powerlineblog--2020-12-17--10 more favorite films

10 more favorite films

I ’ m following up on “ 10 favorite films ” with numbers 11-20 .
I make no claim for them other than that they are movies I love .
My emphasis is on lesser known and offbeat movies rather than classics like Citizen Kane or The Searchers or The Godfather or The French Connection .
With the long holiday weekend coming up next week , I thought some readers might find the list of interest or perhaps of use one way or another .
11 .
The Big Red One : If you love movies , you are probably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This was his dream project .
Fuller wrote and directed this autobiographical film depicting an unnamed “ Sergeant ” ( the absolutely brilliant Lee Marvin ) leading an Army platoon in World War II from North Africa in 1942 to the liberation of a Nazi concentration camp in Czechoslovakia at war ’ s end in 1945 .
Saturated in Fuller ’ s cynicism and black humor , the movie “ is an enduring monument to Samuel Fuller , the writer , soldier , raconteur , and prodigal filmmaker who virtually invented the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The two-disc DVD set restores 47 minutes to the original version that had been cut without Fuller ’ s consent before its release in 1980 .
( I loved it , too . )
The restoration or reconstruction was produced by critic Richard Schickel , who provides commentary on it for the first disc in the DVD set .
Schickel is so knowledgeable that he all but speaks in Fuller ’ s voice .
12 .
Thank You For Your Service : If you blinked , you missed this 2017 film .
Of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years , Thank You For Service was the only one that moved me , shook me up , taught me something I didn ’ t know , and made me want to learn more , all while increasing my gratitude and respect for the service to which we pay tribute in the stock slogan that gives the movie its title .
It also introduced me to David Finkel ’ s incredibly powerful book of the same name .
13 .
Harry and Tonto : Harry ( Art Carney ) is a retired high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his New York City apartment building falls victim to redevelopment , Harry compares himself to King Lear : “ He gave up his real estate , too.
” Like King Lear , Harry turns to his kids to put him up .
Harry ’ s travels to and from his kids across the country with his pet cat ( the Tonto of the title ) give rise to a series of closely observed portraits .
Co-written , directed , and produced by Paul Mazursky , this is a comedy with a difference .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ brief remarks on the film to an abrupt conclusion : “ Art Carney won the Academy Award for his devastatingly simple looking portrait of Harry.
” 14 .
The Lives of Others : Among other things , this incredibly powerful and moving German film “ portray [ s ] how effective , how demoralizing , and how corrupting…was the statistically more-benign soft totalitarianism employed by the ‘ post-Stalinist ’ and fairly consolidated communist regimes of 1960-1989 , particularly in Europe .
You might not be shot , Gulag-ed , nor ever physically tortured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other ways would be found to grind you down into submission.
” Bowled over by the film , William Buckley deemed it a “ holy vessel of expiation.
” 15 .
Gridlock ’ d : Written and directed by Vondie Curtis-Hall , this autobiographical comedy of the welfare state stars Tim Roth and Tupac Shakur .
Only the subplot is an unwelcome distraction .
16 .
Boyhood : Written and directed by Richard Linklater and running nearly three hours , the film is absorbing from beginning to end .
Indeed , I found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it seemed much shorter .
Realism is the film ’ s mode — it used the same actors to film the story over a 12-year period — and it seems to me full of the genuine emotions of family life .
17 .
End of the Tour : Based on David Lipsky ’ s book about his time on assignment from Rolling Stone to profile the mentally troubled author David Foster Wallace , this is a most unusual film .
When I went to see it at the Uptown Theater in Minneapolis , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Mall of America.
” “ The tour ” in fact ended in St. Paul , at the late , great Hungry Mind Bookstore .
New York Times reviewer A.O .
Scott concluded : “ There will always be films about writers and writing , and this one is just about as good as it gets.
” What got to me was the moment of blissful release Wallace is given at the end of the film .
18 .
O Brother , Where Art Thou ?
The Coen Brothers have made some wildly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , cult favorite The Big Lebowski .
In this one they follow in the footsteps of James Joyce , turning The Odyssey to their own purposes .
They make the music the hero of the story ; music saves the day .
It made perfect sense that the soundtrack set off a craze for bluegrass music , sending contributors including Ralph Stanley on a “ Down From the Mountain ” national tour that I saw once in Minneapolis and once in St. Paul .
Will Hodge ’ s No Depression essay looks back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Where Aren ’ t Thou ?
” 19 .
The Subject Was Roses : Frank Gilroy won the Pulitzer Prize for Drama with The Subject Was Roses in 1965 .
The play portrays the homecoming of Timmy Cleary from Europe to the Bronx after his military service in World War II .
Timmy ’ s parents are trapped in a loveless marriage full of hurt and hate .
Their son is caught in the middle .
At a crucial point Timmy tells his father of a recurring dream in which he learns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dream Timmy runs crying into the street .
He tells his father that in his dream someone would stop him and he ’ d say , “ My father is dead and he ’ s never said he loves me.
” He says he realizes that , by the same token , he ’ s never said those words to his father .
“ I say them now– , ” he says , “ I love you Pop.
” The film preserves terrific performances by Jack Albertson and Martin Sheen , who played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crossing Delancey : This is a romantic comedy set in New York City with a Jewish overlay .
Bubbe Ida Kantor ( Reizl Bozyk ) reminded me of both of my grandmothers .
It ’ s a good movie that I include here for the scene at the hot dog diner in which Izzy ( Isabelle Grossman , played by Amy Irving ) has lunch on her birthday .
A crazy street singer enters with a song she directs to Izzy .
Izzy resists the message , but you can see her thinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something close to a slice of real life .

