Universities are financially autonomous...Not! #4

 

#4 Universities are financially autonomous.Not!

I haven’t blogged in a while, as I have been unwell, with several problems that have flummoxed our socialised medicine system here in the UK. I would put system in air quotes here, but I fell that that gag has been overused (Oh no it hasn’t).  I have also been spoiled for choice about topics, because loads of really unbelievable things have happened in the world that continue to inspire us to think that many people are more than a few cards short of a full deck. But enough about the Labour government. Sorry “Labour”[1] government (for my Canadian and British world wide fan base---OMG we have a Dutch person here [2]). I am mocking the current “Labour” government who so far are not governing very much like a Labour government. This is British understatement, for my growing Canadian and worldwide audience.  

Many of us in UK academia have been “doomscrolling” in social media and mainstream news outlets because the recent neoliberal news is international, national and local!

1.      Internationally Trump and his book burners are destroying US democracy, credibility and world security at a pace that even the most cynical of us could not imagine. UPDATE: Add destroying Ukraine, and the US federal reserve by buying crypto currencies, threatening law firms and judges, and demanding botox of the senior staff[3]. You cannot make this stuff up.  These examples are getting worse by the day.

2.      Nationally, most UK universities now are reporting major financial problems and “restructuring” (neoliberalspeak for firing people who are not in management). I pause to remind my now burgeoning readership that that should read “yet more restructuring” (neoliberalspeak for firing some of those non-management people who survived the last firing rounds). These examples are getting worse by the day.

3.      And of course, locally, unless perhaps you are at one of the ten really big older Universities, you are reading the local “outward-facing” news of yet more efficiencies and strategic plans coming your way.  (I thought we were at peak sh*t about two weeks ago, but the world has outdone itself of late).[4] The situation locally is getting worse by the day.

If you survive this cull (shall we call it what it is, although after several rounds of this sort of thing, the “dead wood” has gotten rather thin on the ground), you won’t just be emptying your own wastebasket (you have been doing that since firing round 1 or 2 in all likelihood); management have many new and exciting plans to broaden your skillset and provide you with unique opportunities and challenges made possible by their 21^st century “vision for a sustainable future”.  Ideally this vision should have a nice cuddly or inspirational sounding acronym like R.I.S.E. (University of East Anglia’s “Strategy 2030. RISE stands for “Research, Innovation, and Support for Enterprise).

I want to one day compare this remarkable piece of marketing with the equally aspirational but devoid of content Universities UK document “Blueprint for Change” ^[5]with some sort of discourse analysis package. It will be the same stuff, more or less; big on aspiration, low on strategy to achieve that aspiration.

Imagine I told my beloved that I have a Strategy 2026 document for the Bestelmeyer-Carey household. (God I could have fun with this one, but I would have to use non-stock photos of us of course, attractive but not too attractive - hard to manage for me and for my beloved, as I am of course gorgeous, and she is all brains and buck teeth[6]). The “case for change 110% strategy plus plan” (CFC110%SPP)^TM  includes me developing a six pack, regrowing my lost hair, cooking to Michelin-star status and become the world’s greatest housekeeper and lover (not necessarily in that order)^[7].

After a careful and considered appraisal of the 20-page[8]glossy document (I will do a shiny cover page of this one day; parodying this crap gives me some sense of perverse satisfaction), Bestelmeyer had some sensible comments on the difference between “aspirations” and “goals” and the means necessary to achieve them. That latter part of the plan, we soon discovered, needed development. But the opportunities we identified! A noble exercise indeed, unless you believe in realistic goal setting. See for example, “We are aiming for Russell Group research quality and impact, here at our {under-resourced} university {currently gasping for financial breath}. But back to R.I.S.E.! Many of us at other universities could use some inspiration.

Fig 1. Whats not to like? The UEA Strategy 2030…thing[9]. Respect, Empowerment, Ambition and Collaboration (these are good things, I am sure you agree). Research, Teaching and Organisational Development, but at the core, their “vision”. I hope its 20/20 this time around, because UEA seem to be in financial trouble just as often as everybody else.  (At least they have nicer buildings than Bournemouth)[10].

