University Regent Howard Rosenberg was a guest on Sam Shad’s “Nevada Newsmaker’s” pundit panel yesterday and was asked to respond to my blog column in which I asked why the university system was cutting rural campuses instead of high athletic director and sports coach salaries. Which led to this little on-air conniption:
“Let me start by saying Mr. Muth is, I’m sure, a very nice person. I wouldn’t know him if I fell on him, and I sincerely hope not to have to fall on him. But he does what he does in a way that, if I had a student do that to me, I’d flunk his butt and kick him out of class instantly. Number one, anybody can use sarcasm and scorn. You don’t have to be bright to do that.”
Hey, hey, HEY! I may not be bright, but I can assure you that not just “anybody” can use sarcasm and scorn effectively. It takes years and years of practice. The effective use of sarcasm and scorn is a high level art form. In fact, I’m thinking the Nevada System of Higher Education should add “Sarcasm & Scorn 101” to its course curriculum, right between the “Culture of Pizza” course and the “History of the Beatles” course.
I’m sorry. Was that sarcasm and scorn again?
By the way, Rosenberg is both an employee of the university system and a university regent. You don’t have to be very bright to recognize that as a world-class conflict of interest, despite any legal or ethics commission opinions to the contrary. Any public defense of the university budget by Mr. Rosenberg has to be viewed in light of Mr. Rosenberg’s irresolvable conflict. In other words, you can’t pay any attention to or take seriously anything he says on this subject.
Except for the part where he said he was sure I was a very nice person.
Posted on December 13th, 2007 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: Nevada
Chuck,
Surprised you didn’t comment on a good article in the LVSun today that covered the imminent “collapse” of funding for the state’s Western colleges if an 8% reduction hits higher ed (close down Hawthorne’s campus et cetera).
Odd, wasn’t higher ed doing just fine last fiscal year, which included September 2007, without the 14-20% increase in funding? In two months they’ve already spent the whole increase they got for fy 2007-2008?
Smells like Rogers has a dis-information action-plan set up and in motion; would love to read those internal e-mails!