I’m following up on “10 favorite films” with numbers 11-20. I make no claim for them other than that they are movies I love. My emphasis is on lesser known and offbeat movies rather than classics like Citizen Kane or The Searchers or The Godfather or The French Connection. With the long holiday weekend coming up next week, I thought some readers might find the list of interest or perhaps of use one way or another.
11. The Big Red One: If you love movies, you are probably familiar with the work of Sam Fuller. This was his labor of love and dream project. Fuller wrote and directed this autobiographical film depicting an unnamed “Sergeant” (the absolutely brilliant Lee Marvin) leading an Army platoon in World War II from North Africa in 1942 to the liberation of a Nazi concentration camp in Czechoslovakia at war’s end in 1945. Saturated in Fuller’s cynicism and black humor, the movie “is an enduring monument to Samuel Fuller, the writer, soldier, raconteur, and prodigal filmmaker who virtually invented the now familiar form of the war-film-as-memoir.” The two-disc DVD set restores 47 minutes to the original version that had been cut without Fuller’s consent before its release in 1980. (I loved it, too.) The restoration was produced by critic Richard Schickel, who provides commentary on it for the first disc in the DVD set. Schickel is so knowledgeable that he all but speaks in Fuller’s voice.
12. Thank You For Your Service: If you blinked, you missed this 2017 film. Of the movies I have seen in recent years, Thank You For Service was the only one that moved me, shook me up, taught me something I didn’t know, and made me want to learn more, all while increasing my gratitude and respect for the service to which we pay tribute in the stock slogan that gives the movie its title. It also introduced me to David Finkel’s incredibly powerful book of the same name.
13. Harry and Tonto: Harry (Art Carney) is a retired high school English teacher and widower. When his New York City apartment building falls victim to redevelopment, Harry compares himself to King Lear: “He gave up his real estate, too.” Like King Lear, Harry turns to his kids to put him up. Harry’s travels to and from his kids across the country with his pet cat (the Tonto of the title) give rise to a series of closely observed portraits. Co-written, directed, and produced by Paul Mazursky, this is a comedy with a difference. In his memoir, Mazursky brings his brief remarks on the film to an abrupt conclusion: “Art Carney won the Academy Award for his devastatingly simple looking portrait of Harry.”
14. The Lives of Others: Among other things, this incredibly powerful and moving German film “portray[s] how effective, how demoralizing, and how corrupting…was the statistically more-benign soft totalitarianism employed by the ‘post-Stalinist’ and fairly consolidated communist regimes of 1960-1989, particularly in Europe. You might not be shot, Gulag-ed, nor ever physically tortured if you questioned the regime, but other ways would be found to grind you down into submission.” Bowled over by the film, William Buckley deemed it a “holy vessel of expiation.”
15. Gridlock’d: Written and directed by Vondie Curtis-Hall, this autobiographical comedy of the welfare state stars Tim Roth and Tupac Shakur. Only the subplot is an unwelcome distraction.
16. Boyhood: Written and directed by Richard Linklater and running nearly three hours, the film is absorbing from beginning to end. Indeed, I found the running time hard to believe; it seemed much shorter. Realism is the film’s mode — it used the same actors to film the story over a 12-year period — and it seems to me full of the genuine emotions of family life.
17. End of the Tour: Based on David Lipsky’s book about his time on assignment from Rolling Stone to profile the mentally troubled author David Foster Wallace, this is a most unusual film. When I went to see it at the Uptown Theater in Minneapolis, the marquee read: “Filmed at the Mall of America.” “The tour” in fact ended in St. Paul, at the late, great Hungry Mind Bookstore. New York Times reviewer A.O. Scott concluded: “There will always be films about writers and writing, and this one is just about as good as it gets.” What got to me was the moment of blissful release Wallace is given at the end of the film.
18. O Brother, Where Art Thou? The Coen Brothers have made some wildly excellent films including, just for example, cult favorite The Big Lebowski. In this one they follow in the footsteps of James Joyce, turning The Odyssey to their own purposes. They make the music the hero of the story; music saves the day. It made perfect sense that the soundtrack set off a craze for bluegrass music, sending contributors including Ralph Stanley on a “Down From the Mountain” national tour that I saw once in Minneapolis and once in St. Paul. Will Hodge’s No Depression essay looks back on the soundtrack in “O Brother, Where Aren’t Thou?”
19. The Subject Was Roses: Frank Gilroy won the Pulitzer Prize for Drama with The Subject Was Roses in 1965. The play portrays the homecoming of Timmy Cleary from Europe to the Bronx after his military service in World War II. Timmy’s parents are trapped in a loveless marriage full of hurt and hate. Their son is caught in the middle. At a crucial point Timmy tells his father of a recurring dream in which he learns his father is dead. In the dream Timmy runs crying into the street. He tells his father that in his dream someone would stop him and he’d say, “My father is dead and he’s never said he loves me.” He says he realizes that, by the same token, he’s never said those words to his father. “I say them now–,” he says, “I love you Pop.” The film preserves terrific performances by Jack Albertson and Martin Sheen, who played the roles on Broadway.
20. Crossing Delancey: This is a romantic comedy set in New York City with a Jewish overlay. Bubbe Ida Kantor (Reizl Bozyk) reminded me of both of my grandmothers. It’s a good movie that I include here for the scene at the hot dog diner in which Izzy (Isabelle Grossman, played by Amy Irving) has lunch on her birthday. A crazy street singer enters with a song she directs to Izzy. Izzy resists the message, but you can see her thinking it over. This seems to me something close to a slice of real life.