Here are some nice stock photos they have too:

Fig 2. Buttons for reading more about UEA’s Strategy 2030. Those people look really happy, do they not? (and they are, to my eye, attractive but not too attractive). I must click on their boxes to find out more, because…oh WHO ARE WE KIDDING??? WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO BE IN THEM. OK I clicked on the research one:

Insert some big-ask goals, and then here comes the strategy part (don’t blink or you might miss it):

To achieve this[11] (in giant bold font, we[12] will):

1. Extend our research base. (Some nice aspirational stuff about innovators, realising potential in here. Does not mention that scientists will be doing this thing or these things as well as emptying their own bins and filling in a lot of forms, many about how they might extend their research base if only they had the time to do it).  
2. Build our collaboration with Norwich Research Park partner organisations. (We will have more partners [because you don’t need more academics or support staff you need some more UK industry right?[13]] and we will focus on food, nutrition and health [because this STUFF sounds like it will get grant money even though the science will probably be a bit on the pedestrian side]. More capitalism, UK universities, because that has worked so well for us in the past!)
3. Increase the economic benefits and impacts of our research and innovation. (We need to sell sell sell. We don’t want to learn things, create things, teach things, discover things. Our government wants us to sell things!).
4. Enhance our international reputation. (We are going to do better in international league tables! Because national and international league tables have forced us all to raise our games, right? Things are so much better in terms of student learning and research quality than they were 30 years ago, surely? The market is always right[14]).

This stuff is wrong in so many ways. First, who is it designed for (and more importantly who did you pay to write this stuff and give you those stock photos of attractive but not too attractive models)? Your employees, UEA, are mostly pretty smart cookies and they probably think that this stuff is “fluff”[15]. My guess is that most of them read a few sentences of this thin gruel and don’t look any further (because this is the response[16] from everyone, always, except the sycophants[17], who will appear shortly). These documents are written by people who have some sort of “Barbie-aspiration thesaurus”[18] to hand, which is all about potential achievement, empowerment, teamwork, challenge, growth, partnership, and of course opportunist opportunities (because you can’t just use opportunity as a noun my dear it can also be a verb!). Is this stuff [19]what they teach people in marketing?  OMG, if yes, then that discipline is even softer than I feared. (I was going to use inverted commas around discipline here but restrained myself). 

Your staff are not going to read this expensive to produce superficial drivel; but this “engagement concern” does not stop the more sycophantic of them telling management ”how much they enjoyed it“, or how ”useful it is" in staff meetings, where you are mighty happy that the session is virtual, you have your camera turned off, and that you can’t remember how to insert a barf emoji [20]into the chat. Speaking for a friend.

OK maybe this is “opportunistic aspiration” verbiage is meant to be outward facing, maybe “end users” will skim it? Students, parents, funders, the government? Problem is, it sounds like the same fluff-stuff you read at other university websites too. Do you have to have it, else concerned parents and guidance counsellors wonder “should we encourage Pamela to apply to Oxford, they don’t seem to have a very shiny mission statement, like that slick one they have at Poppelton U[21]”?

Meanwhile, the vision of the management of many Universities, in spite of these glossy strategy documents has perhaps not been 20:20 in recent years, because around 90 of them are in financial trouble at the time of writing (https://qmucu.org/qmul-transformation/uk-he-shrinking/#current-redundancy-programmes). Recent press stories on these local job cuts have been disappointing in their analysis. Put some numbers in, interview someone from management (who may quote from their strategic plan, or might just throw in some “regrettable”, “not sustainables” into some word salad); interview a staff member at risk or a Union rep, then make a brief comment about tuition being frozen for quite a while and maybe a throwaway sentence about non Brit students visa “issues”.

But of course, our institutions assure us, they have made “plans” which include yet more restructuring but we also must grow! This is code for "we are not sure what the 18 year-olds want, but it probably isn’t you, and it might be this other new shiny thing, which we are sure that none of our competitors have thought of either".

I suppose the good news is that the blog I planned to write on student “quality” (those damned air quotes again), and student “engagement” (I can’t help it) can probably wait for a future blog because, ho boy, the former is heading in one direction only and the latter will, if it isn’t already, become completely irrelevant (even in the big ten universities).

Our government, one might think, would appreciate the economic and political correlates of some universities failing completely, and of course will be on top of things. I had to remove an older gag about Starmer and Reeves at this stage (23 March 2025), as they have just announced that their cunning plans for “growth” are not working, so obviously the disabled should pay the price, rather than tax the well off (crazy, I know!!)`.  

