Bud Ginn - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 8, 2005

RE: Bud Ginn

Date: Dec 8, 2005

I have never believed that Dr. Lucas let USM go to hell in a handbasket for the sake of his daughter's future career. She has plenty of options. I've heard that he has said "there is a reason" but I just have to believe it's a better reason than that.

Date: Dec 8, 2005

LVN,

I admire you very much! I hope what you say is true; yet, I am uneasy about it, and in trying times it's hard to know who to really trust. I think we've all tried to think the best about AKL (and most still do); however, this Lucas/Thames conspiracy seems to gain ground every day. I think we'll see lil' Thames as Dean of CoEP (a disaster waiting to happen) and Frances as Prez. Will it be a bad thing? As long as a Thames is calling the shots in any capacity, USM will be a slave to mediocrity at best.

Date: Dec 8, 2005

The only thing I know for certain about Dr. F. Lucas is that she is President of an academically respectable institution. One hopes that she would therefore select academically respectable Deans, after considering the input of faculty.

I hope we all live long enough to learn what Dr. A. Lucas' "real" reason is.

Date: Dec 8, 2005

I have long had great respect for Dr. A. Lucas. He always seemed a true gentleman who loved USM. However, much of that respect is now gone. He had the good offices to make a difference over the past few years and has (seemingly) not done so. Just watched as his beloved university went down with all hands on the SS Thames.

Date: Dec 9, 2005

Ripper wrote:

I have long had great respect for Dr. A. Lucas. He always seemed a true gentleman who loved USM. However, much of that respect is now gone. He had the good offices to make a difference over the past few years and has (seemingly) not done so. Just watched as his beloved university went down with all hands on the SS Thames.

He stood by and never tried to help Fleming. Let him run into that buzzsaw. That is unpardonable. It was hard enough coming in new and after a 21 year president. I think Lucas wanted his successor to fail. At least unconsciously.

Date: Dec 9, 2005

LVN wrote:

The only thing I know for certain about Dr. F. Lucas is that she is President of an academically respectable institution. One hopes that she would therefore select academically respectable Deans, after considering the input of faculty. I hope we all live long enough to learn what Dr. A. Lucas' "real" reason is.

It would be one of the greatest mistakes USM could make to name her president here. A major mistake. We need to get out of this patrimonial system Lucas is trying to create.

Date: Dec 9, 2005

The $64,000 question seems to be: "Why did AKL do what he did and then not do what he should have done?"

What he did was sit back and let the Thames forces grab the presidency from HF.

Then. What he did not do what he should have done was to sit on the sidelines from 2002 to present and let the destruction of our institution take place.

Are there answers? There are answers to most questions.

Date: Dec 9, 2005

Heh heh wrote:

Bud Ginn once told me that Shelby is one of the nicest people that you'll ever meet--that he's not the kind of person to get angry or hold a grudge.

As the saying goes, "A fool always finds a greater fool to admire him."

Date: Dec 9, 2005

emma with the long legs...

Ole Bud is no fool.

He had his beginning at USM in the 70's. He obtained good positions early in his career due to his kinship with AKL.

One of these postions, in the 1970's, was as an assistant to SFT when SFT was a VP in charge of regional campuse. He was very loyal to SFT.

SFT and AKL took care of Ole Bud and gave him new and increased levels of responsibilty. He carried the laundry for both Lucas and Thames in the 70's and 80's. When SFT was sent back to Polymer Science in the 80's, Bud was loyal to AKL and did his bidding here in Jackson.

Contrary to another poster's opinion, Ole Bud did a good job in Jackson for AKL. He made sure the Gulf Coast was kept on a short leash.

He was always well rewarded.

When AKL retired, Ole Bud cast his lot with Fleming. Bud rode this wagon for a while and then something happened. SFT reemerged as a force, Fleming was forced out, and Ole Bud was among the first with major responsibilities in the SFT administration.

Fleming probably wishes he had never trusted Ole Bud. Bud was a part of the designing of the downfall of Fleming. On second thought, Horace may be thankful to Ole Bud...for getting him out of the USM Circus.

If you can use your kinship to ride three different administrations over a thirty year period, you are not a fool.

If you can retire at the State max with PERS, with 37-38 years, and then go back to work part-time with the same institution at a good salary, you are no fool.

Bud Ginn is no fool. He still has work to do.

