President Heckler's Welcome Speech to New Students criticized

bbtds · September 27, 2017, 09:25:54 AM

I happened across this Letter to the Editor in this morning's (Wed) NWI Times while looking at it online.

http://www.nwitimes.com/opinion/letters/valpo-u-president-turned-welcoming-speech-into-anti-trump-rant/article_65044557-0447-5080-9bd2-a5122f8538ea.html

I had the opportunity to listen to Valparaiso University President Mark Heckler's speech to all the new students.

He started his speech off in a pleasant manner and progressively turned his welcome speech into his own political rally against President Donald Trump. I have never heard Trump endorse the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis or any other white supremacist organizations.

I am a retired firefighter and upset he took the right as a university president and so-called pillar of our community to be able to direct his own personal feelings on new independent young adults.

Shame on him. I really don't believe he has that right from that position, whether I supported or did not support our current president. I believe the freedom of speech is still alive but should not be used by someone in his position welcoming new students to higher education.

Tom Steindler, Valparaiso

https://www.facebook.com/tom.steindler

Is President Heckler too anti-Trump?

valpopal · September 27, 2017, 10:08:19 AM

This letter reflects similar views I have heard from others. I like Mark a lot, but he has one blind spot. When his public comments as the university president overtly include his personal liberal political positions, which are approved and applauded by the overwhelmingly liberal faculty or students in attendance, he risks alienating a percentage of other students and faculty, as well as many alumni and community members. The ironic and inadvertent consequence is that he adds to the atmosphere of polarization. Except for this one weakness, Mark is a great speaker.

crusader05 · September 27, 2017, 10:09:14 AM

I was there. He did mention the president once in reference to his comments on Charlottesville as he was talking about the importance of discourse. To call it an anti-trump rant would seem to infer that the president is beyond criticism in all ways and all times. He also talked about the importance of listening to new ideas and not shutting them out in reference to some issues on other campuses deplatforming conservative speakers. So if that was an anti-trump rant it was also an anti-liberal rant based on this editorial's standards

Dave_2010 · September 27, 2017, 10:29:26 AM

Full disclosure, I'm not a Trump supporter but also don't consider him an existential threat.

I've had limited interactions with Heckler, as well as semi-frequent conversations with university insiders (mentors still employed, board members in my social circle) who have dealt with him more often.

He always struck me as heavy on rhetoric, light on facts in the way he addresses difficult topics. The two best examples offhand being how he (mis)handled an incident with then-LCMS President Gerald Kieschnick in 2009-10(?) and how he communicated some of the school's recent debt issues to the board a couple of years back. Even his comments regarding the HL lawsuit smells of a similar brand of rhetoric.

Heckler seems like a shoot from the hip type, especially when he feels threatened. I don't know what he said, but the fact he felt the need to speak strongly doesn't surprise me at all. Trump is a threat to his worldview and he has responded in a way consistent with past behavior.

Should he know better? Absolutely. Particularly given the makeup of our donor base. But, it's part of the Mark Heckler package that comes with positive and negative aspects.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

crusader05 · September 27, 2017, 11:21:30 AM

I guess I dont get why the President of a private university cannot make a criticism that was being made by both Republicans and Democrats about the presidents recent words. Most of his time was spent talking about open dialogue and being able to hear people and that rudeness and hate have no place in constructive conversation. College is the real world. The students will hear both conservative and liberal politics in their time and I would hope that they will be able to understand that they may hear differing views than their own.

As I said, I was there and to qualify this as an anti-trump rant would only make sense if you believe that any criticism of the President of the United States is forbidden and a rant.

valpopal · September 27, 2017, 11:48:41 AM

I was there also. In his description of the purpose for the Opening Convocation, Mark stated: ""Opening Convocation is one of the primary opportunities for the entire Valpo family to come together...." I would like to believe that by "come together" he means more than just to congregate in the same building, and by "Valpo family" he means to be inclusive of all. Therefore, I would think common sense would dictate that he avoid making any clearly divisive political comments to incoming freshmen in this venue that creates an initial impression. As I have said, I like Mark a lot and I have seen him speak wonderfully many times in public or in private situations, but he does sometimes mistakenly inject personal political views in his official comments as university president, an office that ought to be impartial representative of all.

