Kids Prefer Cheese

A Joke That Didn't Make Air....

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:19:00 +0000

So, I was driving over to do the radio show this morning, the "Shadow Debate," where I got to answer Bev and Pat after the fact, on a radio show that people actually listen to (mp3 of hour long radio show here).

And I came up with a joke. My good friend RT Beckwith claims I am "best known" for my comical send-ups of my hapless opponents. ("Yes, it's true....This man has no no hap."*)

But I chickened out, and didn't use the joke. Seemed a bit abrasive, for a candidate on a radio show. A blog....that's different. It's not serious. Here's the joke:

George Bush claims that he looked into the eyes of Vladdy Putin, and saw his soul.

Now there's a rumor that George Bush looked into Bev Perdue's EAR. You know what he saw?

Daylight.

Major props to Brad and Britt. I hope it was good radio. Neanderbill liked it....how can that be bad?

(*If you said, "Ghostbusters," you win)

Would Obama really pick Biden??

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 19:24:00 +0000

According to Intrade, he's the favorite. Admittedly, no one knows their way around warm spit like Joe, but I just don't see how Obama can pick him. Obama is politics 2.0, Joe is plagiarism 101. Obama is cool, Joe is a creep.

Is Obama so succeptible to flattery (Biden famous called him "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy")?

Wasn't Biden in favor of partitioning Iraq?

I really hope Obama goes this way (gridlock, gridlock, rah, rah, rah), but I don't think so. He's not that dumb.

Immigrants Should be Able to Go to Community Colleges

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:05:00 +0000

The article (gated, free registration)

Excerpt:

Residents should be citizens

By Michael C. Munger : Guest columnist
The Herald-Sun
Aug 20, 2008

I think immigrants should be able to attend community colleges. But then maybe that's because I myself am an immigrant.

Well, not really. I should say I come from a family of immigrants. My ancestors had the surname "Mancgere," or "merchant" in Anglo-Saxon. They moved from County Surrey, England, and settled in the Guilford Colony, near New Haven, Connecticut. Nicholas Munger apparently owned land there beginning in 1651.

I wonder if Nick had trouble sending his kids to community college. You see, old granddad (times 11) Nick never filled out the paperwork required to become a citizen. It seems that he landed at New Haven, left the ship, and went to visit some friends. He met a girl, they got married, and settled down on a portion of her dad's land. Nicholas was a citizen simply because he was a resident of the state of Connecticut. There was no difference.

Nicholas Munger's children, John and Samuel (I'm from the Samuel side) were both U.S. citizens by virtue of birth. But they didn't fill out any paperwork, either. If they went to school, there's no record of it. I imagine they had some rudimentary schooling, though. Nobody asked to see their green card.

"Citizen" is an arbitrary legal status. It gives me the willies to think of "citizen" as a construct that stands in for real identity. Was Nicholas an American? Once he moved here and started paying taxes, yes he was. And if he had brought a child with him, that child would have been a citizen, too. You didn't have to be born here. You just had to want to live here.

Our immigration policy today could not be more different. We make it nearly impossible for people to become Americans legally. We punish people who try to become residents. And then we deny long-time residents the benefits that we give to citizens for free.

Citizenship is a status given, or withheld, by federal law and regulation. But all of the benefits of state residence, including in-state status for schools from kindergarten through graduate school, are based on being able to establish you live here. I just dropped my son Kevin, a 12 generation American Mancgere, at UNC-Chapel Hill. ... We had to show our residence address, demonstrate that we paid taxes in North Carolina, and show our utility bills. Those things proved our residence in the state. Those things qualified my son, and they should qualify anyone's son or daughter, for the benefits the state provides.

And yet, we are now rushing to deny the benefits of residence to thousands of young people who live in our state. Some have lived here for a decade or more, attending our school system and amassing an academic record that meant they earned a high school diploma. They will be working in jobs all over the state.

The children of immigrants will add, or detract, from the economic life of our state depending on whether they can acquire the skills needed to compete in the 21st century workplace. And new businesses will decide whether to locate in North Carolina, or someplace else, depending on whether we have a workforce with those same skills.

What should the standard be? What status should be required to attend community college, or college, as an in-state student? The same as for everyone else: demonstration of residence. The same as for Nicholas Munger, in 1651: live on the land, work, pay taxes, contribute to the community.

