Re: "Drunken Boxer Style"

1

Seemed a little harsh on Maureen Dowd. I guess I've always thougth I should cut her a little slack because she's high-larious.

But right on the mark with David Brooks. He really is magically tool-licious.

horizontal rule
2

Bah! It is the official position of this blog that Maureen Dowd is teh suxx0r. Says me, at least.

horizontal rule
3

She's funny when she's attacking someone bad, and evil when she's attacking someone good, and she has shown no capacity for distinguishing between the two. In my book, that makes her pretty worthless.

horizontal rule
4

As a newbie to Unfogged, I had not yet been made aware of MoDo's teh suxxor status.

Consider my previous comment a steaming pile of poop. Except for the part about David Brooks. He's still magically tool-licious.

horizontal rule
5

Welcome, NCP, to our long and honorable traditon of making fun of David Brooks.

I cringe even at MD's attacks on people I don't like. The superficial is a blog, not a genre.

horizontal rule
6

The superficial is a blog, not a genre.

BURN!!!

horizontal rule
7

I had a very nice, if I say so myself, bit on MoDo on this blog, which included the lines "should I rather bleach" and "practice hip kid speech". Even SB liked it. But google and yahoo can find it not. I am sorely tempted to append a sad face here.

horizontal rule
8

People like Ezra and Yglesias have an incredible amount of insight into human nature for people of their tender years. Makes me feel old and stupid, kind of like our summer associates.

horizontal rule
9

If your summer associates are old and stupid, that's probably a bad sign for your firm.

horizontal rule
10

Even SB liked it.

Even the liberal etc. etc.

horizontal rule
11

Yes, Ben, my sentence structure sucks. That's because I'm old and stupid.

horizontal rule
12

erm.

Funny thing -- this is exactly the rightwing's agenda...you'd never notice Newt Gingrich silently mouthing along in the background.

Ezra words this as if its inherently wrong for a pundit to support the rightwing agenda. But that would also seem to imply that it's wrong for a pundit to support any political agenda (b/c there's no disctinction drawn in Ezra's post). It's a little thing, but it's unnecessarily partisan. Unless someone actually has an argument that pundits can't agree with and argue for reforms that coincide with those on the platforms of major political parties.

Anyway, Brooks is of course a total maroon. I doubt he's even open to reasonable argument, and not worth engaging directly. But since I have different standards for Ezra, I'll also mention that I find a problem with this:

Were Brooks really serious about increasing the educated class, he'd mention not martial structure, but the minimum wage,

Which would be true if Brooks' desire to raise our education level was an equal or greater priority to him than not raising the minimum wage. I doubt that that is the case. Is he guilty anyway for omission? An impartial newspaper article would be, but in a limited op-ed, it doesn't seem so. After all, Brooks might think he was misleading his readers by mentioning the benefits of raising minimum wage without providing the appropriate space to all his perceived negatives effects of raising minimum wage.

horizontal rule
13

1. We excuse MoDo because she's attractive. If she keeps drinking, this will no longer be an issue.
2. I honestly can't make out what MoDo is saying half the time beyond, "I was the most popular girl in high school." Which is sad, because every now and again, she write a sentence that cracks like a punch in the face.
3. I think Ezra's done much better posts, and I'm not particularly crazy about this one. Mostly for the reasons Michael notes. (Caveat: I've only read the first sentence of Michael's comment.)
4. Brooks is horrific, but what's embarrassing is that no one in the media, not even the ones put there to act as Dems, will call him on it. That's what I find most infuriating--listening to weak-wristed Dem responses to Brooks's water-carrying commentary.

horizontal rule
14

Ezra words this as if its inherently wrong for a pundit to support the rightwing agenda.

No, he words it as if it were deceptive for Brooks to do it in the liberal-sounding-kinda-bipartisan way he does. It's not the rightwingery, it the insidious way in which he gets you nodding along with him until he pulls out the right-wing doublewhammy.

horizontal rule
15

8: I must say I've never had a summer associate make me feel stupid. I've had one make me think "She's going to be a better lawyer than I am," but she's unusual.

horizontal rule
16

Well, I refuse to actually read Brooks, so I don't quite know what I'm talking about. But in I suppose a more abstract sense, I don't get your objection, LB. It seems you object on grounds of character; Brooks is pretending to be bi-partisan, but is actually advocating a partisan platform. But this would only seem to be wrong if Brooks was pretending to be bi-partisan in bad faith, and advocating certain reforms in bad faith. Certainly the former might be true (I suspect more out of knee-jerk habit for Brooks though), but it might not, too, and I'm not at all certain that the latter is true.

horizontal rule
17

Caveat:I've only read the first sentence of Michael's comment.)

