How to Get the Media Involved

Date: Mar 29, 2004

How to Get the Media Involved

Date: Mar 29, 2004

I wrote the last message so fast I mispelled and garbled a lot of sentences. The only one that matters is the last sentence. Please know: the national mass media DOES NOT CARE one whit about us. USM is a backwater non-entity in a ridiculous state. Our story, no matter how grave, is fundamentally local as far as the mass media is concerned. Only if it is told as the thing it actuall is: a huge 100 million dollar scandal. Unqualified people with no oversight controlling vast amounts of tax payer money and enriching themselves....now that works. Remember, the average income in Lamar and Forresst county is under 24,000 grand a year. This financial aspect will have legs if we can get it out in the correct manner.

Date: Mar 29, 2004

According to the IHL website, "The Office of Finance and Administration is responsible for all financial administration, reviews, and audits at the Institutions of Higher Learning including collection, compilation and analysis of data. Additionally, the Office develops the yearly budget request to the Legislature and submits this request, together with the budget review materials of the eight public universities, to the Legislative Budget Office and the Governor's Office."

There are lots of rumblings out there about calling for an audit.

By the way, where did Linda McFall land?

Date: Mar 29, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: #cruncher
"According to the IHL website, "The Office of Finance and Administration is responsible for all financial administration, reviews, and audits at the Institutions of Higher Learning including collection, compilation and analysis of data. Additionally, the Office develops the yearly budget request to the Legislature and submits this request, together with the budget review materials of the eight public universities, to the Legislative Budget Office and the Governor's Office." There are lots of rumblings out there about calling for an audit. By the way, where did Linda McFall land?"

She now works for the IHL in a similar capacity -- saw her at the last IHL Board meeting

Date: Mar 29, 2004

The financial angle is important. And the mass media will not pay attention to financial malfeasance at a university--even the most blatant stuff--unless the data are served up to them on a platter.

Universities that are much better managed than USM are required to comply with extremely loose standards of financial reporting. So a state university financial report is largely uninformative, even when top administrators haven't cooked the books.

Anyone who has access to inside information, now is the time to make use of it!

Date: Mar 29, 2004

Just gossip, no details but there was something about a million dollar consulting contract, divided into two $500K ones to get around IHL required approvals, that went to AD friends previously convicted (?) in some financial scandal. Sorry, that's all I know.

Date: Mar 29, 2004

Then there's the claims of all the money saved with the reorganization...

The shell game with funds shuffled from one account to another and counted as new...

Some shady expense reporting...

Someone has to FOIA documents, get finance person to step up, or get investigative reporter to blow this open (btw, thanks for all the recent activity and suggestions there). There's too much smoke for there not to be a fire somewhere.

Date: Apr 2, 2004

I'm bouncing this backup to the front b/c Inquiring Mind has raised the issue again. Follow the money is always good advice to find the buried skeletons...anyone? anytime? anywhere?

Date: Apr 2, 2004

What is required to initiate an audit? Does there have to be some evidence of current malfeasance or just a suspicion? I know for a fact that a high ranking member of the current administration lost signature authority for problems involving reimbursement and approval documents that bore a dean's "signature" but which the dean did not sign. This happened a long time ago, but the pattern of behavior is significant, as is the failure of that evidence, which is well documented,to prevent that person's being given control of funds and many other things once again.

Date: Apr 2, 2004

Janet Braswell of the Hattiesburg American has the information about the situation described above. It was circulating in anonymous mailed documents back in the fall sometime, as a sort of chain letter. (Where do all these "anonymous" documents come from?) However, Braswell hasn't done anything with it. It's probably too old to be news.

Date: Apr 2, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: foot soldier
"Janet Braswell of the Hattiesburg American has the information about the situation described above. It was circulating in anonymous mailed documents back in the fall sometime, as a sort of chain letter. (Where do all these "anonymous" documents come from?) However, Braswell hasn't done anything with it. It's probably too old to be news."

Why would it be too old to be news? Sounds relevant to me.

Date: Apr 2, 2004

I had heard that before, that the documents circulated and that they it was about old news. What is pertinent is that the same person is currently making decisions about university money. It is my understanding that the dean who initiated the investigation/audit way back then sent copies of documents to Fleming's office in an attempt to prevent the possibility of the situation being repeated after all of the people involved left the university. It wasn't much of an insurance policy.