But North Carolina has decided that it will place exclusion first, and focus on arbitrary legal distinctions, rather than the welfare of its residents and the future of our economy. By barring the undocumented from getting an education, we are creating an apartheid system with fertile pickings for gang recruitment and exploitation by unscrupulous employers who thrive on ignorance. And we are telling prospective business recruits: go elsewhere. We prefer illiteracy.

Once I established that I am a resident of North Carolina, no one at Chapel Hill asked for my passport when I dropped my son off at Hinton James dormitory. And that's how it should be. Anyone who lives in North Carolina, who pays taxes here, and who accepts a stake in our economic and civic future deserves a shot at education, at the same rates as anyone else. Discriminating among state taxpayers based on where they used to live is un-American.

Where on God's green earth??

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:57:00 +0000

Discuss....

We'll be your huckleberries!

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:05:00 +0000

FYI, people!

Santa Fe discoveries

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:03:00 +0000

One of me and Mrs. Angus's favorite things to do in Santa Fe is stroll through the zillions of art galleries around town. While many are stereotypical and touristy, there are some genuinely interesting artists showing their work and some excellent galleries. One local (by way of Mallorca) artist that we both liked very much is Richard Campiglio. Here is one example:

He puts plaster on panels and then paints on that. Most pieces are small and ornately framed. Kind of Michelangelo meets R. Crumb. Here's another:

What's the number for 911?

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:17:00 +0000

In yesterday's WSJ, Ethan Penner ("a pioneer in real estate finance" according to the Journal (wouldn't that make him well over 100 years old??)) says the following:

To understand exactly what is happening, one needs to properly understand what occurred in the late stages of the prior cycle. Interest rates had been driven to historical lows in the U.S. and throughout the world. The cause of this can be debated. However, it is clear that economic globalization, with the migration of jobs to low-wage nations, had a profound impact on inflation, and thus on interest rates.

Uh, earth to Penner! Phone call for Mr. Penner. Irving Fisher on line 3!

Ignoring the issue of how globalization affects inflation, Penner is (here and throughout the article) making the basic error of confusing real and nominal returns:

The flip side of a low-interest rate environment is that it reduces the absolute level of returns that are available to investors. This has significant implications for the massive wave of baby boomers, which holds many billions of dollars in retirement savings, either through direct investment or through managed pension-fund systems.

People, repeat after me: A 10% rate with 15% inflation is not high and a 5% rate with 0% inflation is not low.

If you read the full article, Penner also seems to believe that the shape of the yield curve is time invariant!

Humor and Dreaming

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:26:00 +0000

Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Humor Styles: A Replication Study

Philip Vernon, Rod Martin, Julie Aitken Schermer, Lynn Cherkas & Tim Spector
Twin Research and Human Genetics, February 2008, Pages 44-47

Abstract:
One thousand and seventy three pairs of adult monozygotic (MZ) twins and 895 pairs of same sex adult dizygotic (DZ) twins from the United Kingdom (UK) completed the Humor Styles Questionnaire: a 32-item measure which assesses two positive and two negative styles of humor. MZ correlations were approximately twice as large as DZ correlations for all four humor styles, and univariate behavioral genetic model fitting indicated that individual differences in all of them can be accounted for entirely by genetic and nonshared environmental factors, with heritabilities ranging from .34 to .49. These results, while perhaps not surprising, are somewhat at odds with a previous study that we conducted in North America (Vernon et al., in press) in which genetic factors contributed significantly to individual differences in the two positive humor styles, but contributed far less to the two negative styles, variance in which was instead largely due to shared and nonshared environmental factors. We suggest that differences between North American and UK citizens in their appreciation of different kinds of humor may be responsible for the different results obtained in these two
studies.

-----------------------

Dreams are more negative than real life: Implications for the function of
dreaming

Katja Valli, Thea Strandholm, Lauri Sillanmki & Antti Revonsuo
Cognition & Emotion, August 2008, Pages 833-861

Abstract:
Dream content studies have revealed that dream experiences are negatively biased; negative dream contents are more frequent than corresponding positive dream contents. It is unclear, however, whether the bias is real or due to biased sampling, i.e., selective memory for intense negative emotions. The threat simulation theory (TST) claims that the negativity bias is real and reflects the evolved biological function of dreaming. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis of the TST that threatening events are overrepresented in dreams, i.e., more frequent and more severe in dreams than in real life. To control for biased sampling, we used as a baseline the corresponding negative events in real life rather than the corresponding
positive events in dreams. We collected dream reports (N=419) and daily event logs (N=490) from 39 university students during a two-week period, and interviewed them about real threat experiences retrievable from autobiographical memory (N=714). Threat experiences proved to be much more frequent and severe in dreams than in real life, and Current Dream Threats more closely resembled Past than Current Real Threats. We conclude that the TST's predictions hold, and that the negativity bias is real.