wh · September 27, 2017, 01:00:49 PM

The neo-communist movement of the far left has cleverly developed a false narrative that President Trump and anyone who supports his policies are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic and misogynistic. In turn, people like Heckler, whose very livelihoods depend on being perceived as champions of "inclusiveness," are "forced" to disavow any support for or association with Trump and his "basket of deplorables," for fear of being accused of complicity with their world view. The Heckler's of the world (including phony NFL owners foolishly kneeling alongside their players so as to not turn over their little apple carts) are nothing more than pawns and useful idiots for a much larger subversive cause. They're playing checkers inside a game of chess. Sad...

crusadermoe · September 28, 2017, 02:32:25 PM

Heckler has shown a strong and gratuitous liberal bias on many occasions. The Trump election is just a flash point that he thinks give him license to intensify it and impress people.

Heckler criticized George Bush by name in his 2008 inaugural speech. He was an easy target nearing the end of his 8th year. People can say what they will about GWB's Iraq decisions, but he was never a divisive figure. In fact he strongly spoke in defense of Muslims immediately after 9/11.

VULB#62 · September 28, 2017, 08:59:48 PM

Mark is also protecting the enrollment base. Like it or not, there is an important component of undergrad enrollment -- attracting foreign students. The current US administration's policies threaten at strategy. And changing the VU strategy suddenly is not something that is easily done. Part of that is, after decades, to swing almost 180 degrees is almost impossible in a short time span.

usc4valpo · September 29, 2017, 11:09:22 AM

Heckler's comments are very upsetting and something that should not reflect Valpo.

crusadermoe · September 29, 2017, 04:07:35 PM

As the leader of a private university. he is free to say what he wants to say. As a result, many parents, students, donors, and alumni are also free to walk away and many will. Maybe the remarks are meant to impress the faculty.

So what distinguishes Valpo these days from the hundreds of "progressive" private universities and liberal arts college? Have we decided to abandon the idea of differentiating ourselves in our country and just accelerate recruitment of international students who will take a "progressive" view of the U.S.?

Dave_2010 · September 29, 2017, 04:41:08 PM

Quote from: crusadermoe on September 29, 2017, 04:07:35 PM

So what distinguishes Valpo these days from the hundreds of "progressive" private universities and liberal arts college? Have we decided to abandon the idea of differentiating ourselves in our country and just accelerate recruitment of international students who will take a "progressive" view of the U.S.?

The one word answer to that question is "nothing." The momentum was rolling before Heckler's hiring, but the final nail in the coffin of Valpo as a truly unique institution and the self-styled meeting-place between "Athens and Jerusalem" was when the board chose to hire a career academic instead of a pastor to run the school.

OP is rolling in his grave.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

vu84v2 · September 30, 2017, 12:28:45 AM

I'll admit that I have not seen an actual transcript of Mark Heckler's speech, but (based on the previous comments in this thread) are his comments any different from these words delivered today as part of a powerful speech by the leader of another university? (though Mark Heckler was likely not as direct)

If you can't treat someone with dignity and respect, then you need to get out. If you can't treat someone from another gender, whether that's a man or a woman, with dignity and respect, then you need to get out. If you demean someone in any way, then you need to get out. And if you can't treat someone from another race, or different color skin, with dignity and respect, then you need to get out.

The appropriate response for horrible language and horrible ideas — is a better idea.

We draw people from all races and from all walks of life, all parts of the country, all genders and upbringings. The power of that diversity comes together and makes us that much more powerful. That's a much better idea than small thinking and horrible ideas.

Those words were delivered today by Lt. General Jay Silveria, Leader of the United States Air Force Academy. Now think about that before you go off and criticize someone for stressing the importance of inclusion in a university.

Oh, and one other thing: General Silveria displayed more leadership in that speech than Donald Trump has during his entire presidency.

usc4valpo · September 30, 2017, 07:52:48 PM

Heckler has a right to say what he wants, but with that right is responsibility. Valpo is a middle sized, good academic university. Those on the opposite side of the political spectrum want free public education, and if that ever happens Valpo will have an even more difficult time maintaining enrollment numbers that they encounter today.