Maybe some of their government underlings recognise the dire political trainwreck that is hurtling down the track at them vis-a-vis universities going under? Or, maybe not: Their education secretary Briget Phillipson [22]and their Secretary for State for Skills, Jacqui Smith [23], saying, a few months apart, that they “love British Universities, shining beacons, opportunistic opportunities, blah blah blah.....We will do all we can to make sure...fit for purpose” [24]. They give us usual politico speak (did some of these people or their speechwriters come straight from university management?). Until we get to the revealing “get out of jail” catchphrase, written by a 30-something spin doctor in Labour HQ (too young to have been in university management, but a real admirer at the clever crafting of some of their strategic pronunciations).  I’ll put in bold font:

“UK universities are financially autonomous”.

For the middle and advanced middle aged amongst my growing readership, please read this in the voice of Ross from the sitcom Friends, when someone in his workplace ate his sandwich that was left in the communal fridge.

“My sandwich??? You ate my sandwich??

I really don’t know where to start with this one, and I feel the comedic value of poking holes in this lame duck are sort of limited, but maybe I will edit this all out. A wise person recently said “Of course, for those of us working in universities in most nations at the moment, this freedom doesn’t feel very free at all.[25]”  We have little freedom in almost anything, are overwatched by many for profit companies who charge us to market us (see blog #3; it’s really a protection racket, more or less) and we can’t choose what to charge for our product, while our wise overseers wonder what we are doing for staff morale, inclusivity, diversity and Lord knows what else.

The one thing the overseers overseers did do, was to remove caps on student numbers in England in 2016[26]. The one thing, everybody but maybe 10 greedy Gus institutions, did not want them to do. That is ironic, as it is the only quasi free market thing they have done in this ”worst of both worlds“ situation (also see British train services, or British water companies, for other compelling examples). The universities who encouraged this, apparently promised to “widen access”. No, really. Let’s let the market destroy some newer and smaller universities by expanding the elite ones, because that is going to help people from poorer regions of the nation.   

I must add that events move quickly in this intellectual and economic purgatory and recently, the Welsh government minister also jumped on the buck passing bandwagon to say “Ms Howells emphasised that universities are autonomous, “so they will be taking their own decisions, albeit with an input and a steer from myself and from Medr” [27]. Medr, by the way, is “an arm’s length body responsible for funding and overseeing tertiary education and research from August 2024”. See here, but Medr’s own website does not seem to work!

Fig 3. I’m excited by the possibility that Wales has made its own version of the Office for Students. (excited is not quite the word I am looking for[28]). To be fair the website did reappear, but too late to save you from this thin gag. Having said that, they are about to realease their own strategic plan!!!! [29]

Fig 4. To be fair, getting your website just right has to be a big priority, when you have only been up and running for 5 months and Universities are dropping from the sky like dead flies. (I am still torn about looking at the OFS one).

But Labour have acted, says Jacqui Smith! “Sir David Behan, who carried out the recent independent review of The Office for Students, has now been appointed as its interim chair[30], and Sir David will oversee the important work of refocusing the Office for Students’ role to concentrate on a number of key priorities, including prioritising the sector’s financial stability[31].” Medr in Wales are arguably doing the same.

Yes of course, it is so obvious. We need more accountants, this time from a regulator, that universities have to pay for in England! That is hilarious, is it not? It’s also actually ironic, isn’t it?[32]. They will charge you to check that your income is not matching your expenditures. “Yes, Vice Chancellor Carey, you are indeed 10 million in the red. Expect our invoice tomorrow”. Analogies escape me here.  

In a 2024 Guardian piece, which includes the tuition fee increase fiasco of 2009-10, William Davies argues that “Fourteen years on, the 2010 framework might now be said to combine the worst of the market with the worst of government. Universities and students are left with mounting financial risks, while the state continues to meddle and regulate in ways that only seem to exacerbate their distress.”. But do not worry: one idea of the government is to use levelling up funds to help the sector grow! [33] . A management consultant suggested that we call this one a “Multiversity”[34]. I have yet to look up their “strategic plan”; I suspect I know what will be in it.

