The only times that this administration has been beaten is when their dirty dealings have been exposed to the sunlight.  This is not the time to chase our tails at the beck and call of the fictitious Johnson who may or may not be trying to frame arguments, divide and conquer faculty, or play mind games with the website community.

Instead, focus on what has been successful in the past and expose the lies.

Here are some to think about:

Thames as the master fundraiser?  No, in fact as recently as last week he delivered a speech to his FOUNDATION board and once again repeated his mantra that there are only three ways for a university to get money:  state appropriations, tuitions and grants.  HIS JOB should primarily be one of DEVELOPMENT yet, like accreditation, it is an area that he has almost completely ignored.  Why?  Because he doesn't have the skills. Additionally, his focus on grants as a source of revenue is simply illigitimate.  Grant funding has many benefits to a university but a revenue source is not one.  He is either being deliberately deceitful or he doesn't understand.  Implicated or incompetent becomes irrelevant becasue both are grounds for dismissal.

Steadily increasing enrollment?  No, in fact exclusive of the fiasco in fall, 2003 and the continued misrepresentations since then (as recently as yesterday if you read Klumb's words carefully) enrollment growh as a percentage of enrollment growth in the state is down.  The <.5% is ludicrous.  While Thames will try and point fingers at others, it is the continued turmoil, loss of faculty, and declining quality responsible for the university's abysmal performance.  More important, is the transition from full to part-time students who have a significantly higher attrition rate.

Thames as the SACS savior?  No, in fact it is his responsibility for dropping the accreditation ball in the first place, supporting poor decisions once the accreditation experts came in, and continuing to defy the spirit (if not the letter) of accreditation with behind the scenes interference like the upcoming political meeting.  How many times have the faculty committees now been asked to revise SACS materials because Thames' appointees don't have a clear idea of what they're doing?

Thames as the driver of technology company recruiting to the state?  No, in fact this is a public university and private recruiting is outside of the university's mission.   Let him run a private technology park or work in the private sector as a lobbyist. 

What about the nursing program?  One more year of declining scores and it automatically loses accreditation?  What is he doing about that other than sweeping it under the rug?

There's more, think about it.  Meanwhile, what Johnson is trying to do is gain support of faculty by trying to create a turf war between the College of Business and Department of Economic Development.  It's a divide and conquer strategy and it successfully kept the university community distracted last summer while Thames wrought havoc with his henchcrew.

Want to change the mission of this university?  Want it to become more comprehensive, less comprehensive, more technology focused, more liberal arts focused, more of a research school, more of a teaching school, more focused on meeting the needs of students in this state, more focused on recruiting students from out of state....whatever, I truly don't care.  It's not my decision but nor is it Shelby Thames' decision.  This university needs some serious soul-searching and it needs it without Shelby Thames in the president's mansion.  The kind of searching for a mission and subsequent development of a strategy that needs to be done CANNOT be done with someone who ignores the the fact that this is a university and needs to be run like one.  Shelby Thames has been a disaster.  Replace him with a temporary seasoned OUTSIDE administrator immediately and stop the downward spiral.

Let the light shine in.