Q: Once there was a young boy named Bret who had a cat named Wolfgang. The boy had really wanted a wolf for a pet, but his mother said wolves liked to hog the bathroom and liked to blow things down and they snored. So the boy had to call his cat Wolfie.

He had also thought about naming his cat Sir Purrsalot. Bret himself planned to become a knight when he grew up (or maybe a cowboy) and thought Sir Purrsalot sounded like a good name for his brother knight. The difficulty there was that Wolfie didn't purr a lot. He purred when he was being fed or petted, but no one could say he purred a lot. Plus Bret's mother said knights liked to poke things with their swords and they also liked to hog the bathroom and they clanked.

So Bret was left with a cat named Wolfgang. The neighbors gave him strange looks when he stood in the front yard in the evening and yelled "Wolfie! Here Wolfie!!!", to get Wolfgang to come in for the night. But Bret didn't care what anyone else thought. He had a Wolfie and maybe he'd end up becoming a pet doctor when he grew up instead.

Answer the following questions:
1. Who planned something?
2. what?
3. Who purred?
4. is it something he did all the time?
5. was wolfie a dog?
6. what was he?
7. what did Bret's mother say?
8. did he yell in the yard at night?
9. was he a vet?
A: 1. Bret
2. To become a knight or a cowboy
3. Wolfie
4. No
5. No
6. A cat
7. Knights poke things with their swords, hog the bathroom, and clank
8. Yes
9. No
Q: CHAPTER XXVII

A LEMON

That bulwark of _Peaceful Moments_, Pugsy Maloney, was rather the man of action than the man of tact. Otherwise, when, a moment later, he thrust his head up through the trap, he would have withdrawn delicately, and not split the silence with a raucous "Hey!" which acted on John and Betty like an electric shock.

John glowered at him. Betty was pink, but composed. Pugsy climbed leisurely on to the roof, and surveyed the group.

"Why, hello!" he said, as he saw Betty more closely.

"Well, Pugsy," said Betty. "How are you?"

John turned in surprise.

"Do you know Pugsy?"

Betty looked at him, puzzled.

"Why, of course I do."

"Sure," said Pugsy. "Miss Brown was stenographer on de poiper till she beat it."

"Miss Brown!"

There was utter bewilderment in John's face.

"I changed my name when I went to _Peaceful Moments_."

"Then are you--did you--?"

"Yes, I wrote those articles. That's how I happen to be here now. I come down every day and help look after the babies. Poor little souls, there seems to be nobody else here who has time to do it. It's dreadful. Some of them--you wouldn't believe--I don't think they could ever have had a real bath in their lives."

"Baths is foolishness," commented Master Maloney austerely, eying the scoured infants with a touch of disfavor.

John was reminded of a second mystery that needed solution.

"How on earth did you get up here, Pugsy?" he asked. "How did you get past Sam?"

Answer the following questions:
1. Was Pugsy obnoxious?
2. Did he scare Betty?
3. Did they know each other?
4. How did John feel about this?
5. What name did Pugsy know her as?
6. Did John?
7. When did she change her name?
8. What did she do for a living?
9. On what?
10. What did she write?
11. Why did she come down every day?
12. Did she feel bad for them?
13. Why?
14. What did she feel some have never had?
15. What did MAster Maloney think of baths?
16. Did he like the babies?
17. Who did Pugsy get past?
18. Was that perceived as an easy task?
19. According to who?
A: 1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. Surprised
5. Miss Brown
6. Yes
7. When she went to Peaceful Moments
8. Stenographer
9. On de poiper (paper)
10. Articles
11. To help look after the babies.
12. Yes
13. there's nobody else here who had time to look after them
14. A real bath
15. They are foolishness
16. No
17. Sam
18. No
19. John
Q: A recent Treasury Department report of misconduct by a banking regulator is giving watchdogs some ammunition to argue that financial regulators are too cozy with the banks they are tasked with overseeing.

The report, part of a small batch just released by the department's inspector-general, says that a government employee in Florida who served as a bank examiner accepted "gratuities (golf fees and/or food) on at least four occasions" from a bank he was reviewing. The report, conducted in 2010, called the situation a "conflict of interest" for the employee, who worked at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

"You have a government employee, during a time when he has a special responsibility to oversee this bank, actually taking time from work and going to play golf with these folks," said Michael Smallberg, a researcher with the Project on Government Oversight. "It was a pretty striking example of a government employee actually cozying up to the folks he's supposed to be regulating."

But Inspector-General Eric Thorson, who polices the Treasury Department and released the files, defended the agency.

"These investigative reports are good examples of the fact that the department has been successful in demonstrating that there is little toleration for individual misconduct."

"My opinion is that Treasury has an institutional highly ethical culture," he added.

But Smallberg is still critical. "When folks wonder why regulators didn't do a better job of stopping the financial crisis, or they're wondering why OCC didn't spot the huge trading loss at JP Morgan earlier this year, I think part of the issue is just that the examiners were just too close to the folks they were supposed to be examining," he said.

Answer the following questions:
1. What was the recent report about?
2. Was this a big batch?
3. When was the report?
4. What was it called?
5. Who took up for the agency?
6. Who was he?
7. What does he do?
8. Where these reports bad or good?
9. How were they good?
10. What was Thorsons thoughts on the Treasury?
11. Did Smallberg have any thoughts?
12. What was one of his thoughts?
A:
1. Misconduct by a banking regulator
2. No
3. 2010
4. A "conflict of interest" for the employee
5. Eric Thorson
6. Inspector-General
7. Polices the Treasury Department
8. Good
9. They are good examples that there is little toleration for individual misconduct.
10. It has an institutional highly ethical culture.
11. Yes
12. That the examiners were just too close to the folks they were supposed to be examining