“I see the resident faculty endorsed themselves for the Faculty Senate,” Professor Plum said as he held up a copy of The Daily Squirrel.

He must have read the mail. (More)

Blogistan Polytechnic Institute doesn’t have a daily newspaper, so Professor Plum had printed one on his own. He handed it to us before leaving with Ms. Scarlet to join the self-endorsing resident faculty in the wine cellar library, where they’ll spend the weekend drinking thinking on our motto of Magis vinum, magis verum (“More wine, more truth”).

Meanwhile, the Professor of Astrology Janitor seemed confused by Chef’s pot-sized raise at the river in the staff poker game. He had raised before the flop with a pair of Tens, and Chef had simply called. The Professor of Astrology Janitor had bet when the Ace-Jack-Ten flop gave him three Tens, and again Chef called. Worried that she might hold King-Queen for an Ace-high straight, the Professor of Astrology Janitor checked when a Four fell on the turn, and Chef checked as well. Another Jack on the river gave him a full house and, no longer worried about Chef’s possible straight, he confidently bet again.

His confidence faded when Chef put in that raise. There weren’t many hands she could have that beat his Tens full of Jacks. A Jack-Ten would give her a better full house, but he doubted she would have called his pre-flop raise unless she her Jack-Ten were suited, and there was only one Ten left unseen so there was only one possible suited Jack-Ten. She might have the two remaining Jacks and four of a kind, but again that was only one possible combination. She might have an Ace-Jack for a better full house, but Chef rarely called a pre-flop raise with an unsuited Ace. With two Jacks not yet seen, there were only two possible suited Ace-Jacks. That left a pair of Aces and yet another better full house. There were six possible combinations of paired Aces, but surely she would have raised with Pocket Rockets before the flop.

Yet Chef must know he had a strong hand, and he doubted she was bluffing. She had something she thought was the best hand. After dithering for a few more seconds, he decided he had to know. He called and began his plaintive mewling even as he turned up his cards. The mewling caught in his throat when he saw Chef’s pair of Fours, and he smiled as he followed her to the kitchen to help her finish her Pumpkin Breakfast Casserole, leaving your lowly mail room clerk to review the week’s correspondence….


Dear Ms. Crissie,

Ten months ago we endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination for president. Now, in the closing days of the general election campaign, the question is which of the two contenders deserves to be the next president of the United States. Both President Barack Obama and Governor Romney are superbly qualified. Both are graduates of the Harvard University Law School who have distinguished themselves in government, in public service and in private life. Both are devoted husbands and fathers.

Which candidate could forge the compromises in Congress to revive our economy and balance our budget? When the question is framed in those terms, Mitt Romney emerged the stronger candidate. Don’t you agree?

Register Editors in IA

Dear Register Editors,

We agree that Mitt Romney is a master forger, having spent the past year producing ever changing facsimiles of his own history, policy positions, and values. However, we doubt he could or would even attempt to forge any compromise in Congress. While Romney did seek bipartisan consensus as the Governor of Massachusetts, he had no other choice as Democrats held huge majorities in the state legislature. Were he to win the presidency, he would almost certainly have a GOP-led House and we are confident would try to force hard-line Republican bills through a Democratic-controlled Senate. You presume that he would succeed, perhaps because you believe Senate Democrats would not be as staunchly obstructionist as Republicans have been since 2009. Conversely, your argument presumes President Obama would continue to get no cooperation from House Republicans in a second term. Even if both of your presumptions were true, your conclusion seems an endorsement of Republican political hostage-taking. You seem to believe the only workable solution is to let Republicans have their way, and we conclude that solution would be a forgery of the democratic process itself.


Dear Ms. Crissie,

Did the resident faculty really endorse themselves for the Faculty Senate? And who gets to vote on Faculty Senate membership? Oh, and do you endorse Chef’s Pumpkin Breakfast Casserole?

Endorsingly Hungry in Blogistan

Dear Endorsingly Hungry,

Yes, the resident faculty did endorse themselves, writing: “We feel we’ve done an outstanding job in our previous term, and we’re confident we will do just as well in our next term. Thus, we enthusiastically recommend that we elect ourselves to another term on the Faculty Senate.”

As for Chef’s Pumpkin Breakfast Casserole, we heartily endorse it. To make it, first wipe down a 9×13″ casserole dish with melted butter, then place 10 cubed slices of bread in the dish. In a bowl, mix a 15-ounce can of pumpkin puree, ⅔ cup of white sugar, 1 teaspoon each of ground cinnamon and vanilla extract, ½ teaspoon each of ground ginger and ground nutmeg, a pinch of salt, 6 beaten eggs, 1 cup of milk, 1 5-ounce can of evaporated milk, and ½ cup of chopped pecans. Pour the mixture over the bread cubes, cover with plastic wrap, and refrigerate it overnight. The next morning, remove the plastic wrap and bake the casserole at 350° for about 45 minutes, until the pumpkin mixture is set and a toothpick pressed in the center comes away clean. Bon appétit!



Register Editors in IA.


Happy Sunday!