Save the caveats, and the reading me if you're already emotionally overloaded, and just agree with me. You're in good hands.

horizontal rule
18

I totally loved Brooks this morning. College . . .tax credits . . . tuition . . . WHAM! Moms need to stay home and stay married! And Hilllary Clinton is a feminazi!

I mean, it's all just so obvious, the way he puts it, isn't it?

horizontal rule
19

Not that it makes him a bad person, but it does make him someone to warn people against. "You, there, liberal guy -- don't listen to Brooks! He's going to sweet-talk you in and then pull the right-wing wool over your eyes."

horizontal rule
20

Maybe you've already seen this, but Paul Glastis just chimed in with a little more info on Brooks' hackery over at the washington monthly.

horizontal rule
21

The problem with Brooks isn't that he sounds "liberal-sounding-kinda-bipartisan" and gets you to nod; it's that he sounds sane and ineffectually nice, and that that's what gets you to nod. We so deperately want to believe there is someone sane on the other side that we're willing to go far more than halfway to meet him. We're willing not to rip bad arguments to bits for the sake of comity.

horizontal rule
22

If Glastris is right (thanks Michael!), Brooks has a more serious problem: You can't trust his facts. I hate that.

Glastris also points to this comprehensive takedown.

horizontal rule
23

But I love David Brooks. That "bobo" thing was brilliant.

horizontal rule
24

And, I might add: Anecdotal evidence is still evidence, is it not?

horizontal rule
25

You all just hate me because I'm too beautiful and successful.

horizontal rule
26

Shorter Maureen Dowd: I hate men. Why does no one love me?

I hate myself for saying that but christ her writing makes me want to club her with her pointy shoes.

horizontal rule
27

15: Well, I was exaggerating a bit for rhetorical effect, but I'm pretty blown away by some of the resumes, especially considering that we pay half or less of what they could make on the mainland. Resume does not necessarily equal smarts, though.

horizontal rule
28

Mainland? Are you in Hawaii, or where?

horizontal rule
29

Yep.

horizontal rule
30

Dude. That's why they have amazing resumes -- who wouldn't be a summer associate in Hawaii.

I should have thought of that -- back in law school, I still spoke Samoan some, and in a Hawaiian firm there's a tiny but non-zero chance it might come up. And, you know, Hawaii.

horizontal rule
31

We try pretty hard not to hire people who are looking for a cool summer vacation on the firm. It doesn't always work out that way, but somebody with an amazing resume but no plausible story about wanting to be in Hawaii long-term is less likely to be hired.

horizontal rule
32

You're in Hawaii? I'll definitely sleep with you. Just send me a plane ticket.

horizontal rule
33

I'd love to, but the rules as laid down by my wife are that I'm allowed to have as many girlfriends as I want as long as I don't spend any time or money on them.

horizontal rule
34

Frequent flyer miles?

horizontal rule
35

30, 31: But if you're interested in a lateral offer, I'd sure as hell be a strong supporter.

horizontal rule
36

34: Hmm....

horizontal rule
37

Because your firm needs more litigators who spend all day fooling around online?

horizontal rule
38

What's a lateral offer?

horizontal rule
39

Hiring a lawyer other than fresh out of law school. I came into my current firm as a lateral, because I'd worked at another law firm before.

At some (most?) big firms, the normal career path is summer associate to partner all at the same firm. I don't think there's anyplace you couldn't get hired laterally, but there are certainly firms that don't do it much.

horizontal rule
40

Because your firm needs more litigators who spend all day fooling around online?

LizardBreath's web addiction is indeed troubling. However, as someone who has worked with her IRL, I can tell you that she is one hell of a good lawyer.

horizontal rule
41

Apparently there's a niche here for people who are good enough at what they do that they can get away with spending way too much time screwing around, yes.