powerlineblog--2020-12-18--In defense of Dr. Jill’s dissertation

In defense of Dr. Jill’s dissertation

If Jill Biden hadn ’ t insisted on being called “ Dr. ” I doubt anyone would have examined her doctoral dissertation .
And if someone had , I wouldn ’ t have piled on .
But Jill insisted on the appellation , so her dissertation became fair game .
Kyle Smith rips it here .
He writes : “ To call Jill Biden ’ s dissertation thin gruel is an insult to gruel.
” Smith finds the dissertation plagued by “ insipid writing , typos , faulty language , [ and ] weak research.
” I haven ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looking it over I found a few things in its favor — things that it set it apart from a good deal of current academic writing ( the kind Steve used to ridicule in his academic absurdity of the week series ) , including some law review articles and , I assume , more than a few dissertations .
Jill Biden ’ s writing is insipid , to be sure , but she did produce mostly simple declarative sentences that one can comprehend .
She didn ’ t use much jargon .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obvious , she didn ’ t say anything absurd ( at least not in the portions I reviewed ) .
Kyle Smith isn ’ t wrong to call the dissertation “ garbage.
” However , in important respects I believe it ’ s superior to a fair amount of contemporary academic writing .

If Jill Biden hadn’t insisted on being called “Dr.” I doubt anyone would have examined her doctoral dissertation. And if someone had, I wouldn’t have piled on.
But Jill insisted on the appellation, so her dissertation became fair game. Kyle Smith rips it here. He writes: “To call Jill Biden’s dissertation thin gruel is an insult to gruel.” Smith finds the dissertation plagued by “insipid writing, typos, faulty language, [and] weak research.”
I haven’t read the entire dissertation, but in looking it over I found a few things in its favor — things that it set it apart from a good deal of current academic writing (the kind Steve used to ridicule in his academic absurdity of the week series), including some law review articles and, I assume, more than a few dissertations.
Jill Biden’s writing is insipid, to be sure, but she did produce mostly simple declarative sentences that one can comprehend. She didn’t use much jargon. And although most of what she said is obvious, she didn’t say anything absurd (at least not in the portions I reviewed).
Kyle Smith isn’t wrong to call the dissertation “garbage.” However, in important respects I believe it’s superior to a fair amount of contemporary academic writing.


