more Rhodes Scholars. In the early 70s it was highly competitive. Most students applied also to Pomona, Stanford as well as Oxy (fewer California students went east then so the selections in California for a top student were not as great as they are today) and UCLA. USC was considered a third-rate party school, and Pitzer even lower. The joke about USC was that the students stood in line the first day comparing notes as to their test scores and when UCLA turned them down. Much has changed.

So Occidental was last highly competitive (stats to verify that?) approximately 45 years ago, but it's fall has been the result of social awareness from the last 5-10 years?

That's not how that works.

Didn't say that and if you knew anything about the history of Oxy you would know that was a stupid remark. Oxy starting falling apart after a series of catastrophic presidents, weak boards and bad real estate investments. The last solid President was Richard Gilman. He maintained control of Oxy's liberal faculty. John Brooks Slaughter took over in 1988 and was disinterested and let the liberal faculty take over. The college also suffered catastrophic loses in real estate holding in Orange County, CA real estate and the mortgage bank crisis. The endowment never recovered from the Slaughter years. After Slaughter was shown the door, most alums, and certainly all republican and conservative families had stopped giving. Ted Mitchell and a conservative vice dean were brought in in 1999 to try and repair the endowment, get control of the faculty and repair relationships with conservative alums. Mitchell quite in frustration in 2005. After Mitchell, Susan Prager was president for one catastrophic year (2007-08) until she was shown the door. Jon Veitch was brought in in 2009 to try to regain control of the faculty and get alums to start giving again but has proven unpopular and has failed at both faculty control, alumni outreach and endowment effort. The school never recovered. Whereas the endowments of Pomona and Occidental were once equal, Pomona's endowment is $2 billion dollars. Occidental's endowment today is only $3371.1 million. Veitch recently started a campaign to push the endowment up to $400 million but had to cancel. Due to lack of funds, Occidental College's football program was scrapped this year (2017).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SLAC has gone crazy left and doesn't even tolerate conservative or republican points of view. So I don't give. That doesn't mean much in of itself but there are sufficient alumni who feel this way such as it has really made the endowment suffer. The other problem is that the institution went from highly selective to almost 50% selectivity rate -
due to lack of quality applications - which just disgusts a lot of alums. It was once a great school but no longer is.

I'm having a hard time coming up with any SLACs that used to be highly selective but now have a 50% admission rate. So I'm going to call this one fake news.

Well, off the top of my head there's Occidental College. It used to be on the same level as Pomona and Stanford in California. Now it has a 45+% acceptance rate.

When was Occidental on the same level as Stanford and Pomona?

On and off since 1907. In 1907 Oxy produced its first Rhodes. Pomona then suggested they combine into one college. Oxy turned Pomona down. Oxy then produced 9 more Rhodes Scholars. In the early 70s it was highly competitive. Most students applied also to Pomona, Stanford as well as Oxy (fewer California students went east then so the selections in California for a top student were not as great as they are today) and UCLA. USC was considered a third-rate party school, and Pitzer even lower. The joke about USC was that the students stood in line the first day comparing notes as to their test scores and when UCLA turned them down. Much has changed.

So Occidental was last highly competitive (stats to verify that?) approximately 45 years ago, but it's fall has been the result of social awareness from the last 5-10 years?

That's not how that works.