"Lateral" just means "not straight out of law school."

horizontal rule
42

41 to 37 and 38.

horizontal rule
43

Mmm. I did love living on a Pacific island, and I've always wanted to learn to surf.

horizontal rule
44

I've never been to law school. Wanna hire me? I'm not gonna have a job in a couple months.

horizontal rule
45

They must have a marketing department. How hard could PR be?

horizontal rule
46

A lot of times, formal vocational training is a joke anyway -- you really learn everything on the job. As such, I support hiring Bitch as a lawyer, particularly since she already has a doctoral degree. Just scratch off the "Ph" and write a "J," if it makes you feel better.

horizontal rule
47

They say it's a doctoral degree. I only bring this up to make people with real doctorates pissed, though.

(Does anyone know why that is? It's really not comparable in rigor to an academic doctorate -- if I were going to name the degree lawyers get from scratch, I'd call it a masters. Is there some history behind calling it a doctorate?)

horizontal rule
48

We excuse MoDo because she's attractive.

Exactly. And she spawned the canonical Bitch-baiting thread, so that's something.

horizontal rule
49

43: Kidding aside, you are more than welcome to deduce my not-so-secret identity from IP address and first name/last initial and e-mail me if you're ever so inclined. Or I'll e-mail you if so instructed. I don't post a valid e-mail here because I've never gotten around to setting up one that doesn't have my full name in it and I don't figure that anybody wants to talk to me outside of comments anyway, but I'm not very hard to find.

45: No marketing department, and working in admin here would be pretty shitty for political/personality reasons. But lots of national-security type stuff in town for Mr. B, depending on what he does, and various sorts of teaching and writing opportunities around if you don't mind being poorly paid and getting shit on from time to time.

horizontal rule
50

I'm already poorly paid. No big change then! And better weather! W00t!

horizontal rule
51

'Doctor' originally just meant someone who was a teacher. It's an honored academic title, basically. So you could be a doctor of the law, or a doctor of medicine, or a doctor of the church, etc.

horizontal rule
52

48: Damn, that's painful to read now. Thanks a lot.

horizontal rule
53

Without looking it up, I'll venture to say that the JD evolved out of the LLB in the late c19, at the same time as all the professions were shoring up their academic credentials, and around the early 1900s it began to become the required norm. I think in Britain they still have LLB though, i.e., an undergraduate education for law.

horizontal rule
54

50: All things considered, it's a pretty damn nice town. Too small and parochial sometimes, too crowded sometimes, too a lot of things sometimes, but a pretty damn nice town. Way too expensive, too, but not compared to SoCal. Salaries are generally lower here, but not so much if you're working for the feds (even indirectly, I think).

horizontal rule
55

They got a lot more strict about handing out the "doctor of the church" title over time.

If you're worried about global warming, I don't know if an island is your best bet. Plus: volcanos?

horizontal rule
56

53: Don't some of the Ivy schools still award LLBs?

horizontal rule
57

I think not (i.e., now I've looked it up, at least to the extend of Wikipedia).

There are LLM's, though, which I think you have to get after your JD's. So you get your doctorate first, then your master's. I don't know if there's another field like that.

horizontal rule
58

Without looking it up, I'll venture to say that the JD evolved out of the LLB in the late c19, at the same time as all the professions were shoring up their academic credentials, and around the early 1900s it began to become the required norm. I think in Britain they still have LLB though, i.e., an undergraduate education for law.

Process not completed, anyway, until much later than that. Older lawyer I used to work with told me he graduated about '45 with an LLB, and received a J.D. unsolicited from his law school about '62. It used to be common to admit to law school students who'd completed maybe two years of college.

horizontal rule
59

But volcanoes are pretty! Samoa had some of the most cartoonishly beautiful scenery -- waterfalls cascading down volcanic rocks into perfect little pools surrounded by ferns... and from what I remember of Hawaii the few times I was there, it was physically very similar.

horizontal rule
60

Process not completed

This I don't doubt. When I started in my field, which wasn't a billion years ago, there were still people around without doctorates.

horizontal rule
61

There were academics without doctorates? You're hardly older than I am, if you aren't younger (I know I knew, but I can't remember.)