Date: Dec 9, 2005

jackson lobby guy wrote:

emma with the long legs... Ole Bud is no fool. He had his beginning at USM in the 70's. He obtained good positions early in his career due to his kinship with AKL. One of these postions, in the 1970's, was as an assistant to SFT when SFT was a VP in charge of regional campuse. He was very loyal to SFT. SFT and AKL took care of Ole Bud and gave him new and increased levels of responsibilty. He carried the laundry for both Lucas and Thames in the 70's and 80's. When SFT was sent back to Polymer Science in the 80's, Bud was loyal to AKL and did his bidding here in Jackson. Contrary to another poster's opinion, Ole Bud did a good job in Jackson for AKL. He made sure the Gulf Coast was kept on a short leash. He was always well rewarded. When AKL retired, Ole Bud cast his lot with Fleming. Bud rode this wagon for a while and then something happened. SFT reemerged as a force, Fleming was forced out, and Ole Bud was among the first with major responsibilities in the SFT administration. Fleming probably wishes he had never trusted Ole Bud. Bud was a part of the designing of the downfall of Fleming. On second thought, Horace may be thankful to Ole Bud...for getting him out of the USM Circus. If you can use your kinship to ride three different administrations over a thirty year period, you are not a fool. If you can retire at the State max with PERS, with 37-38 years, and then go back to work part-time with the same institution at a good salary, you are no fool. Bud Ginn is no fool. He still has work to do.

This is the first time I have commented on this thread. The theme throughout seems to be that a small cadre of close-knit individuals have been extraordinarily influencial at USM since the McCain era. It is a small world. Dr. Meredith knows many of the current and past players at USM well for decades, including people like Carl Martray (former Dean of COEP) and Shelby Thames.

Political battles all over the globe seem marked by some degree of cronysim and nepotism, but Mississippians play that game about as well as can be (I grew up in NY and NJ, so I know cronysim when I see it!). As examples, in the past two days the Hood brothers and Haley Barbour and his niece have raised some eyebrows up in Jackson (it may all be legit, but the appearances are iffy). Within USM, there are few degrees of separation among the major players here. This thread has helped shed light on the history and activities of some of the back room power brokers at USM. Thank you for all your comments.

Date: Dec 9, 2005

Ginn increasoingly seems to become the strong arm behind the power. We need to know why Prez. Thames needs a Bud Ginn in his life.

Date: Dec 9, 2005

Whoops, I meant to say increasingly!!!!

Date: Dec 10, 2005

"Within USM, there are few degrees of separation among the major players here."

Joe Paul has to figure in this thread somewhere...any takers?

Date: Dec 10, 2005

Gatoreagle wrote:

"Within USM, there are few degrees of separation among the major players here."
Joe Paul has to figure in this thread somewhere...any takers?

You are absolutely right, but I don't know how. I do know that one of his relatives is now at ADP.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

Intrigued wrote:

Gatoreagle wrote:
"Within USM, there are few degrees of separation among the major players here."
Joe Paul has to figure in this thread somewhere...any takers?

You are absolutely right, but I don't know how. I do know that one of his relatives is now at ADP.

Sorry about this posting. Not about Joe Paul. I think he is in the SFT camp up to his eyeballs, no matter now much he may proclaim otherwise to those he thinks are on the other side. But about the relative thing. The person in the ADP is very smart and very capable--deserves the job or a better one.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

You guys need to let it go. Dr. Ginn is two steps ahead of you and anything that you might do. He knows the right people, knows how the politics of the state work, has many favors to call in, and is experienced in what he does.

You may have misread his intentions and know so little of his past that you don't have a clue about what he does or how he does it.

I know that he has a good record at USM and as a professor I did not have anyone else that was as dedicated as he was to students.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

Knows the "right people" -- is "two steps ahead" -- that's scary.
Here is a person who has been at the elbow of three presidents and yet we have the present mess. I don't think that's much of a recommendation for his skills or his supposedly good intentions.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

j b on the bayou wrote:

You guys need to let it go. Dr. Ginn is two steps ahead of you and anything that you might do. He knows the right people, knows how the politics of the state work, has many favors to call in, and is experienced in what he does. You may have misread his intentions and know so little of his past that you don't have a clue about what he does or how he does it. I know that he has a good record at USM and as a professor I did not have anyone else that was as dedicated as he was to students.