Didn't say that and if you knew anything about the history of Oxy you would know that was a stupid remark. Oxy starting falling apart after a series of catastrophic presidents, weak boards and bad real estate investments. The last solid President was Richard Gilman. He maintained control of Oxy's liberal faculty. John Brooks Slaughter took over in 1988 and was disinterested and let the liberal faculty take over. The college also suffered catastrophic loses in real estate holding in Orange County, CA real estate and the mortgage bank crisis. The endowment never recovered from the Slaughter years. After Slaughter was shown the door, most alums, and certainly all republican and conservative families had stopped giving. Ted Mitchell and a conservative vice dean were brought in in 1999 to try and repair the endowment, get control of the faculty and repair relationships with conservative alums. Mitchell quite in frustration in 2005. After Mitchell, Susan Prager was president for one catastrophic year (2007-08) until she was shown the door. Jon Veitch was brought in in 2009 to try to regain control of the faculty and get alums to start giving again but has proven unpopular and has failed at both faculty control, alumni outreach and endowment effort. The school never recovered. Whereas the endowments of Pomona and Occidental were once equal, Pomona's endowment is $2 billion dollars. Occidental's endowment today is only $3371.1 million. Veitch recently started a campaign to push the endowment up to $400 million but had to cancel. Due to lack of funds, Occidental College's football program was scrapped this year (2017).

What does this have to do with the subject of this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SLAC has gone crazy left and doesn't even tolerate conservative or republican points of view. So I don't give. That doesn't mean much in of itself but there are sufficient alumni who feel this way such as it has really made the endowment suffer. The other problem is that the institution went from highly selective to almost 50% selectivity rate -
due to lack of quality applications - which just disgusts a lot of alums. It was once a great school but no longer is.

I'm having a hard time coming up with any SLACs that used to be highly selective but now have a 50% admission rate. So I'm going to call this one fake news.

Well, off the top of my head there's Occidental College. It used to be on the same level as Pomona and Stanford in California. Now it has a 45+% acceptance rate.

When was Occidental on the same level as Stanford and Pomona?

On and off since 1907. In 1907 Oxy produced its first Rhodes. Pomona then suggested they combine into one college. Oxy turned Pomona down. Oxy then produced 9 more Rhodes Scholars. In the early 70s it was highly competitive. Most students applied also to Pomona, Stanford as well as Oxy (fewer California students went east then so the selections in California for a top student were not as great as they are today) and UCLA. USC was considered a third-rate party school, and Pitzer even lower. The joke about USC was that the students stood in line the first day comparing notes as to their test scores and when UCLA turned them down. Much has changed.

So Occidental was last highly competitive (stats to verify that?) approximately 45 years ago, but it's fall has been the result of social awareness from the last 5-10 years?

That's not how that works.

Didn't say that and if you knew anything about the history of Oxy you would know that was a stupid remark. Oxy starting falling apart after a series of catastrophic presidents, weak boards and bad real estate investments. The last solid President was Richard Gilman. He maintained control of Oxy's liberal faculty. John Brooks Slaughter took over in 1988 and was disinterested and let the liberal faculty take over. The college also suffered catastrophic loses in real estate holding in Orange County, CA real estate and the mortgage bank crisis. The endowment never recovered from the Slaughter years. After Slaughter was shown the door, most alums, and certainly all republican and conservative families had stopped giving. Ted Mitchell and a conservative vice dean were brought in in 1999 to try and repair the endowment, get control of the faculty and repair relationships with conservative alums. Mitchell quite in frustration in 2005. After Mitchell, Susan Prager was president for one catastrophic year (2007-08) until she was shown the door. Jon Veitch was brought in in 2009 to try to regain control of the faculty and get alums to start giving again but has proven unpopular and has failed at both faculty control, alumni outreach and endowment effort. The school never recovered. Whereas the endowments of Pomona and Occidental were once equal, Pomona's endowment is $2 billion dollars. Occidental's endowment today is only $3371.1 million. Veitch recently started a campaign to push the endowment up to $400 million but had to cancel. Due to lack of funds, Occidental College's football program was scrapped this year (2017).

What does this have to do with the subject of this thread?

"any other alums who think their school has gone off the deep end?" Yes, mine, Occidental has. It's gone off the deep end both politically and for the reason given immediately above.

[Anonymous]

I am mad that universities don't support the teachings of flat earth society. Why are they so afraid to teach college age students that there are 2 theories... a flat world and a round world.

I do contribute money to the flat earth society.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_flat_Earth_societies