Date: Apr 2, 2004

User banned and this threat and the user's IP have been forwarded to Comcast, Hattiesburg office.

Date: Apr 2, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: VandyGrad-DR
"."

You would be a disgrace to Vandy if you HAD graduated from there. Don't you know that the Fire Shelby moderator is tracking your IP address and deleting your posts? Your half-baked posts don't scare me. Go find another message board to troll on.

Date: Apr 3, 2004

Hey Foot Soldier

Janet Braswell, aka write what each side says and print it ignoring any veracity behind said offerings, would not know what to do with a "lead" if it jumped up and knocked her in the head.

She is a nice lady but does not know how to report and investigate. She merely takes a note pad and writes down what two sides of an issue say. She NEVER questions the parties as to the veracity of their statements and NEVER looks into issues like misue of money, a Forrest Co. Circuit Court jury summons, etc, etc, etc, etc, on ad infinitum.

I have no idea why our media, with all the obvious leads they have, have not one shred of courage to "investigate" in the least.

Date: Apr 3, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Greedy
"Hey Foot Soldier Janet Braswell, aka write what each side says and print it ignoring any veracity behind said offerings, would not know what to do with a "lead" if it jumped up and knocked her in the head. She is a nice lady but does not know how to report and investigate. She merely takes a note pad and writes down what two sides of an issue say. She NEVER questions the parties as to the veracity of their statements and NEVER looks into issues like misue of money, a Forrest Co. Circuit Court jury summons, etc, etc, etc, etc, on ad infinitum. I have no idea why our media, with all the obvious leads they have, have not one shred of courage to "investigate" in the least."

Three AP investigative writers are following this message board and have been forwarded contact info for people on campus at USM who have agreed to speak to them.

Riva Brown is to be commended for doing the research on the Whiting suit and for forcing Jim Keith to answer the questions she asked in yesterday's article.

Date: Apr 3, 2004

I agree with Greedy. Even the way headlines are used to frame breaking stories from the perspective of the Mader organization was disheartening. The enrollment fraud was repeatedly headlined as being an a graduate continuous enrollment policy issue,when it had nothing whatever to do with what the university community understands as continuous enrollment. Even when the article after the headline reported that notification to all of those graduate students did not occur because of manual override, the reporters did not point out the glaring contradiction between those facts and the university's position that the purpose was to have graduate students get enrolled in the proper class once they discovered they were in the wrong class. I went back and read the headlines even in the Printz about Hollandsworths being forced to give up the history class, and the implication was that accreditation cost him that assignment. We all know accreditation had nothing to do with the decision.

Date: Apr 3, 2004

To FS: Great news!

Date: Apr 3, 2004

Question for FS

Date: Apr 3, 2004

RE: How to Get the Media Involved

Date: Apr 3, 2004

RE: To FS: Great news!

Date: Apr 3, 2004

tvscene

Date: Apr 3, 2004

RE: How to Get the Media Involved

Date: Apr 3, 2004

Thanks FS

Date: Apr 3, 2004

RE: How to Get the Media Involved

Date: Apr 3, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: fire shelby
"Let me add that those reporters are reading this board. "

By that, I meant those three AP reporters are reading this board. Keep the light on the Thames administration on this board, because they are now making the decision whether or not it is worth their time to do investigative reporting on the crises at USM.

Date: Apr 3, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Dave
"Just wanted to point out that the HA did no "favor" by printing the open letter from the faculty senate. I've heard that this half page open letter to Shelby was purchased as an "ad" and is costing each faculty senate member $25. So, while Shelby gets free press, this one piece of press cost faculty members a total of $1,000 out of their own pockets. Good job faculty senate! We appreciate you!"

You are right! And that is the price they are willing to pay to have their side of the story told, since obviously the Hattiesburg American has decided not to verify many of the statements made by Thames and his cohorts that USM isn't hurting because of this crisis.

Cheers to the Faculty Senate, and especially to Bill Scarborough, for putting their sentiments into print.

Since Shelby won't talk to them, at least maybe he'll read what they have to say.