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. My father worked as an architect in a prestigious NY firm most of his work life, and never graduated from college. But he's pushing 70.

horizontal rule
62

There were academics without doctorates

Yes, and not all of them that aged, either. And I'm the same age as Weiner.

horizontal rule
63

61: You're kidding, LB. Yes, there are people around with MAs and tenure. All over the place. And you're like my age w/in a year or two, right?

horizontal rule
64

Hey, I have an MA. Why don't I have tenure? I published a fucking article!

horizontal rule
65

64: Publications in Penthouse don't count.

horizontal rule
66

64: You're a white man. They don't give people like you jobs any more.

horizontal rule
67

I knew I shouldn't have loved learning!

horizontal rule
68

I'm the same age as Weiner.

I could swear that somewhere in the googleyahoohole you have copped to being slightly older. Anyway, in philosophy there are still people around without doctorates, if by 'around' you mean 'one of the big-deal professors in my old department, and Chris Bertram' (and many other UK-trained philosophers).

horizontal rule
69

62, 63: I guess I shouldn't be surprised, I really don't know thing one about academia. But I thought a PhD had been a minimum entry requirement for tenure track for decades.

horizontal rule
70

When I was in grad school people were getting hired to tenure-track jobs not having finished their PhDs, and at least some of them didn't finish for a couple of years thereafter. But this was frowned upon somewhat, and you would certainly need to finish it before tenure.

horizontal rule
71

Surprisingly not. Especially at small colleges and community colleges; it's only really recently that they've started demanding PhDs.

horizontal rule
72

Community colleges still generally only require a master's.

horizontal rule
73

It seems like a community college or another small institution might even be better off just hiring an MA-holder, because it'd be more likely that they would be interested primarily in teaching.

In English, that would be especially true, since so much of it is just teaching composition -- something that generally does not require having written a dissertation on Blake or something.

horizontal rule
74

That's true, and it can be an advantage for those who only have MAs. On the other hand, there are an awful lot of unemployed PhDs out there, and hiring them can give a CC more prestige.

horizontal rule
75

It's still true that most people at my department, at least, get the job with the Ph.D. not in hand but expected within a year or so. Formally, they're supposed to have it when they start the job (APA December, defend in April, two month long bender, move), but some guys figured out that the tenure clock doesn't start till you get the Ph.D. and delayed it just enough to be sneaky.

Yes, we spend six years here learning how best to pwn bureaucracy.

horizontal rule
76

Sneaky. Do people in other disciplines do this? I've never heard of it before.

horizontal rule
77

a minimum entry requirement for tenure track for decades.

Yeah, but some professorial careers last more than decades, too. Also, <insert some stuff here that would explain it better but would say too much about my career>.

Anyway, as to 75, say what? That's not true at any department I know of, and I've heard of a lot of dodges.

horizontal rule
78

somewhere in the googleyahoohole you have copped to being slightly older

Well, it's within a year; I guess I'm older than you but younger than B and Apo.

Also, what is up with the unsearchability? I'm still deeply saddened about my lost MoDo ode.

horizontal rule
79

I know personally three or four young men who didn't defend till a year in or so. Clock started with the Ph.D. in one of the cases. It meant he was a nine-year for our program even though he was only here eight.

horizontal rule
80

No, I know about the hiring unfinished people, it's the business about holding the tenure clock till they finish, which seems bizarre. I mean, what if you take a long time to finish? They must have negotiated something.

horizontal rule
81

I suspect it may have been a loophole in Institution X's regs, if only because the guy defended at a random time in October instead of a usual semester time. It wasn't like he couldn't have defended whenever.

horizontal rule
82

This guy was retired long before I got to college, though ten years ago, he was still kicking around as a Loeb trustee. He had a distinguished career, and he didn't even have a Masters degree ((an American masters, that is; I'm not talking about the Oxbridge "I got my BA with honours, waited 5 years and paid 25 quid to upgrade to an M.A.) Also note the cool career as a cryptographer decoding Japanese messages during the War.

horizontal rule
83

With thanks to our masterly colleague, I can say that the MoDo ode is here.

horizontal rule
84

Oxford has a thing called the B.Phil* -- a two year postgraduate 'masters' in philosophy -- which used to be pretty much the standard route into academia for philosophers.

A huge percentage of the big name British philosophers of the past half century or more didn't/don't have doctorates but either have an MA or the B.Phil. For example, I seem to recall that Derek Parfitt, for example, doesn't have one. Nor, as far as I remember, does Michael Dummett.

* The B.Phil is totally badass and, in many years, has a failure rate of around 25%.

horizontal rule