Also, there are obviously many that support Trump and tend to be on the right, and historically Valpo has been successful in enrolling students in that group.

vu84v2 · October 01, 2017, 08:58:06 AM

usc4valpo - I would argue that Valpo is a very good academic university compared to its peers and when comparing the quality of teaching across all universities.

Free public education at the university level is a joke. Obama's former head of the council of economic advisors (one of my former professors at a different university) called it "economic soundness based on flying puppies that have winning lottery tickets attached to their collars". The point is that there are many non-conservatives who think that Bernie Sanders and others are nuts. I agree that it would be a disaster for schools like Valpo, but it will not ever happen.

I would restate your comment that there are many students (and perhaps more importantly their parents) at Valpo who support Trump OR otherwise tend to be on the right. Trump is a disaster in terms of leadership and this is likely to be recognized more by conservatives who value public education. Additionally, the median political beliefs at most private college campuses like Valparaiso tend to be moderate (perhaps a bit to the right) with a slight skew to the left if you are only looking at social positions. Moving a campus environment far to either side (examples: Hillsdale or Concordia, WI to the right, eastern liberal arts colleges like Ithaca to the left) is going to severely narrow who you can attract and that seems like a losing strategy for a school like Valparaiso.

Lastly, does President Heckler have a right to make political statements when speaking at Valpo events (and again, I have never read what he said at convocation)? He is representing the university and should be serving at the pleasure of the board (who, in turn, should be representing major stakeholders, who include donors, professors and students). Thus, the board should be giving him guidance and setting some level of boundaries. If they don't like positions that he takes when representing Valparaiso, they can dismiss him (in fact, they probably could dismiss him for positions taken when not representing Valpo).

usc4valpo · October 01, 2017, 10:07:36 AM

I tend to agree with your statements to some extent. Valpo is a very good school regarding their teaching and dedication to education. However, in your opinion academically, what would be an excellent or outstanding university?

Thanks for your explanation on free tuition. There are many naive youth who listen to Sanders or Hillary really believing that free education is possible, and yes even at private universities. The ignorance of this blows me away.

As for Trump, yes he has lackings - but he won over 300 electorate votes and defeated a candidate many had deep apathy for. Sad as it sounds, was there truly a significantly better candidate?

Heckler needs to stay away from making political statements and focus on the Valparaiso University problems requiring resolution.

vu84v2 · October 01, 2017, 11:06:48 AM

To define an excellent or outstanding university, you have to define your criteria to measure that. There are generally two primary pillars (teaching and research) and one secondary pillar (service) that define the quality of universities, but schools weight them differently. Valparaiso weights teaching much more heavily than research and they excel in the area that they prioritize (this does not mean that some faculty don't do good research too). From a totally subjective view, I would say that Valparaiso's excellence in teaching puts it on par (on that domain) with the Jesuit schools and Patriot League schools (this is totally my opinion and I am sure that there are other great teaching schools). Valparaiso does not really compete with the east coast schools, so I believe that Valparaiso is competing for students with schools like Butler, Marquette, Xavier, Creighton, Drake.

Schools that are excellent or outstanding in all of the pillars are probably fairly obvious: Stanford, Ivy League, Univ. of Chicago, Northwestern, etc. By the way, USC may be close to that level too - but I only know some researchers there (who are excellent) and don't know much about their teaching reputation.

I don't deny that Trump won (doing so is a useless folly that ignores the rules of elections). Hilary being an awful candidate does not make Trump a good one - that argument might work in political strategy, but judging the quality of Trump and the quality of Hilary are two independent judgements. I like P.J. O'Rourke's (a conservative humorist) assessment prior to the election: Donald Trump is bad in an incomprehensible way. My opinion from the 2016 Presidential Election is that John Kasich was the 'adult in the room' and that he would have been tremendously better than Trump or Clinton.