Date: Apr 3, 2004

The thread about the faculty raises was closed b/c the comments got off target and began debating individual raises. Prior to that, there was some good information about the current administration getting caught in yet another lie. It was publicly stated on more than one occasion that the deans made the raise decisions. A comparison between the written documents with the deans' recommendations and the final list showing who got the raises will indicate that the two lists are not the same and that this is another public lie. Repeated cycles of poor decision making, deceit and cover up are the common denominator to all of the problems.

Date: Apr 3, 2004

Well,,,,,,,,,,

Date: Apr 3, 2004

RE: RE: How to Get the Media Involved

Date: Apr 4, 2004

I'm glad this thread is finally getting to the point I was hoping to make.

To the real media looking there IS a major story here with national consequences: how much oversight exists in state university budget expenditures? We are, after all, talking about well over 100 million dollar enterprises.

So here is the deal: USM for all the bluster is a tax-emempt non-profit org, that depends on state subsidies to function. What happens when four or five business people control a tax-emempt organization?

Those four or five people give themselves large annual raises. They create lots of positions that never existed before: risk manager, cfo, chief info officer. These positions are filled without national searchs and seem to be filled with people who have close relationships. THese positions require staffs. All of this adds up to money spent that otherwise never had been. Add up the staff and salary of cfo, chief info officer, and risk manager and you come up with close to half million dollars.

The arguement is that that was worth it given how much new money they generated. Well, all grant money generated is tax free remember? We are a tax exmempt org. All the money goes out of state or out of tax claiming authorities. But the new kickbacks from grants go right to those in charge of gettig them! So the country, city, state get nothing but those involved get paid. Sounds like a nice scam no?

In short, finances are the story here and they are dull, hard, and involve tax codes knowledge of other arcana and the like. But it comes down to a pres, a pr gal, a vp for research, a human resources guy, and a risk manager.

Why, one wonders, is there such turn over in Financial Affairs. What sorts of potential illegalities are being asked of that office?

In terms of whistle blower protection. ALL ONE HAS TO DO IS REPORT ONE'S KNOWLEDGE TO THE APPROVED ENTITY IN THE WHISTLE BLOWER STATUTE. IF ONE TELLS WHAT ONE KNOWS FOLLOWING THE SPECIFIC STATUTE MISSISSIPPI LAW IS VERY STRONG AND WILL PROTECT ONE> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT UNDER WHISTLE BLOWER IF ONE ADHERES TO ITS PROCEDURES ONE IS ENTITLED TO TRIPLE DAMAGES IF RETALIATION IS MADE> HENCE ITS TEETH IS IN THE FINANCIAL PROTECTION IT OFFERS FROM POTENTIAL RETALIATION

OTher things to know: Shelby is all claims to science and academics aside, fundamentally a businessman: he has a paint company. Indeed, he met Dvorak in her capicity as a businesswoman/lobbyist. She was head of a mississippi trade organization and he met here in his capacity as a paint businessman. When he brought her to USM he did so to spin all kinds of profitable business ventures out of the reserch sector of this university. Her job was economic development and it was their own short sighted foolishness that gave her both tenure and the title of vp for research. Also, both of them have done their business spinning out of usm very well and sucessfully. But is it all legal? There is a fine article about all of this on this very website in a business magazine on south mississippi.

SO: the questions to ask are: what are the businesses they have generated while here from usm? Who has profited? What is their relationship to shelby?

Other questions: the sale of albertson's smells like a payoff. A close supporter of usm athletics gets big money from usm itself in a sale of a building?

THe sale of van hook smells like a payoff. Who profits? What are their relations to the dome?

Further questions: rumor has it that shelby in fact does not collect his salary. He has loads of money from his paint bus? What is the relationship of the research and development of that bus to usm and taxpayer money.Did the state finance his profit making business?

Date: Apr 4, 2004

OK - I've hesitated to say this but it seems like folks are finally putting 2 and 2 together.

What we have here at USM under Thames is a "radical" (Dvorak's term) attempt to put public taxpayer money to private for-profit purposes. The only thing terribly new about it is that it is occurring here in a public institution of higher education. It is part of the trend that took off in the 1980s to eventually privatize all formerly public institutions, i.e. utility companies, prisons, aspects of the military, and so on to turn them into privately-owned for-profit companies that use their privileged position as recipients of taxpayer funds and as, in many cases, the sole supplier of a particular service in a given geographical area (otherwise called a monopoly). Basically, areas of society that the government spent decades in building up from public funds are being converted to private use with little to no oversight and with questionable, indeed detrimental, impact on the population that is supposed to be served by that institution. Some might blame the Republicans for this anti-New Deal trend in America, but the Democrats share in the blame and have yet to prove that they meaningfully oppose it.