powerlineblog--2020-12-19--Ocasio-Cortez denied seat on powerful House committee

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sought to join the House Energy and Commerce Committee for the upcoming session of Congress .
This committee has always been a coveted assignment for pork barrel reasons .
And , presumably , it ’ s a good gig if you want to impose the Green New Deal .
But Ocasio-Cortez ’ s bid failed .
The spot she was in the running for went to Kathleen Rice , a relatively moderate member of the New York delegation .
John Sexton has the details .
Nancy Pelosi did not take a position in the contest between Ocasio-Cortez and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members of her Steering and Policy Committee .
They voted in favor of Rice , 46-13 .
Neither Rice nor Ocasio-Cortez is on Pelosi ’ s good side .
Rice had refused to support Pelosi for Speaker and was denied an assignment on the House Judiciary Committee because of it .
Ocasio-Cortez is a constant critic of Pelosi and recently said , in effect , that the Speaker should be put out to pasture .
But Rice was the clear favorite of Pelosi ’ s steering committee .
It voted overwhelmingly against Ocasio-Cortez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the ascendancy among House Democrats ?
I don ’ t think so .
In my view , Ocasio-Cortez ’ s defeat was driven by factors other than ideology .
First , loyalty .
Ocasio-Cortez has supported insurgent candidates in challenges to House incumbents .
On top of that , she refuses to pay party campaign dues .
That ’ s not behavior that wins plum assignments .
Second , prudence .
House Democrats fear losing their majority in 2022 .
They fear being perceived as too radical .
But this doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it comes to policy .
It just means they want to maintain the pretense of non-radicalism .
Keeping Ocasio-Cortez and other avowed far leftists out of key positions makes it easier to maintain that pretense .
Third , jealousy .
Ocasio-Cortez is a 31 year-old who is completing her first term in the House .
She was a nobody before her surprise victory in 2018 .
Yet , next to Pelosi , she is probably the best known Democratic member of Congress .
Surely , that doesn ’ t sit well with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secrecy .
Ocasio-Cortez lost on a secret ballot .
Mike Allen of Axios quotes a member of the steering committee as saying “ the vote would have been very different if it wasn ’ t secret.
” That says a lot about how House Democrats will behave when the lights are on .

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sought to join the House Energy and Commerce Committee for the upcoming session of Congress. This committee has always been a coveted assignment for pork barrel reasons. And, presumably, it’s a good gig if you want to impose the Green New Deal.
But Ocasio-Cortez’s bid failed. The spot she was in the running for went to Kathleen Rice, a relatively moderate member of the New York delegation. John Sexton has the details.
Nancy Pelosi did not take a position in the contest between Ocasio-Cortez and Rice. She left that decision to members of her Steering and Policy Committee. They voted in favor of Rice, 46-13.
Neither Rice nor Ocasio-Cortez is on Pelosi’s good side. Rice had refused to support Pelosi for Speaker and was denied an assignment on the House Judiciary Committee because of it. Ocasio-Cortez is a constant critic of Pelosi and recently said, in effect, that the Speaker should be put out to pasture.
But Rice was the clear favorite of Pelosi’s steering committee. It voted overwhelmingly against Ocasio-Cortez.
Does this mean that moderates are in the ascendancy among House Democrats? I don’t think so. In my view, Ocasio-Cortez’s defeat was driven by factors other than ideology.
First, loyalty. Ocasio-Cortez has supported insurgent candidates in challenges to House incumbents. On top of that, she refuses to pay party campaign dues. That’s not behavior that wins plum assignments.
Second, prudence. House Democrats fear losing their majority in 2022. They fear being perceived as too radical.
But this doesn’t mean they intend to be moderate when it comes to policy. It just means they want to maintain the pretense of non-radicalism. Keeping Ocasio-Cortez and other avowed far leftists out of key positions makes it easier to maintain that pretense.
Third, jealousy. Ocasio-Cortez is a 31 year-old who is completing her first term in the House. She was a nobody before her surprise victory in 2018. Yet, next to Pelosi, she is probably the best known Democratic member of Congress. Surely, that doesn’t sit well with many of her colleagues.
Fourth, secrecy. Ocasio-Cortez lost on a secret ballot. Mike Allen of Axios quotes a member of the steering committee as saying “the vote would have been very different if it wasn’t secret.”
That says a lot about how House Democrats will behave when the lights are on.


powerlineblog--2020-12-18--Who won the Oracle case?

Who won the Oracle case?

