Shots in the Dark

Because who can resist kittens and baby otters, especially when they’re palling around with each other?

“Ambers” and Andrew Sullivan debate the implications of Judd Gregg’s pull-out.

(Only in Washington can you screw someone by pulling out.)

It’s sort of an interesting conversation, actually, but I was too distracted by Andrew’s shirt to pay much attention.

In the Wall Street Journal, Karl Rove argues that the Republicans have handled the stimulus bill brilliantly.

Over the past month, House Republicans have used the stimulus bill to redefine their party, present ideas on how to revive the economy, and force congressional Democrats and the president to take ownership of the spending programs soon to be signed into law.

…House Republicans had the wisdom to continue to talk to the Obama White House. This made them look gracious…

…The payoff is that support for the stimulus bill is falling.

This is classic Rove: the man has absolutely no interest in substance. Politics is all for him. Why was it good to oppose the stimulus? Because it energizes the Republican party. Nothing about what is good for the country.

Rove claims that he’s on the side of the people, pointing out that …a recent CBS News poll, for example, shows that 62% of Americans think “reducing taxes” will “do more to get the U.S. out of the current recession” — nearly three times the 22% who prefer “increasing government spending.”

Because average Americans’ economic expertise is always right, right? And polls that ask you to choose between a tax cut and “increasing goverment spending” are gospel.

But as far as politics goes, I think that Rove has it exactly wrong, as he so frequently did during the last eight years. Here’s how the debate over the stimulus plays around the country: Obama wants to help people, Republicans are obstructionist, and would rather score political points than help solve the country’s problems.

As the man in the bodega said the other day, Obama, si.

As I was buying my New York Post this morning, I overheard a Mexican guy buying some coffee say to the Yemeni guy behind the counter, “Mucho trabajo, poco dinero.”

And the Yemeni guy, who doesn’t know that much Spanish, said only, “Obama si, Obama si.”

Pretty interesting.

The Crimson reports on the voluntary retirement plan being offered to Harvard staff detailed below.

The announcement comes as the University struggles to right itself after the endowment plummeted 22 percent in a four-month period from its June 2008 value of $36.9 billion. Since then, University officials have projected a 30 percent decline in endowment value by the end of the fiscal year ending June 30, 2024.

The University has taken a series of progressively stronger measures to reduce personnel costs—which make up 48 percent of the overall budget—starting with a hiring freeze on FAS staff announced in November, soon followed by a University-wide salary freeze for faculty and non-union staff in December.

…Similar retirement incentives for faculty are also under consideration, FAS Dean Michael D. Smith said at the meeting.

Here are a couple of sentences I might have included in the Crimson piece.

One published report, however, has put the decline in the endowment’s value as high as 50 percent.

And this:

Hausammann declined to say how many voluntary retirements she hoped the program would attract and whether, if the number of those participating did not reach that level, further layoffs would be required.

One thing seems clear: That as Harvard tries to deal with its budget challenges, the staff are bearing the brunt of the pain. Not that voluntary retirement packages are inherently bad; for some people, they can be a great deal. But of course there is always the underlying threat of firings.

Thanks to the commenter below who posted this link to SI columnist Joe Posnanski and his quite smart and, I think, more than fair take on A-Rod.

I wish he hadn’t done it, and I think it’s a mark on his permanent record, but I still think he was and is a great baseball player, one of the greatest of all time. And I don’t think he should go to jail or be deported or be forced to write ”I will not do steroids“ 10,000 times on a chalkboard…

Then Alex Rodriguez spoke….

The Harvard grads who allege that Mark Zuckerberg stole the idea of Facebook from them wound up getting $65 million in their lawsuit against the company….which we know because their law firm inadvertently included the figure, which was supposed to confidential, in promotional materials.

Can’t anyone keep a secret anymore?

I went to this pretentious literary party not long ago, basically as a favor for a friend, who more or less blew me off within minutes after we arrived. So instead I was talking with a New Yorker writer, which always intimidates the heck out of me, especially when it’s one that I admire, which this was. And we were talking about how boring literary biographies are, and how the act of writing was really pretty boring, at least if you’re not doing it but reading about it, and how when English writers write biographies of literary types they focus on hot deviant sex, like with Graham Greene, and Americans are much more uptight about unmasking their literary heroes in this fashion.

Of course, this may be changing.

On Wowowow.com, author Roger Warner argues that John Updike messed around…a lot!

The ex-neighbor counted the [Updike] lovers he knew about on his fingers: The clipper-ship heiress who worked at the library. The majestic lady who taught children’s choir. The mother of the guy who sat in the pew next to Kim at [Updike’s] memorial service. “And my own first wife,” he said with a rueful laugh. “But then we were all fucking everybody else back then, in the Couples era. And so was I. Bad behavior. Very bad behavior. Which doesn’t mean I wouldn’t do it over again, if I had a chance.”

The majestic lady who taught children’s choir?

A clever Yale friend of mine wrote this for his 25 Things on Facebook (funny!):

1. I shot a man in Reno.
2. I’m too sexy for Milan.
3. I’ve got lots of friends in San Jose.
4. I am everyday people.
5. I’m every woman.
6. I’m the tax man.
7. I am the walrus.
8. I want to know what love is.
9. I want to run naked in a rainstorm.
10. I’d like to teach the world to sing.
11. My hips don’t lie.
12. I remember when rock was young.
13. I’m special. So special.
14. I can’t go for that.
15. There is always something there to remind me.
16. I’ve been alive forever, and I wrote the very first song.
17. I’m Rob Base, and I came to get down.
18. Regrets? I’ve had a few.
19. I believe the children are our future.
20. I believe I can fly.
21. I know what boys like.
22. I’ve been working in a coal mine.
23. I was working as a waitress in a cocktail bar.
24. I’m on the top of the world, looking down on creation.
25. I am a lineman for the county.

Harvard is offering voluntary buyouts to staff….will layoffs be next?

Dear Colleagues, 
I am writing today to inform you that Harvard University will offer a
voluntary early retirement program for eligible staff members. The Human
Resources community will begin to provide details of the program to
eligible staff next week. Generally, those staff members who are age 55
and over, have 10 or more years of participation service, and are
participants in the Defined Benefit Plan are eligible for this program.
As we work to meet the fiscal challenges that confront us, University
leaders have been taking a hard look at all of our operations and
capital planning to determine how we can reduce overall spending while
still investing in the vital academic programs that will ensure
Harvard's excellence in teaching and research for years to come. 
At every step of the way, we have been acutely aware of the needs of our
staff whose work supports the University's mission every day. We are
sensitive to the effect of our decisions on those who have helped make
Harvard great, and who rely on the University for their livelihoods.
With these objectives in mind, a generous early retirement program has
been under consideration since December.  Through the program, we aim to
design a voluntary program that will both offer generous incentives to
qualifying employees who may wish to retire and help the University make
progress in reducing overall compensation costs.  
Eligible staff members will receive individualized benefit statements,
and will be supported in their decision-making through overview sessions
that will include financial counseling assistance. In order to give
interested staff members the attention they deserve, the program will be
sequenced in two identical phases, with the first phase beginning in
February and the second in March. The initial phase will cover staff
members working with the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and the Harvard
Medical and Dental Schools. 
We will notify eligible staff once details of the program are finalized,
and information for the general community will be posted on HARVie
(http://harvie.harvard.edu). 
Sincerely,
Marilyn Hausammann
Vice President for Human Resources