What will that mean at USM? At the least it will mean further development of the trends we are already seeing: money shifted to "economic development" (including athletics) and all emphasis for faculty production, student degrees, and community relations being shifted there as well - deemphasis of humanities and the arts (they don't generate profits for the institution), deemphasis of what was for centuries thought of as "education" (critical thinking, writing, communication, and analytical skills, except as they can be directly related to "economic development") - a PR machine that constantly says "economic development" is the great goal of all right-thinking, full-blooded Americans (with little to no proof to support the claim) - the belittling of students and faculty who don't "see the light" and go along with this obviously correct new direction - the conversion of all university services (such as food, printing, textbook sales, housing, health, and so on) to private companies who pay a fee in order to acquire a captive audience of consumers and then gradually over time offer less service for higher cost - the pursuit of and conversion of grant monies from the federal and state governments, foundations, and private sources that, though acquired through USM's status as a public university, go to support private companies via "economic development," and, finally, the centralization of administration and elimination of any meaningful input from students, faculty, staff, or parents: that's why USM is now run by people who know next to nothing about higher education but who know how to turn this great public resource into personal profit.

The main problem for this attempt to highjack higher education is that the public generally does not agree with it. But, unless hell is raised (as it has been lately), the public will never get to vote on these radical changes or otherwise affect the direction that Thames & Co. is taking USM. If the pressure is maintained then the burden of proof is on Thames & Co.: they must demonstrate that turning USM into a money-making venture genuinely benefits students (other than those in Polymer Science) and that it fulfills the educational (as opposed to the economic) goals of the state of Mississippi. Should economic development really be the end all of a public university? Is that all that we want our students to know and treasure?

Date: Apr 4, 2004

This is the best post I've seen on the board. Hurrah! The problem is (and I hate to say it) that the ideas are too complicated for the level of writing in the Hattiesburg American or even the Clarion Ledger. The papers only sometimes give a clear picture of the ongoing issues at USM. Although they've gotten much better lately, if I were a member of the wider community, I wouldn't really understand what was going on by reading the papers. Even if Angeline were to send this post as a "letter to the editor" the average person probably still wouldn't "get it." Look at the letters from business people: they like what Shelby is doing because they understand business, it's what they do, but they don't understand that education is more than "economic development." How do we educate the general populace that these radical changes may ultimately damage the education of USM students?

Date: Apr 4, 2004

On one level it is not hard to explain: public resources are essentially being stolen by those in charge of managing those resources. Sure, "economic development" benefits a few people, but the society-enhancing purpose of education is lost, as is the promise of public education to create learned/active citizens. Shelby & Co. seem to despise public education and see students only as future wage earners or entrepreneurs, but not as thinkers who may seek other intellectual pursuits. Students are sheep to be led unthinkingly into the glorious economic future. Everything comes down to making money.

I almost told Shelby soon after he was hired as president when he started talking about wanting to create 10 millionaires from the USM faculty that he could have a much larger positive economic impact on the community (if that is even really his goal, though he says that it is) if he gave everyone at USM a small raise, however token. The hundreds of people getting the token raise would soon spend it in the surrounding community, and sales-tax dependent state and local government would benefit. So, if he's serious about improving the economic prospects of the community, he can start by putting the money where it would have the most immediate impact rather than in the pockets of a few close friends & family members.

Admittedly, "economic development" is the rhetoric of most elected officials and bureaucrats these days, which is why any discussion of the basic facts seems so outlandish - the media (especially the Gannet-owned Clarion Ledger and H'burg American) has for so long bought into this economic development line, that they do not know how to question it. Of course, we should expect little else from the corporate-owned media - they protect their ideological own.

I say the burden is on the pro-development folks to show how exactly society benefits from transferring public wealth to private hands. My guess is that their notion of society is a very narrow one.

Date: Apr 5, 2004

Maybe this award, listed on the AAUP website, will stimulate some quality investigative reporting! Personally, I'd like to see FireShelby nominated!