I agree that Heckler is better served focusing on solving the problems and advancing Valparaiso University.

valpopal · October 01, 2017, 12:20:26 PM

Good points! When I question the wisdom of Heckler's overtly liberal political comments and openly expressed animosity towards Pres. Trump in statements made in his official capacity as university president, I do so not for ideological reasons. Instead, I am aware that 44% of Valparaiso students come from Indiana. The other top states that supply VU students are Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio, Missouri, Michigan, and Iowa. Except for Illinois, Trump won all those states, some handily. In fact, Trump won 30 states. He took Indiana in a landslide by 20%, and he won almost every county, including Valparaiso's home county of Porter. Recent polls indicate almost all Trump voters still fully support him. It seems to me Heckler is needlessly alienating many families who include present and potential VU students, as well as a large number of local Valparaiso community members, which in a different sense is not good politics. Otherwise, Mark is usually an excellent speaker and representative of the university.

Quote from: usc4valpo on October 01, 2017, 10:07:36 AM
As for Trump, yes he has lackings - but he won over 300 electorate votes and defeated a candidate many had deep apathy for. Sad as it sounds, was there truly a significantly better candidate?

Heckler needs to stay away from making political statements and focus on the Valparaiso University problems requiring resolution.

vu84v2 · October 01, 2017, 01:02:33 PM

valpopal: you make good points.

Let me pose this question from your statement. You said that most Trump supporters still support Trump. If I look at a poll from a conservative news source (Fox News), Trump has a 42% approval rate. If we are thinking about potential Valparaiso students and their parents, my guess is that this is a bit high since Trump draws more support from those without a college education - but let's go with 42%. OK, the same poll says his disapproval rate is 53%. Valpo wants them too, right? So there would seem to be three options: (1) prevent any discourse on political and social positions as it relates to the President, (2) intentionally adjust your strategy to target one side, (3) welcome people from all sides and state that we stand for open and respectful discourse. Which would you go with? I prefer option 3 and consider that to be inclusion.

valpopal · October 01, 2017, 01:42:26 PM

Your 42% poll covers all Americans (like the so-called "popular vote"); my stats cover those states from which Valpo draws most of its students: Trump won 6 of 7 top states for Valpo students, including winning Indiana (which supplies 44% of VU students) by 20%.

Nevertheless, in answer to your question, I fully agree with you that #3 of your options is best. Like you, I want any university to allow a fair opportunity to have open and respectful discourse with inclusion from people on both sides of an issue. However, that would mean the administration, especially the university president, should avoid publicly advocating to the students or disparaging in official statements one political position or party.

When the university president puts his imprimatur on one side of a national political position or party, he unnecessarily tips the balance in many ways. Speakers who disagree with him are less likely to be invited to campus by departments or student organizations (especially since they depend upon university funds) or less likely to feel welcomed by the university. Free speech by students and faculty might be (consciously or subconsciously) stifled because they are reluctant to speak in opposition to the university president. If they do speak in opposition, they may be socially stigmatized. Outsiders—such as student families, potential students, and local community members—view the university president's political positions as representative of Valpo and feel their opposing views probably are not welcomed.

Quote from: vu84v2 on October 01, 2017, 01:02:33 PM
valpopal: you make good points.

Let me pose this question from your statement. You said that most Trump supporters still support Trump. If I look at a poll from a conservative news source (Fox News), Trump has a 42% approval rate. If we are thinking about potential Valparaiso students and their parents, my guess is that this is a bit high since Trump draws more support from those without a college education - but let's go with 42%. OK, the same poll says his disapproval rate is 53%. Valpo wants them too, right? So there would seem to be three options: (1) prevent any discourse on political and social positions as it relates to the President, (2) intentionally adjust your strategy to target one side, (3) welcome people from all sides and state that we stand for open and respectful discourse. Which would you go with? I prefer option 3 and consider that to be inclusion.

crusadermoe · October 01, 2017, 02:53:20 PM

The idea of welcoming both (and more) points of view is crucial.

I hope students can honestly say that all views are equally respected by their faculty and their peers. Is that the experience of our students? It seems their President is making his thoughts known.