Earlier this month , in what should have been a no-brainer , the Department of Labor decided not to appeal its defeat in the meritless compensation discrimination suit it brought against Oracle .
An administrative law judge had smacked down the DOL ’ s radical theories on proving compensation discrimination , and had ruled that Oracle did not discriminate against women or minorities .
Thus , to answer the question posed in the title of this post , Oracle won the Oracle case .
But in my view , there was another winner in the case — the radical DOL @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
How so ?
Because for virtually the entire Trump administration , the Department of Labor advanced radical theories on how to prove compensation discrimination .
Thus , when the Biden administration advances and codifies the same theories , it can defend them on the grounds that these theories , far from being radical , are the same ones advanced by the Trump DOL in the Oracle case .
They will have been the position of the DOL for twelve years under both Democratic and Republican leadership .
Let ’ s flesh this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidency , the Department of Labor published guidelines in the Federal Register on proving compensation discrimination for purposes of the Executive Order banning such discrimination by federal contractors .
Essentially , the Bush DOL adopted the same approach taken by federal courts in compensation discrimination cases brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act .
This sensible approach compares the pay of individuals performing the same basic work to see if one group — e.g .
women or Blacks — is being paid less than others — e.g .
men or Whites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether any pay disparities remain statistically significant after controlling for factors other than gender or race — e.g.
, seniority , experience , and education .
The Obama administration rescinded the Bush-era guidelines .
This enabled it pursue compensation discrimination cases based on pay comparisons unmoored to the work individuals perform .
The goal was to bridge the mostly mythical “ pay gap ” between men and women by circumventing Title VII and , to the considerable extent possible , the judiciary .
The DOL ’ s end run around established law on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One was to compare the pay of people performing vastly dissimilar work .
Let ’ s take the tech industry , which became a prime target of the Obama DOL .
It makes sense to examine whether male and female engineers performing highly complex work ( e.g.
, on the cloud or on artificial intelligence ) are paid about the same .
If they aren ’ t , the federal contractor should have to explain why .
But it makes no sense to lump all people holding the title “ engineer ” together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work to be paid significantly more than those performing relatively unsophisticated work , such as tweaking Outlook .
Thus , no inference of pay discrimination arises from pay differences within such a broad classification .
Yet , the Obama DOL , and later Trump ’ s , drew that inference .
Furthermore , it is preposterous to aggregate all “ exempt ” employees and compare their pay .
Of course , the CEO of a tech company will be paid more than engineers , and engineers will be paid more than , say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or even the hint of it , from gender pay disparities within a group this broad is absurd .
Yet , this is what the Obama DOL , and later Trump ’ s , did .
And they went further .
They adopted something called “ human capital ” theory .
This approach aggregates employees based on the qualifications , skills , and experience they possessed when they first applied for work with the contractor .
Everything else that might explain pay differences — e.g.
, what jobs the employees pursued ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experience they went on to obtain ; whether at some point they chose to work part time — is deemed irrelevant for purposes of finding pay discrimination .
The notion is that once two comparable individuals apply for work at a company , everything should be the same thereafter .
If it isn ’ t , the theory seems to imply , the federal contractor is accountable .
Clearly , this thinking defies reality .
The Obama DOL filed the Oracle case in its final days .
That case represented the apotheosis of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been pushing for eight years .
The Trump administration should have nipped the Oracle case in the bud .
Instead , Alex Acosta , the new Secretary of Labor allowed it to proceed full steam ahead .
One might have expected Gene Scalia , Acosta ’ s successor as Senate-confirmed DOL Secretary , to pull the plug on the Oracle case .
Scalia didn ’ t .
He tried to settle the case , reportedly for somewhere around $ 30-40 million .
After his settlement efforts failed , the DOL pressed on with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount in a case based on unhinged theories of proving compensation discrimination is a tacit endorsement of those theories .
Under a proper statistical analysis — the kind a responsible DOL must apply — Oracle ’ s liability is zero , as the administrative law judge later found it to be .
In August 2018 , the DOL did issue a “ Directive ” that summarized for federal contractors how the Department uses statistics to test for compensation discrimination .
The Directive is consistent with Title VII principles and the Bush administration guidelines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Directive can not be viewed as a repudiation of the theories pursued by the DOL throughout the Trump administration in the then-pending Oracle litigation .
The Biden administration , when it advances and codifies these theories , will be free to argue , correctly , that it is taking positions the DOL embraced , on a bipartisan basis , for twelve years — first under Obama and then under Trump .
( After deciding not to appeal the Oracle case , the DOL said it no longer evaluates cases in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Coming in December of 2020 , this statement is an almost comical attempt to cover the tracks .
It can ’ t erase the four-year embrace of the rejected theories by the Trump DOL . )
It ’ s a disgrace that the DOL devoted virtually all four years of the Trump administration to pursuing a legal action based on an absurd collection of leftist theories of proving compensation discrimination .
It ’ s a disgrace that Oracle had to defend the action — one that , given the 2018 Directive , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kate O ’ Scannlainan knew was based on meritless theories of proof .
And it ’ s a disgrace that , as a result of Acosta ’ s and Scalia ’ s unwillingness to pull the plug , the Biden DOL will be in a better position than it should be to advance the theories underlying the Oracle case .
That ’ s why I believe the leftist Obama DOL appointees and the career DOL bureaucrats come out as winners in the Oracle litigation .