(Nod to KL)

0 to 175 in 6 seconds

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:20:00 +0000

Tom was in trouble. He forgot his wedding anniversary.

His wife was really angry. She told him "Tomorrow morning, I expect to find a gift in the driveway that goes from 0 to 175 in less then 6 Seconds AND IT BETTER BE THERE!!"

The next morning Tom got up early and left for work. When his wife woke up, she looked out the window and sure enough there was a box gift wrapped in the middle of the driveway.

Confused, the wife put on her robe and ran out to the driveway, brought the box back in the house.

She opened it and found a brand new bathroom scale.

Tom has been missing since Friday.

(Forwarded to me by lovely, slender wife)

Say What?

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:37:00 +0000

This morning Tyler links to an RBC article by Martin Uribe and Stephanie Schmitt-Grohe. Let me just say in advance that I know and like Martin and Stephanie and they do awesome work. However, I found the following sentence in their paper quite bewildering:

We find that anticipated shocks are the most important source of uncertainty.

To which I can only reply: ???????? Folks, only a highly trained macroeconomist could hope to parse that humdinger of a sentence.

The paper is indeed a move back toward pure RBC in that there are no nominal ridigities in the model. However, it does simply assume a host of real rigidities, including the dreaded "investment adjustment costs" on the grounds that there is "a large existing literature
showing that these frictions improve the model’s empirical fit."

Oh.

For those of you who prefer a nominal rigidity approach but like the idea of exploring the distinction between expected and unexpected shocks, there is a related paper by Northwestern grad student Joshua Davis (paper can be downloaded here) that gets different results about what shocks are important than do Uribe & Schmitt.

Solar Power for Africa?

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:09:00 +0000

David Wheeler, from the Center for Global Development has been excoriating his old employer, the World Bank, for living in the past and continuing to help fund coal fired energy projects. Here is a graph of the most favorable spots on Earth for solar power generation:

It must have been moonglow....

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:32:00 +0000

So, one debate coach accuses another of racism. The logical response? Moon a roomful of students. The video shows it all, or most of it.

The Provost's reaction?

"We're sure that there's probably some facts and information that's just not available. I mean, you see a lot on the video, but we need to make sure everything is revealed before we take any action," said Gould.

Did he really say that? EVERYTHING revealed? Now, THAT is one aggressive Provost! "Shake for me, boy, I want to be your backdoor man..."

(Nod to KL)

Just To Make Angus' Head Explode....A Music Review

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 00:11:00 +0000

I'm going to go out on a limb here.

Angus let's me write book and movie reviews, and accepts the results. But music...well, he has to draw the line somewhere.

Still, I'm going to take a shot.

I had to drive to Charlotte, NC (2.5 hours from Durham) for a breakfast gig at Skyland, and then do a Keith Larson radio thing, which was really fun.

On the way over, and on the way back, I listened to several of the CD's my son had left in the car.

And....I have a new favorite band. Vampire Weekend. (I swore I wrote this before I looked up any reviews, or actual info. So this is blind).

Admittedly, a bit too much self-aware northeastern prep school cleverness. And the drummer goes back and forth between doing a version of "More cowbell! I want more cowbell!" with his cymbals, which he apparently just got for xmas and is really excited about, and then veering toward a sound that appears to be playing drums on someones plastic kitchen chair.

All that I concede.

But....how cool does it sound? And the lyrics are just smashing, and surprising. Here's "Mansard Roof":

I see a mansard roof through the trees
I see a salty message written in the eaves
The ground beneath my feet
The hot garbage and concrete
And now the tops of buildings, I can see them too

The Argentines collapse in defeat
The admiralty surveys the remnants of the fleet
The ground beneath their feet
Is a nautically-mapped sheet
As thin as paper
While it slips away from view

And I really loved "Blake's Got a New Face," and "Walcott."