JB Ole' Buddy

You the one need to put up or shut up. What is it that CNG does that we don't have a clue about? What are those favors? If he has "a good record at USM and as a professor" it sure is strange that, on a board with a couple dozen senior USM types participating, there seem to be very few have even an inkling of what that record was. I don't think you really know any more about CNG than anybody else. You're just a troll trying to stir the pot of discontent that Da Toad set boiling. Prove me wrong. Tell us one thing that you know about the mysterious Mr. Ginn. Come on, you can do it!

To me he sound likes like SFT and AKL's evil doppleganger, an infernal spirit that can take the shape of corrupt, venal men, but who also savors of sulphur and the pit. Sort of like in that old occult theory of Naziism about how Heinrich Himmler was Hitler's link to the devil. Maybe what we need is an exorcist or a hoodoo man!

Date: Dec 10, 2005

Coast Watcher
Do you always automatically label anyone with a defferent view than you as a troll?

As per your request, one thing about Ginn that I know: there is a member of the coastal legislative delegation (more than likely a friend of yours) that dislikes him as much as you seem to dislike him. She too, like you, have not seen him operate in all areans and does not know his whole record.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

j b on the bayou wrote:

You guys need to let it go. Dr. Ginn is two steps ahead of you and anything that you might do. He knows the right people, knows how the politics of the state work, has many favors to call in, and is experienced in what he does. You may have misread his intentions and know so little of his past that you don't have a clue about what he does or how he does it. I know that he has a good record at USM and as a professor I did not have anyone else that was as dedicated as he was to students.

I don't know Mr. Ginn or much care what he does. However, what little contact I have had with him puts him in my mind as just another stereotype. Mississippi is a backwater. Since not much happens in a backwater, the higher-quality people leave (i.e., where are the best students you ever taught living now?) Backwaters end up being led by a local elite who have nothing better going for them than they are part of that elite. These folks aren't leaders, they just got where they were by an accident of birth. Since they don't have the vision or talent to lead, they drift this way or that depending on the fad or politics of the moment. If you are part of that elite, you just drift with the current of the moment. There is some turnover in the elite (the last ten years here) but it is not fundamental just some moved up (Roy Klumb) and some moved down (Democrats that were slow footed). A backwater elite is just part of being a backwater but it does tend to get worse over time. The good thing is that these folks usually will leave you alone if you'll be quiet.

Now to Mr. Ginn. If you start as a college teacher you quickly find that teaching better be its own reward. You'll never "amount to anything". On realizing this, you sometimes get a once good prof who decides to become a "mover and shaker" someone who matters. BG was in the perfect position to do this. He became a mover and shaker. The faustian bargain is you better leave your ethics and personal preferences when you check in. A successful mover and shaker can become at least a minor deal in a backwater. However, if you started as an academic, there's no going back. I'm sure he has some preferences about USM. I'll lay money they are a distant second to whatever it takes to remain a "mover and shaker." Just stay out of his way. And watch. And listen. It's uncomfortable having your fate partially determined by these sorts of folks, but that's life. At least you can go to sleep every night knowing that if you stumble there's won't be lots of folks closing in for the kill. Watching a mover and shaker with lots of enemies stumble is pretty gruesome. Just ask Trent Lott or Tom DeLay.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

JB:

But what IS that record? As far as that Coast state representative goes, I know of whom you speak, and said person has done more for USM in the last year alone than you seem to be willing to divulge about CNG's whole career. That's why I charged you with trolling; you won't come clean about what you know about Ginn when the whole thrust of this thread was to gather intel on that very topic. If you know stuff about it, why not speak, so that we may know you. Has CNG's career been so unsavory as to make it unwise to divulge? Is that it? It wouldn't surprise me: lobbyist=another word for bribery and corruption in my dictionary.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

past caring wrote:

j b on the bayou wrote: You guys need to let it go. Dr. Ginn is two steps ahead of you and anything that you might do. He knows the right people, knows how the politics of the state work, has many favors to call in, and is experienced in what he does. You may have misread his intentions and know so little of his past that you don't have a clue about what he does or how he does it. I know that he has a good record at USM and as a professor I did not have anyone else that was as dedicated as he was to students. I don't know Mr. Ginn or much care what he does. However, what little contact I have had with him puts him in my mind as just another stereotype. Mississippi is a backwater. Since not much happens in a backwater, the higher-quality people leave (i.e., where are the best students you ever taught living now?) Backwaters end up being led by a local elite who have nothing better going for them than they are part of that elite. These folks aren't leaders, they just got where they were by an accident of birth. Since they don't have the vision or talent to lead, they drift this way or that depending on the fad or politics of the moment. If you are part of that elite, you just drift with the current of the moment. There is some turnover in the elite (the last ten years here) but it is not fundamental just some moved up (Roy Klumb) and some moved down (Democrats that were slow footed). A backwater elite is just part of being a backwater but it does tend to get worse over time. The good thing is that these folks usually will leave you alone if you'll be quiet. Now to Mr. Ginn. If you start as a college teacher you quickly find that teaching better be its own reward. You'll never "amount to anything". On realizing this, you sometimes get a once good prof who decides to become a "mover and shaker" someone who matters. BG was in the perfect position to do this. He became a mover and shaker. The faustian bargain is you better leave your ethics and personal preferences when you check in. A successful mover and shaker can become at least a minor deal in a backwater. However, if you started as an academic, there's no going back. I'm sure he has some preferences about USM. I'll lay money they are a distant second to whatever it takes to remain a "mover and shaker." Just stay out of his way. And watch. And listen. It's uncomfortable having your fate partially determined by these sorts of folks, but that's life. At least you can go to sleep every night knowing that if you stumble there's won't be lots of folks closing in for the kill. Watching a mover and shaker with lots of enemies stumble is pretty gruesome. Just ask Trent Lott or Tom DeLay.

Past Caring has brought tears to the eyes of this Old Timer. You just described my early days on the plantation. Oh, to go back to those "good old days" as overseer.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

past caring wrote:

Since not much happens in a backwater, the higher-quality people leave (i.e., where are the best students you ever taught living now?) Backwaters end up being led by a local elite who have nothing better going for them than they are part of that elite. These folks aren't leaders, they just got where they were by an accident of birth. Since they don't have the vision or talent to lead, they drift this way or that depending on the fad or politics of the moment. If you are part of that elite, you just drift with the current of the moment.

"past caring," thanks to you, I finally completed my Factor Analysis. Your comments provided the oblique orthoginals and the reciprocal vectors I needed to in to complete the rhomic. My anaysis yielded 4 "factors" that help ensure success: (1) Ya gotta be a good old boy with local roots (Mississippi for sure, the closer to Hattiesburg the better); (2) Ya gotta have a degree from USM (an undergraduate degree helps best); (3) Ya gotta have no prior meaningful academic experience out of state, and (4) Ya gotta be willing to persist at one place for a long, long time under a variety of changing conditions.

Date: Dec 10, 2005

j b on the bayou wrote:

Do you always automatically label anyone with a defferent view than you as a troll?

A

L

E

R

T

My hand is hovering quite near the flit.

Date: Dec 11, 2005

Mitch, I read your third post on this thread with interest. We all appreciate your comments and your past experience in the east seems to give you a different perspective on things at USM. Sometimes we need someone out of our parachial setting to look at us objectively.

I would be interested in your opinions, and I think that others would also, regarding a number of the comments made on this thread.

Specifically, do you think there are a small number of individuals that have controlled USM for a great length of time? Are those that support this view correct? Is it conceivable that those in power have a predetermined plan for our future? Share anything else that you can to provide us a different perspective on our situation.

Date: Dec 11, 2005

Don't be snapping at Mitch. He gives his name, he gives his perspective, and he is a faculty member turned administrator who has turned back to faculty member. And, he is one sharp seen the light Yankee. His information concerning the Budster is right-on. Who at this point - who knows at least something about this institution - hasn't realized that it smacks nasty with cronyism. My own encounters with Bud several years ago have convinced me that he is still true to character.

Can I divulge those encounters. Sadly, not now. We all have to watch our step.

A non sequiter - I miss the Night Chalker!!