Earlier this month, in what should have been a no-brainer, the Department of Labor decided not to appeal its defeat in the meritless compensation discrimination suit it brought against Oracle. An administrative law judge had smacked down the DOL’s radical theories on proving compensation discrimination, and had ruled that Oracle did not discriminate against women or minorities.
Thus, to answer the question posed in the title of this post, Oracle won the Oracle case.
But in my view, there was another winner in the case — the radical DOL lawyers who brought and prosecuted the case. How so?
Because for virtually the entire Trump administration, the Department of Labor advanced radical theories on how to prove compensation discrimination. Thus, when the Biden administration advances and codifies the same theories, it can defend them on the grounds that these theories, far from being radical, are the same ones advanced by the Trump DOL in the Oracle case. They will have been the position of the DOL for twelve years under both Democratic and Republican leadership.
Let’s flesh this out. During the George W. Bush presidency, the Department of Labor published guidelines in the Federal Register on proving compensation discrimination for purposes of the Executive Order banning such discrimination by federal contractors. Essentially, the Bush DOL adopted the same approach taken by federal courts in compensation discrimination cases brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
This sensible approach compares the pay of individuals performing the same basic work to see if one group — e.g. women or Blacks — is being paid less than others — e.g. men or Whites. Regression analysis is used to determine whether any pay disparities remain statistically significant after controlling for factors other than gender or race — e.g., seniority, experience, and education.
The Obama administration rescinded the Bush-era guidelines. This enabled it pursue compensation discrimination cases based on pay comparisons unmoored to the work individuals perform. The goal was to bridge the mostly mythical “pay gap” between men and women by circumventing Title VII and, to the considerable extent possible, the judiciary.
The DOL’s end run around established law on compensation discrimination consisted of several elements. One was to compare the pay of people performing vastly dissimilar work.
Let’s take the tech industry, which became a prime target of the Obama DOL. It makes sense to examine whether male and female engineers performing highly complex work (e.g., on the cloud or on artificial intelligence) are paid about the same. If they aren’t, the federal contractor should have to explain why.
But it makes no sense to lump all people holding the title “engineer” together. One would expect engineers performing sophisticated work to be paid significantly more than those performing relatively unsophisticated work, such as tweaking Outlook. Thus, no inference of pay discrimination arises from pay differences within such a broad classification.
Yet, the Obama DOL, and later Trump’s, drew that inference.
Furthermore, it is preposterous to aggregate all “exempt” employees and compare their pay. Of course, the CEO of a tech company will be paid more than engineers, and engineers will be paid more than, say, human resource specialists. Inferring discrimination, or even the hint of it, from gender pay disparities within a group this broad is absurd.
Yet, this is what the Obama DOL, and later Trump’s, did.
And they went further. They adopted something called “human capital” theory. This approach aggregates employees based on the qualifications, skills, and experience they possessed when they first applied for work with the contractor. Everything else that might explain pay differences — e.g., what jobs the employees pursued; what additional skills, qualifications, and experience they went on to obtain; whether at some point they chose to work part time — is deemed irrelevant for purposes of finding pay discrimination.
The notion is that once two comparable individuals apply for work at a company, everything should be the same thereafter. If it isn’t, the theory seems to imply, the federal contractor is accountable. Clearly, this thinking defies reality.
The Obama DOL filed the Oracle case in its final days. That case represented the apotheosis of the radical pay discrimination theories it had been pushing for eight years.
The Trump administration should have nipped the Oracle case in the bud. Instead, Alex Acosta, the new Secretary of Labor allowed it to proceed full steam ahead.
One might have expected Gene Scalia, Acosta’s successor as Senate-confirmed DOL Secretary, to pull the plug on the Oracle case. Scalia didn’t. He tried to settle the case, reportedly for somewhere around $30-40 million. After his settlement efforts failed, the DOL pressed on with the litigation.
Demanding a large settlement amount in a case based on unhinged theories of proving compensation discrimination is a tacit endorsement of those theories. Under a proper statistical analysis — the kind a responsible DOL must apply — Oracle’s liability is zero, as the administrative law judge later found it to be.
In August 2018, the DOL did issue a “Directive” that summarized for federal contractors how the Department uses statistics to test for compensation discrimination. The Directive is consistent with Title VII principles and the Bush administration guidelines.
However, the Directive states:
This Directive is not intended to have any effect on pending litigation, nor would this Directive have altered the agency’s basis for litigating any pending cases.
(Emphasis added)
Thus, by its own terms, the Directive cannot be viewed as a repudiation of the theories pursued by the DOL throughout the Trump administration in the then-pending Oracle litigation. The Biden administration, when it advances and codifies these theories, will be free to argue, correctly, that it is taking positions the DOL embraced, on a bipartisan basis, for twelve years — first under Obama and then under Trump. (After deciding not to appeal the Oracle case, the DOL said it no longer evaluates cases in the way rejected by the administrative law judge. Coming in December of 2020, this statement is an almost comical attempt to cover the tracks. It can’t erase the four-year embrace of the rejected theories by the Trump DOL.)
It’s a disgrace that the DOL devoted virtually all four years of the Trump administration to pursuing a legal action based on an absurd collection of leftist theories of proving compensation discrimination. It’s a disgrace that Oracle had to defend the action — one that, given the 2018 Directive, Gene Scalia and DOL’s Solicitor Kate O’Scannlainan knew was based on meritless theories of proof.
And it’s a disgrace that, as a result of Acosta’s and Scalia’s unwillingness to pull the plug, the Biden DOL will be in a better position than it should be to advance the theories underlying the Oracle case.
That’s why I believe the leftist Obama DOL appointees and the career DOL bureaucrats come out as winners in the Oracle litigation.