**********************
Okay, so I promised myself I would finish writing before looking at reviews. Now, I just looked.

And, as you the astute reader already knew, my "new" favorite band is in fact a little old to be called new. In fact, I should probably get my ass kicked before homeroom by the punks who hate pseudo-African emo-wanna-be ripoff artists. But I'll be listening to that album for the next week or so, when I drive.

If you have NOT kept up, you may find this quick historical description informative, and funny.

Nigel Tufnel opens a sweets shop!

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:26:00 +0000

More Angus book reviews

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:30:00 +0000

1. The Yiddish Policeman's Union by Michael Chabon.

Chabon creates an absorbing counterfactual world with a hard-boiled detective story inside it. Informative and hilarious, big chunks of the book are as good as any fiction I've read. Chabon is a terrific writer. The ending does not do the rest of the book justice, but I flew through this book and really enjoyed it. It's along the lines of "Gun with Occasional Music" by the brilliant Jonathan Lethem and "Hard-Boiled Wonderland & the End of the World by Murikami. Highly recommended.

2. A Case of Exploding Mangoes by Mohammed Hanif.

This is an awesome debut novel. It tells the story of the death of Pakistani dictator Zia and offers several options for how his plane went down. It's by turns sarcastic, poignant, & informative, but always funny. Again the pages flew by for me. The side characters of Baby O and Uncle Starchy will stay with me for a long time. I saw someone describe it as a cross of "Catch-22" and "Libra", which is good, but I'd throw in "A Confederacy of Dunces" into the mix as well.

3. The White Tiger by Aravind Adiga

An even better debut novel. This is a 270 page anti-India screed. It's lovely. It reminds me very much of an extended Thomas Bernhard rant, though there is way more action here than in a Bernhard book. Indian politics, corruption, caste system, and the heinousness of village life all get vigorously rubbed in your face. I read this all in a single afternoon here in Santa Fe. Just wouldn't stop and put it down to go outside. You gotta check this out.

Nachas Grande

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:33:00 +0000

As has been noted before, I like cheesy nachas.

Thursday night: Younger younger Munger (Brian) played in the city semifinals for Raleigh summer baseball, 16-18 division. We are ahead 2-0, fourth inning. Pitcher having trouble, walks bases loaded. We get a grounder to pitcher, force at home, one out.

Then...fly ball to Brian, who is playing left field. Medium deep. Brian misjudges it a little, comes in, has to go back out. Catches it, and throws it home, weight on his back leg.

And the ball comes in a line to the catcher, chest high, right on the baseline. Runner from third, tagging up and running, is out by two steps. Inning over.

We end up winning, 3-0. On to the city finals.

FINALS: Neanderbill and the lovely Sharon come out to the game. Beautiful sunset, temps in the low 80s, low humidity. Fantastic. Maybe 100 people watching, cheering.

First inning: Runner on second, one out, Brian batting. Strike, ball, foul.
Then foul, foul, foul, all with two strikes. Good battle. Enemy pitcher, big kid, muscles up and fires a hard fastball. Brian takes a nice easy two strike style swing, and lines sharply into center. Run scores on the single.

Brian steal second, takes third on a wild pitch, scores on slow grounder to second. We lead 2-0, with Brian driving in run number one, and scoring run number two.

Third inning, Brian playing third, our pitcher is having trouble, two walks. Runner on second takes off for third. Pitcher steps off, without balking. But throws kind of a sidearm thing to third. Brian, scrambling to cover, reverses direction, scoops up short hop throw, and reaches over to tag the runner. Huge out.

A hit, a strikeout, a hit, another walk. Now, 2-1, bases loaded, two outs. Fast batter. Batter tops one, slow roller to Brian. He charges hard, amazingly (really hard to get kids to do this, for some reason.) Ball takes funny hop, bounces up his arm, but he keeps it in front of him. Picks it up, and of course I can see the future: he is going to throw it 11 feet high, into the foul territory behind third [CORRECTED: FIRST!] base, and three runs are going to score.

Except that he makes a throw like third baseman, gets on top of it, and fires a laser right into the first baseman's glove. Runner out by half a step, takes off his helmet, and kicks it, getting a warning from the ump. We are out of the jam. Still ahead, 2-1.

Top of the fourth inning. Brian leads off. Goes with an outside pitch, and hits it exactly where I was so sure he was going to throw it. Over the first baseman's head, right fielder tries to cut it off. But it is crushed, and skips past him, all the way to the wall. Brian trips going around first, because he knows he has a triple. But the right fielder has a weak arm, and Brian DOES have a triple.