Date: Dec 11, 2005

Mathematical genius wrote:

past caring wrote: Since not much happens in a backwater, the higher-quality people leave (i.e., where are the best students you ever taught living now?) Backwaters end up being led by a local elite who have nothing better going for them than they are part of that elite. These folks aren't leaders, they just got where they were by an accident of birth. Since they don't have the vision or talent to lead, they drift this way or that depending on the fad or politics of the moment. If you are part of that elite, you just drift with the current of the moment. "past caring," thanks to you, I finally completed my Factor Analysis. Your comments provided the oblique orthoginals and the reciprocal vectors I needed to in to complete the rhomic. My anaysis yielded 4 "factors" that help ensure success: (1) Ya gotta be a good old boy with local roots (Mississippi for sure, the closer to Hattiesburg the better); (2) Ya gotta have a degree from USM (an undergraduate degree helps best); (3) Ya gotta have no prior meaningful academic experience out of state, and (4) Ya gotta be willing to persist at one place for a long, long time under a variety of changing conditions.

Good job. I never could get the multicollinearity out of my regression model. The R2 always looked good but the t's sucked.

Date: Dec 11, 2005

Miss Emma, Miss Emma, You need to go back and read my post if you think I was snapping at Mitch. My comment about him being from the east was, I thought, something of a compliment. I think that we have much to learn from people from the North, South, East, and West. It will take more than us Suthners to solve our problems at USM I admire this guy and his views. That was what my request was all about.

I hope to hear from him.

Date: Dec 11, 2005

Mitch Monitor wrote:

Mitch, I read your third post on this thread with interest. We all appreciate your comments and your past experience in the east seems to give you a different perspective on things at USM. Sometimes we need someone out of our parachial setting to look at us objectively.

I would be interested in your opinions, and I think that others would also, regarding a number of the comments made on this thread.

Specifically, do you think there are a small number of individuals that have controlled USM for a great length of time? Are those that support this view correct? Is it conceivable that those in power have a predetermined plan for our future? Share anything else that you can to provide us a different perspective on our situation.

I'm not sure that growing up in NY has much to do with it, except that I got to see cronysim at it's true world-class best. I do believe that there seems to be a small number of folks who have been highly influential at USM-donors, alum, and administrators--for many years. But even among the "in crowd" there have been power plays and in fighting. All public institutions will have a degree of this sort of narrow "dotted line" influence, but USM seems to have quite a bit of this going on. The next President will have an interesting challenge--deciding which players to keep in the fold and how to manage them (MSU will have the same problem). A clean sweep is not always the answer to institutional reform, for a lot of reasons, as we have seen in the past few years. The "if it ain't broken, break it" approach to change that we have experienced has just not worked in our interest.

I have no clue how the powers that be think of USM or our future as an institution. From the perspective of a faculty member, I would like to see a greater emphasis placed on increasing the quality of our educational offerings, raising the overall quality of our student body, and focusing on some of the traditional core strengths of USM--including the performing and liberal arts, life sciences, social sciences and education. Expansion into what I see as boutique degree programs should be done more cautiously, especially if they are resource intensive and not central and essential to a unit or the university's mission.

One point of pride for my home department is that, under the leadership of the chair, we have focused our offerings, become a more cohesive unit, and phased out undergrad and grad programs that are not central to our mission (maximizing our use of resources). Grade inflation has been held in check, and the quality and quantity of our overall scholarship has increased dramatically. At the same time, external sources of revenue have been sought and received, and we contribute quite a bit to the welfare of the community. This is a model that seems to be working for us--and we have the potential for prospering even more if the next administration adopts a de-centralized unit management approach and has a long term strategic plan to increase the resources supplied (infrastructure and personnel) to the academic units.

We will have a clue about our future if transparency in our operations increases, including budgetary and technology decisions (I think that some effort in these areas is being expended, but we are far from there). Also, if we start to put people and programs first--faculty, staff, grad student, and undergrads--rather than power and influence and parochial turf concerns, we will be headed in the right direction. Finally, if we see a shift from the economic model that the core finance folks espouse (for example, that the acaedmic units should be viewed as potential "profit centers"), that would be reason to be optimistic. There is no doubt that the economics of public higher education are complex and challenging, and that we (from the guy who cleans the restrooms to the President) need to constantly consider costs and revenue generation. However, USM is still a non-profit public trust, and the models used by corporate and private for profit business entities (the world from which virtually all of our current university leaders are drawn) are not fully applicable to USM--attempting to apply them whole cloth has been a source of many of our problems, including our failure to fairly and appropriately compensate faculty, staff, and graduate students.

Please understand that I am not an expert in leadership, finance, or higher education administration (my Ph.D. is in clinical psychology). So take my comments with a grain of salt.