Where to conclude this latest instalment? I need to say something aspirational, and hopefully of some light comedic value. If I was at UEA, would R.I.S.E. be the ticket? Don’t worry, be happy, or try to look on the bright side of life? For those of us on the restructuring block at the moment, there surely must be some private sector jobs going (or OFS may be looking for accountants who can read a spreadsheet; we can “upskill”). After all those marketers and sales folk have moved in droves into the higher education sector. The opportunistic opportunities! Say, did “Hotcourses” keep the rights to that name, Mr. Hunt? I know some fashionable young models from U-No who would look great in the promotional materials....

{the end}

...

No, this will not do. Let’s audit this blog:

“In blog #4, ostensibly about “how Universities are only free to fire people”[35], Carey tries to build on a few themes that he started to develop last year, such as marketisation, university management failure, government as “Ostrich-in-sand” and the surprising complacency (or shameless sycophancy) of what is otherwise a fairly clever workforce[36]. He loses his way somewhat, as he is (admittedly) distracted at the absolute sh*tshow all around him in the real world right now. He pokes fun at painfully thin attempts to sound cheery, confident and in/aspirational while continuing, in a time-honoured tradition, of saying little with any actual content (management, but some extent Carey as well, see blog number 1). He ends, unsuccessfully, in a flimsy attempt to comedically fiddle while Rome is not just burning but sinking into the sea as it is struck by 3 successive comets. This disappointing instalment is probably not quite sufficient to put us off having a look-see when blog #5, comes out…but that title had better be dynamite (see footnote 36).

Further reading:

Fortunately, a few clever people are widening the argument about the current university challenge beyond superficial statements about static tuition fees and non British students.

e.g. Opinion UK universities. The UK’s academic recession is in full swing: This university crisis is a grim scrabble for numbers. 10 March 2025. Glen O'Hara (Oxford Brookes).

https://www.ft.com/content/0ec7120a-5b78-43da-8016-0415dca99073

Husain, M. (2025). On the responsibilities of intellectuals and the rise of bullshit jobs in universities. Brain, 148(3), 687-688. https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/148/3/687/8058558?login=false

(Masud Husain, Oxford University).

Dickinson, J. (2024) Jacqui Smith goes searching for funding options in Reading. https://wonkhe.com/blogs/jacqui-smith-goes-searching-for-funding-options-in-reading/

A nice piece in Wonkhe by Jim Dickinson, which covers how the tuition fee model introduced by the collation 2010 did not quite work out as planned.

Sauntson, H., & Morrish, L. (2010). Vision, values and international excellence: The ‘products’ that university mission statements sell to students. In The marketisation of higher education and the student as consumer (pp. 87-99). Routledge.

This lovely chapter analyses word frequency in a whack of mission statements from different Unis nearly 15 years ago. Same sh*t as now, really.  https://network23.org/freeunisheff/files/2015/07/Mike-Molesworth-Richard-Scullion-Elizabeth-Nixon-The-Marketisation-of-Higher-Education-and-the-Student-as-Consumer-book.pdf#page=88

You also really should read Universities UK’s Blueprint for Change. I struggle to get past the main page and the executive summary, as it fills me with rage for being so wet.

https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/latest/news/new-paper-set-out-role-universities

E.g. “The role universities can play in powering[37] the new government’s growth strategy and in creating opportunities for millions all over the UK is being outlined by a group of experts from within and outside higher education.”

“To address some of the opportunities and challenges of the future, the paper brings together an expert panel of commissioners from a range of sectors, including Rain Newton-Smith, Chief Executive of the CBI, Lord Peter Mandelson, former Cabinet minister, and Lord David Willetts, former Minister of State.” 

Yes, three “left of centre” leaders, right there in plain sight.

1. “Rain Newton-Smith is the CBI’s Chief Executive. Before taking up the role, she was Managing Director, Strategy and Policy, Sustainability and ESG at Barclays.”  She might not be so bad, but she is a banker.

2. Peter Mandelson, Lord of the Dark Arts, is known to many of my burgeoning readership but for example “After Trump won the U.S. presidential election last month, Mandelson told the Times Britain can “have our cake and eat it” on trade, building closer ties with both the EU and U.S. rather than choosing between them.” From https://www.politico.eu/article/peter-mandelson-britain-prince-of-darkness-us-ambassador/ . More on Mandelson cosying up to the facists in the news this weekend in fact.