Scores on a wild pitch. We have three runs.

Bottom of fourth inning. High fly foul ball. Hits the arm of unmoving Neanderbill's chair with a loud crack. He is not looking. Pretty scary.

Bottom of the last inning. We are now ahead 3-1. Disaster is in the air. Our pitcher is struggling with the strike zone. Ump calling it tighter and tighter. At one point, our pitcher holds his arms out to the side and yells, "Where was that? WHERE WAS THAT?" after a fine-looking pitch is called a ball.

A walk, a wild pitch, runner goes to third. A strikeout. 1-2 count on next batter, bottom of the order. This kid couldn't hit if he had a boat paddle. Inexplicably, our pitcher throws a loopy curve in the dirt. Gets past catcher, goes to the fence. Run scores. One out, score is 3-2.

ANOTHER walk. Goes to second on wild pitch. Fly ball to short left. Runner takes off, then goes back. Left fielder tries to be hero, throws if over head of second baseman, even though runner is already back. Runner goes to third. First baseman, backing up throw to second, does NOT just run the ball in. Instead, he fires it sort of kind of toward home. Catcher desperately blocks throw in the dirt. Runner stays at third.

So...two out, runner on third, we are ahead 3-2, last inning of city championship. Top of their order now. Cocky kid who thinks is great. He isn't a great player, but he is just fine. Any hit, any error, or a wild pitch ties it. Everyone is screaming. Even Neanderbill is smiling slightly. The lovely Sharon is yelling.

Cocky kid hits a silo shot, just fair, halfway between home and first. First baseman, none too steady on fly balls, is looking up into the lights, the late night sky, and he has a good three seconds to contemplate the implications of failure. I can see the future: It is going to hit off the heel of his glove, and the runner is going to score from third. We are going to lose.

Except that he catches it clean. And I get my nachas. Yum. City champions. Trophies, photos, dancing and yelling. When the nurse first says, "Oh, it's a boy!" this is what you are dreaming of, but hardly dare hope to have.

(nod to Newmark's Door, for turning me onto nachas in the first place)

Ode to Neil West (The Lord is my Barber)

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 13:15:00 +0000

From the comments on Mungowitz's WITBD post. I am too proud of myself to leave it there.

The lord is my barber, I shall not want.

He maketh me lie down to get shampooed. He restoreth my highlights.

Yea though I have male pattern baldness, I will fear no dandruff. For he is with me. His clippers and combs, they comfort me.

Surely goodness and mercy will follow me all the days of my life, and I will get free haircuts forever.

The NRA loses a couple members

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 13:10:00 +0000

(click directly on story to enlarge for ez reading).

WITBD? Edwards or Spitzer?

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:19:00 +0000

Let's play, "Who is the Bigger Doofus?"

Today's contestants: Elliot Spitzer, Gov. of NY, and user of (illegal) prostitution services.

And he'll be playing John Edwards, ex-Senator and (now ex) candidate for political office.

Arguments for Spitzer being the bigger Doofus:
1. He systematically abused his offices, from prosecutor to Governor, to attack the financial sector of the entire U.S., which happens to be headquartered in NY. He did nothing to prevent actual abuses of the Enron or credit crunch type, but he extorted huge amounts of money, and cost taxpayers and investors billions of dollars with absurd charges and investigations. A dangerous, narcissistic demagogue.

2. He paid a girl to touch his winky. He's married, but he spent tens of thousands of dollars on the winky-touching thing. This is illegal. I don't think it should be, but it is. And since Doofus #1 had made a career of being Mr. Moral, it matters that it was illegal. But he also broke a promise: HE WAS MARRIED. As far as his wife knew, they were "happily" married.