It would appear from news less than a year ago that St. Olaf has become openly hostile to conservative statements and students. My hope is that Valpo is neutral at worst. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03/conservative-students-violently-threatened-st-olaf-college-supporting-trump/

More faithful to Valparaiso's founding mission would be to say, "We are founded to explore our Christian worldview of the world, but we pursue the truth wherever it might lead." Our motto is, "In thy light we see light. Try that again. "In THY light" Let's not be ashamed of that initial prism. We could even use the word Jesus on the website.

vu84v2 · October 01, 2017, 04:33:06 PM

So we need to welcome and include Christians, including (of course) those who are evangelical, fundamentalist, etc. And we need to include conservatives. Otherwise, it would not be inclusion.

But don't we also need to include people that are mainline and liberal protestants? those that are Jewish? Mormons? Muslims? all minorities? Atheists? Liberals? Moderates? Again, it would not be inclusion without welcoming and respecting them too.

We need to stop demanding that our ideologies must win without exception, regardless of whether we are liberal, conservative or whatever. Instead, we need to respect everyone and their inherent right to have and live by their own beliefs, as long as they do not harm others. This is the environment that Valparaiso needs to strive for. Having a great Christian program does not harm someone that is Jewish, as long as there is not some type of required adherence. Having a gay student organization does not harm an evangelical Christian group. Etc., etc. I would recommend that Valparaiso focus on what they can do foster this environment.

VULB#62 · October 01, 2017, 05:29:36 PM

Quote from: vu84v2 on October 01, 2017, 04:33:06 PM
So we need to welcome and include Christians, including (of course) those who are evangelical, fundamentalist, etc. And we need to include conservatives. Otherwise, it would not be inclusion.

But don't we also need to include people that are mainline and liberal protestants? those that are Jewish? Mormons? Muslims? all minorities? Atheists? Liberals? Moderates? Again, it would not be inclusion without welcoming and respecting them too.

We need to stop demanding that our ideologies must win without exception, regardless of whether we are liberal, conservative or whatever. Instead, we need to respect everyone and their inherent right to have and live by their own beliefs, as long as they do not harm others. This is the environment that Valparaiso needs to strive for. Having a great Christian program does not harm someone that is Jewish, as long as there is not some type of required adherence. Having a gay student organization does not harm an evangelical Christian group. Etc., etc. I would recommend that Valparaiso focus on what they can do foster this environment.

Well stated. However, that objective has been increasingly harder to achieve in the currently chaotic, divisive and insensitive environment that has developed around us. Inclusion and mutual respect have to work very hard to just to get to the discussion table these days.

bbtds · October 01, 2017, 08:21:31 PM

Quote from: VULB#62 on October 01, 2017, 05:29:36 PM
Well stated. However, that objective has been increasingly harder to achieve in the currently chaotic, divisive and insensitive environment that has developed around us. Inclusion and mutual respect have to work very hard to just to get to the discussion table these days.

Isn't this chaotic, divisive and insensitive environment extremely attributable to our current president's tweets? Can our Valpo Trump supporters deny this? Is Trump not waging a direct war on inclusiveness? Those are questions not necessarily my statements.

VULB#62 · October 01, 2017, 10:33:47 PM

Quote from: bbtds on October 01, 2017, 08:21:31 PM
Quote from: VULB#62 on October 01, 2017, 05:29:36 PM
Well stated. However, that objective has been increasingly harder to achieve in the currently chaotic, divisive and insensitive environment that has developed around us. Inclusion and mutual respect have to work very hard to just to get to the discussion table these days.

Isn't this chaotic, divisive and insensitive environment extremely attributable to our current president's tweets? Can our Valpo Trump supporters deny this? Is Trump not waging a direct war on inclusiveness? Those are questions not necessarily my statements.

I think i know what you are saying. At least i think i do. And what you are are saying points to our problem. In the past, one would rely on honor, integrity and staying above the chaos. Unfortunately, in the environment we face as citizens, those qualities are out the door. Everything goes. I am thinking Heckler reacted out of frustration with these circumstances and was trying to stem that tide in an attempt to reestablish the balance (or at least the dialog) we had before. And that played right into the chaos.

Yet, how does one stem any tide ( regardless of what you believe) unless you make strong statements.