3. And of David Willetts? I am thinking of doing an entire blog on this Tory person because he sets my spider sense a tingling, but I need to read some of his work not just than damned report. Nevertheless “Rather than ushering in a brave new world, David Willetts will be remembered for presiding over an utter debacle: a quasi-marketised mess, funded by a grotesquely unfair fees and loans regime that not only imposes a massive burden on students but actually worsens the state’s fiscal position.” Lee Jones. See second commentary here: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/71466/1/blogs.lse.ac.uk-Will%20David%20Willetts%20be%20remembered%20for%20progressive%20push%20for%20Open%20Access%20or%20pernicious%20effects%20of%20neoli.pdf

There is, much to my amazement, a large and growing literature on university strategic plans. Like the plans themselves, much of the content is descriptive, uncritical, “aspirational” and neoliberal. For example, read this beauty:

“In sum, to face these new digital and health paradigms, the entrepreneurial university leadership should act ambidextrously with agile methodology to prepare numerous strategies, seek creative solutions, and be flexible in the face of continuous changes. Therefore, this new decade characterized by exponential changes opens the door for re-viewing the theoretical foundations and empirical evidence of entrepreneurial universities”.

From Guerrero, M., Fayolle, A., Di Guardo, M. C., Lamine, W., & Mian, S. (2024). Re-viewing the entrepreneurial university: strategic challenges and theory building opportunities. Small Business Economics, 63(2), 527-548.

And this my friends leads into another rabbit hole. For example:

Bess, J. L., Johnstone, D. B., & Dee, J. R. (2012). Understanding college and university organization: Theories for effective policy and practice: Volume II—Dynamics of the system. Routledge. From their abstract ( I know it’s long, but read it you have gotten this far):

“Now available in paperback, this two-volume work is intended to help readers develop powerful new ways of thinking about organizational principles, and apply them to policy-making and management in colleges and universities. The book is written with two audiences in mind: administrative and faculty leaders in institutions of higher learning, and students (both doctoral and Master's degree) studying to become upper-level administrators, leaders, and policy makers in higher education. It systematically presents a range of theories that can be applied to many of the difficult management situations that college and university leaders encounter. It provides them with the theoretical background to knowledgeably evaluate the many new ideas that emerge in the current literature, and in workshops and conferences. The purpose is to help leaders develop their own effective management style and approaches, and feel confident that their actions are informed by appropriate theory and knowledge of the latest research in the field. Without theory, organizational leaders are forced to treat each problem that they encounter as unique–as if it were a first-time occurrence.

Of course, this is a meta business. An onion lacking in content. How could it not be? I haven’t dared had a look at volume 1 yet. And surely there is a volume 3 too.  People now study to become a university manager. Of course they do.

---

[1] Always room for some more cynical air quotes! Maybe I should use a different font instead?

[2] Note to self. Remove joke about the Dutch being the Americans of Europe from footnotes in blog 1.

[3] https://theweek.com/health/mar-a-lago-face-the-hottest-maga-plastic-surgery-trend

[4] There’s a literature on this Kubler-Ross stages of grief business. You can start here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-53267505. I keep cycling back to angry. Of course there is guilt in this particular terrible set of circumstances as you compare yourself constantly in your mind with other colleagues. Even as lives are ruined, we are compelled to participate in the “market”. See how I end up back at angry?

[5] https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/what-we-do/policy-and-research/publications/opportunity-growth-and-partnership

[6] Obviously she does not read this blog. My four to five readers who know her, will have realised this immediately. She is of course drop dead gorgeous.

[7] Of course these need to be “benchmarked” (management love this word)  against the best, hot Hollywood six packs (https://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/photos-13-most-ripped-celebrity-abs#gid=ci02b8d1d0900a2491&pid=5-mark-wahlberg), 1 star Michelin chefs in the UK (I have aimed low here the six pack will be a big ask; https://www.thestaffcanteen.com/1-Michelin-Star-Chefs#/) and of course the obsessives from Obsessive-Compulsive Cleaners (this is a real show: https://www.channel4.com/programmes/obsessive-compulsive-cleaners)

[8] It’s really ten pages, but the first column on each page is in Welsh.