Arguments for Edwards being the bigger Doofus:
1. He systematically abused the legal system, extorting billions of dollars from corporations and small businesses that may or may not have directly harmed individuals. He was an ambulance-chasing trial lawyer who bankrupted dozens of companies. And then he took the majority of the funds that were "won" in these cases, so he could build a $6 million, 40,000 sq ft mansion in Chapel Hill with its own indoor hardwood halfcourt basketball court. He also has several other homes, again from intercepting money that was supposed to pass from bankrupted companies where workers lost jobs to people who had been harmed, possibly in some cases by something the company had done.
Then, Edwards decided he needed to give back. He created a small charity designed to provide college scholarships (just pulled the plug on this), and ran for U.S. Senate. He was, by all accounts of staffers who really know, the very worst Senator since...well, the very worst Senator. Lazy, unprepared, uninterested. (These same staffers, who work for Repubs, claim Hillary Clinton was one of the BEST they ever saw, by the way). Then he ran for Prez, and then he "worked" at the UNC Law School (at least, he had an office!). And then he ran for Prez again. On a platform of giving other people's money to poor people. This was a lot like his law career: use the system take money at gunpoint from people who worked for it and created jobs, and give it to other people. This scam didn't work as well, because (1) voters couldn't pay him as much as plaintiffs, so it wasn't as profitable, and (2) voters are apparently not as gullible as juries.

2. He found a girl who apparently wanted to touch his winky, for free. This makes some sense, because Edwards is MUCH better looking than Spitzer, I have to admit. The downside is that Edwards is MARRIED, to a brave woman who has supported him through two Prez campaigns, even though in the first she was ill with, and now appears to be dying from, breast cancer. Edwards told his wife of the affair in 2006, and she STILL supported him for the Presidency in 2008, never saying a word. But it appears that Edwards did NOT break off the affair, as he had promised, but in fact visited his girlfriend at the Beverly Hills Hilton IN THE PAST MONTH!

Now, folks, it's time to play. In terms of moral character, it's a toss-up, a zero-zero tie. In terms of the moral content of the action, I have to give the nod to Edwards here. Spitzer lied to his wife, but he paid good money for the services. Edwards may well have fathered Rielle Hunter's child, the affair has been going on for years, and apparently continues to go on, and ELIZABETH IS DYING, FERCRISSAKES! Elizabeth tried to support Edwards in his most recent campaign, EVEN AFTER SHE KNEW OF THE AFFAIR, and Edwards still went back to see the other woman.

Not close. Edwards is a MUCH bigger doofus. You have to give Spitzer credit for his damage to the economic system, and his amazing self-promotion, but Edwards wins.

To check my conclusion, I asked my own panel of female experts.

My hairdresser: "Wheech one is worse? Hell, I keel them both." (She is a Puertorriquena, and I don't think she is actually kidding. I think she'd use a knife, and I shudder to think HOW she'd use it).

My wife: "If you even touched another woman, I'd shoot you." (How did this get to be about me? Sweetie? Dear?)

My colleague at Duke: "Edwards is a much bigger &$@$^ing $#&%$#." (She ignored the rules, where "Doofus" is the category, but I'm assuming she MEANT Doofus. This woman is a liberal Dem, but this issue is a little deeper than politics.)

An Improv Moment

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:15:00 +0000

Last night, my older son's wonderful girlfriend (and, she IS wonderful) was over after they had watched a movie out.

She was describing the situation of a friend: "It's so sad. My friend has the saddest dog in the world. She's 16 years old, she's blind and deaf, and she has seizures."

ME: "No wonder her dog is sad."

Now, most people would not find this funny. Certainly NO ONE else in the room at the time found it funny.

But I did. It strikes me, as it often does, that I may not be all that easy to be around. Thanks, people, for putting up with....whatever that is.

A Point for Ryan

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:00:00 +0000

A point for Ryan, I have to admit.

I was fussin' about being left out of the "nicknames" article, which looked at the evolution of names for my opponents.

In particular, I noted that I was willing to use "Mike" as a way of shortening my name, if it meant that I could be included in even the last line of articles. I don't need equal time, but (as Glenn Close put it in "Fatal Attraction" )"I won't be IGNORED."

Ryan Teague Beckwith responded, in an email, that I was obviously confused. The story was about HOW MANY nicknames candidates had. And, since I had sent him my email from an account that identified the sender as "Mungowitz," it brought me up short. The story would have to be pretty long.

He's right. A partial nickname list for me would include:

To my family: "Mikey"
High school: "Mole" (Dutch Boy and Bayou Jack, can I hear an amen, in comments?)
College: "Mungey"
Grad school: "'I'm Really Good at Putt-Putt' Boy"
Austin, TX (at UT): Grease (The original Killer Grease Mungowitz lives in Austin)
Duke: El Jefe / Killer Grease Mungowitz

Now, sure, I go by "Mike," though my wife calls my "Michael" when she's in a good mood.

If you asked me what I would LIKE to be called? "Governor."

Wow....I Got Chili punkd fo sho!