powerlineblog--2020-12-18--Needed: A Vaccine for Leftism

Needed: A Vaccine for Leftism

You knew where things were headed when you heard the Biden team talking about how the COVID vaccine needed to be distributed “ equitably.
” It meant that decisions would be run through a “ social justice ” filter rather than a relative risk assessment filter .
Good times for medical “ ethicists.
” The New York Times naturally gives us a thumb-sucker of a “ news ” story today wringing their white-guilt-ridden hands about the scene , including such gems as : Historically , the [ CDC ] committee relied on scientific evidence to inform its decisions .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerns as well , noted Lisa A. Prosser , a professor of health policy and decision sciences at the University of Michigan .
.
.
Harald Schmidt , an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania , said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults , given their risks , and that they are disproportionately minorities .
“ Older populations are whiter , ” Dr. Schmidt said .
“ Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer .
Instead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already had more of them , we can start to level the playing field a bit.
” Chaser : Did you know that Helen Keller was just “ another privileged white woman ” ?
Time magazine just discovered this , after all this time : However , to some Black disability rights activists , like Anita Cameron , Helen Keller is not radical at all , “ just another , despite disabilities , privileged white person , ” and yet another example of history telling the story of privileged white Americans .

You knew where things were headed when you heard the Biden team talking about how the COVID vaccine needed to be distributed “equitably.” It meant that decisions would be run through a “social justice” filter rather than a relative risk assessment filter. Good times for medical “ethicists.”
The New York Times naturally gives us a thumb-sucker of a “news” story today wringing their white-guilt-ridden hands about the scene, including such gems as:
Historically, the [CDC] committee relied on scientific evidence to inform its decisions. But now the members are weighing social justice concerns as well, noted Lisa A. Prosser, a professor of health policy and decision sciences at the University of Michigan. . . Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter,” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”
Chaser: Did you know that Helen Keller was just “another privileged white woman”? Time magazine just discovered this, after all this time:


powerlineblog--2020-12-18--Who Goes to Jail? One Governor’s Perverse Answer

We have often written here about Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and , among other things , his irrational response to the COVID virus .
His fecklessness ( or worse ) is now becoming a national story , as in this column by Daniel Horowitz at The Blaze .
Walz is now explicitly threatening to imprison Larvita McFarquhar for the “ crime ” of trying to feed her family by operating her restaurant , Havens Garden , in a small town in southwestern Minnesota , in defiance of an executive order by Walz that Larvita believes ( correctly , I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitutional rights .
Meanwhile , Walz and his Attorney General , Keith Ellison–the only AG in America who has come out in favor of political violence by supporting Antifa–are freeing a gang banger who killed an 11-year-old girl from prison : On Tuesday , Gov .
Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison , as part of the state ’ s Board of Pardons , voted to immediately commute the life sentence of Myon Burrell after he served 18 years for the murder of 11-year-old Tyesha Edwards in 2002 .
He intended to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that day , but a stray bullet hit Edwards in the heart while she was in her home doing schoolwork .
In Walz ’ s view , incarcerating violent criminals is contrary to “ science.
” Why did Walz release him ?
The “ science ” of teenage killers !
“ We can not turn a blind eye to the developments in science and law as we look at this case , ” said Walz .
“ We can ’ t shackle our children in 2020 , ” added Walz .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” What Walz means is that we can ’ t shackle those who murder our children ; we can only shackle those who try to earn an honest living .
Walz , like many Democrats , is fond of invoking “ science ” as a universal justification for his perverse policies .
At the same time , he has repudiated the use of science or data when it comes to his COVID policies that threaten to send Larvita McFarquhar to jail .
In that case , Walz says , “ It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not about data .
It ’ s about neighborliness.
” Walz ’ s idea of “ neighborliness , ” apparently , is to imprison normal Minnesotans while releasing violent criminals to prey on the innocent .
No wonder violent crime has soared under the Walz/Ellison administration !
Much more at the link .