[9] I don’t know what to call it really. I guess it’s a chart?

[10] A reference to a weak joke in an earlier blog. For a later joke on these kinds of joke, keep reading the footnotes. I also assume that they have nice buildings, because didn’t a now sacked VC spend lots of money on them after numbers jumped with the removal of student caps? This is a recurring theme in Western hemisphere academia. Perhaps VCs of today really liked those shiny postmodern buildings of the 1970s and 1980s?

[11] My ex-student readership will recognise that the authors of this stuff are not my ex-students, because there should be a noun after every “this”. Three of my readers will get this joke. I need to rope in more ex-students.

[12] Super nice of their management to be part of the process, and not just expect the staff on the ground to turn water into wine, inside a volcano about to be struck by a comet. Meow!

[13] They did of course, invent the “strategic plan” ^TM

[14] The logic here inevitably leads to a bunch of 17- and 18-year olds deciding what sorts of provision that universities, well, actually provide. The customer is always right. I asked a Head once “if parapsychology became all of the rage, would we create degrees in it?”. I don’t remember her saying no.

[15] Some might argue that this is unkind to “fluff”. A lot of fluff is mindlessly entertaining. This management speak is anything but that. I should really call it sh*t, but fluff has a softer edge and it’s hard to keep the tone like in this blog, have I mentioned that yet?.

[16] The noun for the preceding “this”. This joke is getting stale already, is it not?

[17] Only the more senior experienced sycophants realise that you don’t have to read the fluff in order to thank managers for it. Junior sycophants, take note.

[18] This is my go to idea if I do not survive this latest round of my local ”restructuring”.

[19] I struggled for the best noun after this particular instance of this. I wanted to use sh*t, but don’t want to keep using the same terms and gags over and over, right? {cough}.

[20] Of course there are many. 

[21] A fictional University created by Laurie Taylor for the Times Higher Education Supplement, which made fun of marketisation but has been surpassed by the ridiculousness of the real UK landscape: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/finem-respice-poppletons-undying-spirit

[22] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/bridget-phillipson-universities-university-and-college-union-government-office-for-students-b2583871.html. By the time I publish this she will probably be gone gone gone. Is she a”leftie” in this parody of a Labour government?

[23] https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/jacqui-smiths-speech-at-the-universities-uk-conference

[24] On the news 20 minutes ago, Rachel Reeves, cutting services for disabled people (I mean really not a good look even for a villain in a Dickins novel) mentioned ”value for money”. 

(Note reference to Dickins!)

[25] Me, of course in the last blog, after lamenting all of this "oversight".

[26] This is really good: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/119985/html/. And this too: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Clean-copy-of-SNC-paper1.pdf

[27] https://nation.cymru/news/welsh-government-plans-university-rescue-fund/

[28] It’s not wisdom that comes with age-dependent seniority. I don’t need to know much about OFS to know that I really won’t like very much about it. You are daring me to go look, aren’t you?

[29] It’s out!  I can’t wait to read it! https://www.medr.cymru/en/strategic-plan/. “No Dave. Please don’t. Please Dave. Don’t.”.

[30] He may very well be a lovely person, but I won’t like this role much.

[31] This “prioritising the family’s financial stability” was in an early version of the Bestelmeyer—Carey case for change 110% strategy plus plan (CFC110%SPP)^TM, but was removed because it had yet to be ”resourced”. Management speak for we have no money for it.

[32] Alanis Morisette gag in blog 1.

[33] https://www.gov.uk/government/case-studies/40-million-funding-for-new-multiversity-in-blackpool-levelling-up-fund-2

[34] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4ge6egy73xo

[35] A strong contender title for this instalment, dear readers.

[36] In some instances this is complicity, not just complacency. But this line of thinking has produced the greatest ever title for the next, unwritten installment. So in the end, there is a small smidgeon of satisfaction for me, the writer, out of the clisterf*ck of our current, partially self-induced predicament. Sadly, you dear reader are on your own. Addendum: I can remember how clever I thought it was, but can’t for the life of me remember what it was. I was obviously knee-deep in the Bestelmeyer-Carey case for change thing a ma bob.

[37] Right from the ”what ya ma call it“ thesaurus. (I am too lazy to go back to my own gag, thats how ponderous this blog entry is getting).