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 22:34:00 +0000

Quite a bad day at the Munger campaign, and for journalistic consistency.

1. First, the Charlotte Observer runs this story. Notice the total ABSENCE of any mention that I even exist.

Now....I have a PhD in Econ. I have worked as an analyst at the Federal Trade Commission, I have taught energy economics at Dartmouth College. I have published extensively on energy, including work on low level radioactive waste disposal siting and technology.

Oh, and I almost forgot: I'M A CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR! As a candidate for Governor, just like the two who WERE mentioned in the story in the Big O, I issued a press release, and wrote up my position on drilling on my campaign blog. If you Google "munger drilling", you get my position in the fourth line. If you Google "munger libertarian drilling", you get it in the FIRST line, and three of the first four entries. Even a reporter, I think, should be able to use advanced research techniques like this. If he WANTED to, that is.

Shame on you, Mark Johnson. If you want to email him, here you go.

2. Then, the News and Observer actually goes out of it's way to deliver the coup de grace. (Ryan, I though we were tight, man....sad, really). Here's Ryan's story.

Mr. Beckwith goes through all the permutations of Bev Basnight's different names, her travels through the many lands of marriage and names she doesn't even use any more. He also talks, at length, about whether Pat McCrory goes by Pat or Patrick.

Ryan...sweetie...what every HAPPENED to us? Nothing about "Mike" or "Michael"? Not one word about the other candidate in the race?

You could at least have said this:

"The other candidate, Mike Munger, Libertarian, uses "Mike" rather than "Michael" because it is shorter. He knows that improves the chances of getting included in the last sentence of stories." Only 25 words. How hard would that be?

I want my nickname included with the others! Then, I'd feel like a REAL boy, just like Pinocchio. (He went by "Woodie," as you might know.)

A final lagniappe: Bev Perdue's nickname in the Senate was, and is, "Dumpling." Yet, Mr. Beckwith, in a clear show of journalistic timidity, left this out of the story.

Sad day for journalism in NC. A sad day.

He Made a B?

noreply@blogger.com (Mungowitz) — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 21:46:00 +0000

This guy took his own courses, to get more credit hours. And he even gave himself a B, so it wouldn't look too obvious. Or, maybe he just sucked in that class. Either way, pretty impressive.
Alabama College Is Told to Reinstate Instructor Who Took His Own Courses

An instructor who was fired for enrolling in his own classes at Bishop State Community College, in Mobile, Ala., should be reinstated and given back pay, an arbitrator has ruled, according to a report in the Press Register, a local newspaper.

Henry Douglas, an instructor in Bishop State's culinary department, was terminated by the college when a state audit revealed that he had enrolled in 10 courses that he himself was teaching, and was listed as taking six other courses at times when he was scheduled to teach. The Press Register reported in 2007 that he received six A grades and one B in seven courses.

Mr. Douglas argued that he had taken the courses at the behest of administrators at the college, who thought that his associate degree needed augmentation. The instructor and his lawyer contended that the courses were taken as independent-study courses, and that Mr. Douglas was not in fact teaching himself.

Herman Packer, the Bishop State employee who had supervised and advised Mr. Douglas, was also fired after the situation came to the attention of state officials. Mr. Packer was also reinstated earlier this summer in a separate arbitration procedure. He will serve a seven-day suspension.

James Odom Jr., the arbitrator in the case, decided that a reprimand issued to Mr. Douglas by the college was sufficient, and that taking any other action against the instructor was unfair. —Richard Byrne

From the Chron of Higher Ed (nod to KH)

Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 13:41:00 +0000

George Miller and his buds on the Education and Labor Committee should be commended for having read their Orwell. How else to explain that their bill outlawing secret ballots for votes on whether a shop becomes unionized is titled "The Employee Free Choice Act".

Even George F. McGovern understands that the bill actually reduces free choice (and surely that is the actual intent of its sponsors as well, no?). "Under EFCA, workers could lose the freedom to express their will in private, the right to make a decision without anyone peering over their shoulder, free from fear of reprisal".

People, I have worked in a union shop as a union member and have even been a (minor) official in the union (the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers IBEW). While the Union was, in my judgment, a net plus for us workers, it was heavy handed in demanding that everyone toe the official line.

Bottom line: The secret ballot should be used MORE in union decision making, not less.

Darn tootin'

noreply@blogger.com (Angus) — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:45:00 +0000