Iris Molotsky Award for Excellence in Coverage of Higher Education

Given for outstanding analytical and investigative reporting on higher education. The purpose of the award is to recognize and stimulate coverage of higher education nationally and to encourage thoughtful and comprehensive reporting of higher education issues. Entries will be judged on the basis of their relevance to issues confronting higher education. Submissions may be made by media organizations or employees. Applicants may be self-nominating. Each application must be accompanied by an entry form. Please contact Robin Burns for more information.

Date: Apr 5, 2004

kick

Date: Apr 8, 2004

Don't forget about some of these older threads...

As I understand it, and I don't have all the details, the Pileum (ITech) contract was broken into two parts to get around IHL Board approval. If the approval amount is $1 million, then there were two contracts of just under $500K. If the limit is $500K, then they were each just under $250K. One of the partners (and alleged friend of Angie Dvorak) is an ex-WorldCom executive currently under indictment. Word is that Gregg Lassen (and I know some of you have beat him up on this board but he MAY be the most honest person in the dome) tried to cancel the contract and Angie Dvorak would not allow him to.

Date: Apr 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Fedup
"Don't forget about some of these older threads... As I understand it, and I don't have all the details, the Pileum (ITech) contract was broken into two parts to get around IHL Board approval. If the approval amount is $1 million, then there were two contracts of just under $500K. If the limit is $500K, then they were each just under $250K. One of the partners (and alleged friend of Angie Dvorak) is an ex-WorldCom executive currently under indictment. Word is that Gregg Lassen (and I know some of you have beat him up on this board but he MAY be the most honest person in the dome) tried to cancel the contract and Angie Dvorak would not allow him to."

I think that is true. I do know there was no approval process other than Shelby saying "let's do it."

And, thank you for resurrecting this thread - I still think the USM community needs to directly confront the situation that I outlined above re: transferring public resources into private hands without so much as an announcement of the real goals (much less a discussion with genuine input from all concerned parties).

Date: Apr 9, 2004

Many journalists in the area do believe this story deserves deeper investigation. Our choices are to lose a low-paying day job or work on a freelance project with no pay and no firm prospect of ever getting paid.

This Web site is phenomenal and is doing the true, serious work of journalism. Fire Shelby is getting the word out, sounding the alarm, and demanding the truth. You make me feel downright patriotic.

Many of my colleagues won't work with unidentified sources.

A simple way around that ethical issue is to have NUMEROUS anonymous sources who are saying the same thing. The reporter would need to meet these people face-to-face, ideally in a group setting. The necessary indgredient is documentation. If those anonymous sources can either produce documents or help attain them, then there's the mainstream-approprate story.

I would think the Jackson Free Press would run the non-mainstream and "inappropriate" story.

Date: Apr 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: hack
"Many journalists in the area do believe this story deserves deeper investigation. Our choices are to lose a low-paying day job or work on a freelance project with no pay and no firm prospect of ever getting paid. This Web site is phenomenal and is doing the true, serious work of journalism. Fire Shelby is getting the word out, sounding the alarm, and demanding the truth. You make me feel downright patriotic. Many of my colleagues won't work with unidentified sources. A simple way around that ethical issue is to have NUMEROUS anonymous sources who are saying the same thing. The reporter would need to meet these people face-to-face, ideally in a group setting. The necessary indgredient is documentation. If those anonymous sources can either produce documents or help attain them, then there's the mainstream-approprate story. I would think the Jackson Free Press would run the non-mainstream and "inappropriate" story. "

Yes, I understand the need for verifiable sources and the need for most posters to remain anonymous at this time. But, it seems to me that there is enough public information out there in published articles in newspapers, industry journals, government reports, the USM web, the Student Printz archives, and so forth to make it obvious what Shelby & Co. are trying to do. That's the way I figured it out, along with some research into the privatization trend nationally. There are books in the library--you gotta use a library--that discuss in great detail this recent trend in higher education. Use the web - you'll be amazed what you will find that you can then follow up on to verify.

One way for an investigative reporter to go about this is to look into the backgrounds of the principal players: for example, who is Carl Nicholson and what are his business ties? Might they help explain his unyielding support for Shelby and the new technology park (RIP VanHook golf course)? What about Trent Lott and the new Trent Lott Center for economic development? Haley Barbour's connections to all of this? I hate to repeat the obvious: but "follow the money." Many of the posters to this site are doing on a very part-time basis what I am describing here, and this site is fantastic as a sounding board to test out rumors etc. A reporter (and perhaps before too long the US Justice Dept.) devoted to this full-time will quickly find the connections we all suspect.

Date: Apr 9, 2004

"A reporter (and perhaps before too long the US Justice Dept.) devoted to this full-time will quickly find the connections we all suspect."

There's the rub. It takes time. Lots of time. Lots of uninterrupted, free time. I honestly don't know anybody in Mississippi who is willing to fund this type of work. Few reporters would be wiling to work that hard for free. And it would be work.

You are correct, Angeline, in your comments that a lot of this information already exists in the public domain. Much of it is not usable for mainstream journalism. Following the money is obvious, but not always easy. FOIA doesn't always work the way it should.

Yes, it could be done, it should be done, and I believe it will be done in time.

Date: Apr 9, 2004

So...the conclusion that I come to then is that there really isn't much investigative journalism in the state of Mississippi.

quote:
Originally posted by: hack
""A reporter (and perhaps before too long the US Justice Dept.) devoted to this full-time will quickly find the connections we all suspect." There's the rub. It takes time. Lots of time. Lots of uninterrupted, free time. I honestly don't know anybody in Mississippi who is willing to fund this type of work. Few reporters would be wiling to work that hard for free. And it would be work. You are correct, Angeline, in your comments that a lot of this information already exists in the public domain. Much of it is not usable for mainstream journalism. Following the money is obvious, but not always easy. FOIA doesn't always work the way it should. Yes, it could be done, it should be done, and I believe it will be done in time. "

Date: Apr 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Outside Observer
""

Yes, Outside O., not much investigative reporting. Scalia speaks at a high school, then confiscates tapes and silences reporters. SF fires tenured faculty for speaking freely, then says that it's not a free speech issue (his call, I guess, since he seems to be the judge of all truth).

So investigating people in power is not fashionable in MS, now or ever!

Date: Apr 9, 2004

I'm afraid I don't see much difference between a college professor working on a research project in the hope it will be successful, and the additional hope that it will pay off in terms of recognition and/or pay raise; and a reporter working on an investigative report with the same hopes!

quote:

Originally posted by: hack
""A reporter (and perhaps before too long the US Justice Dept.) devoted to this full-time will quickly find the connections we all suspect." There's the rub. It takes time. Lots of time. Lots of uninterrupted, free time. I honestly don't know anybody in Mississippi who is willing to fund this type of work. Few reporters would be wiling to work that hard for free. And it would be work. You are correct, Angeline, in your comments that a lot of this information already exists in the public domain. Much of it is not usable for mainstream journalism. Following the money is obvious, but not always easy. FOIA doesn't always work the way it should. Yes, it could be done, it should be done, and I believe it will be done in time. "

Date: Apr 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Outside Observer
""

Well, it's a huge difference. College professors get paid for their positions at institutions. I am not the brightest bulb in the daylily pad, but I am under the impression that professors are allowed to spend part of their "work week" doing research in their field of choice. Is that right? I know that other responsibilities get in the way or may take priority. I admit I don't know how it works. I do deeply respect and envy college professors who can do it all and do it so well.

In my current position, my orders are to only report happy news.

This is not my field of choice.

I could quit my job to pursue investigative stories, and I've done this before. I never got paid, the stories never ran anywhere, and, um, well, what are the options? Get a job in PR? The stories I can sell and do sell are superficial and shallow. Yes, I'm ashamed and yet so proud to finally be hovering just below the poverty line instead of being dirt poor with no electricity to Google articles or no phone to interview anonymous sources. Never mind no food to feed my family.

My message is that a smart, partially-funded, energetic person can do what you all want to see done. I am lacking in all three qualities.

Is there a journalism student reading this? Here is your challenge. You can get away with this when you are young. Don't expect to get paid, but approach this as the most impressive work your future editor will ever see from a student. Yes, I know you are poor, too, but your reward is getting a dream job with your impressive clip file. Honestly, I think there's a book in your future.

Liberal arts professors at USM also shaped my thinking. They still do. These are great men and women. What's happening at USM shocks and embarasses me. I want to help.

Date: Apr 9, 2004

to hack.............prof rewards......