We have often written here about Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and, among other things, his irrational response to the COVID virus. His fecklessness (or worse) is now becoming a national story, as in this column by Daniel Horowitz at The Blaze.
Walz is now explicitly threatening to imprison Larvita McFarquhar for the “crime” of trying to feed her family by operating her restaurant, Havens Garden, in a small town in southwestern Minnesota, in defiance of an executive order by Walz that Larvita believes (correctly, I think) to be a violation of her constitutional rights.
Meanwhile, Walz and his Attorney General, Keith Ellison–the only AG in America who has come out in favor of political violence by supporting Antifa–are freeing a gang banger who killed an 11-year-old girl from prison:
On Tuesday, Gov. Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison, as part of the state’s Board of Pardons, voted to immediately commute the life sentence of Myon Burrell after he served 18 years for the murder of 11-year-old Tyesha Edwards in 2002. He intended to kill someone else in a gang fight that day, but a stray bullet hit Edwards in the heart while she was in her home doing schoolwork.
In Walz’s view, incarcerating violent criminals is contrary to “science.”
Why did Walz release him? The “science” of teenage killers! “We cannot turn a blind eye to the developments in science and law as we look at this case,” said Walz. “We can’t shackle our children in 2020,” added Walz. “We need to grow as our science grows.”
What Walz means is that we can’t shackle those who murder our children; we can only shackle those who try to earn an honest living. Walz, like many Democrats, is fond of invoking “science” as a universal justification for his perverse policies. At the same time, he has repudiated the use of science or data when it comes to his COVID policies that threaten to send Larvita McFarquhar to jail. In that case, Walz says, “It’s not about numbers. It’s not about data. It’s about neighborliness.” Walz’s idea of “neighborliness,” apparently, is to imprison normal Minnesotans while releasing violent criminals to prey on the innocent. No wonder violent crime has soared under the Walz/Ellison administration!
Much more at the link.


Die-hard deplorables

We have yet to settle accounts with the Axis of Evil linking Democrats , mainstream media , and big tech .
We have yet to settle accounts even with the perpetrators of the Russia hoax ( and related hoaxes ) .
In his current New York Post column Glenn Reynolds argues that the Deplorables remember and decline to stand down : Leaving aside charges of voter fraud and vote-rigging , there is the undisputable fact that Big Media and Big Tech put not just a thumb , but both hands , on the scales to influence the result .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Hunter Biden scandal and Joe Biden ’ s role in it , first reported in this paper .
When blue-check reporters did pay attention , they claimed , falsely and without evidence , that the reports were “ Russian disinformation.
” Big Tech shut down the accounts of people who shared the story , and Twitter even blocked sharing the link via direct messages .
The machinations worked , but at a high price : According to a McLaughlin poll , enough Joe Biden voters say they would have changed their votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scandal that they would have produced solid Trump win .
The impression of tech-media-corporate underhandedness will long endure .
So the Deplorables are still around , and they ’ re still angry .
And as long as they ’ re still around , and still angry , the Democrats can ’ t actually get what they want .
It ’ s an optimistic assessment , but I hope he ’ s right .
At InstaPundit , Glenn attributes the thought behind the column to his road trip “ driving through Lower Alabama and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] ” He notes that “ the InstaWife and I saw Trump signs still defiantly flying a month after the election .
We quit counting after a couple of hundred , but we only saw a single Biden/Harris sign .
The refusal of the Deplorables to give in inspired my latest NY Post column.
” Whole thing here .
When I say we have yet to settle accounts , I have in mind the Russia hoax promulgated , promoted , and disseminated by the Axis to hobble President Trump with the assistance of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took office and virtually every day thereafter .
One can observe the desire to settle accounts in the striking exchange between Senator Ron Johnson and Ranking Liar Gary Peters in the Homeland Security Committee hearing on election irregularities earlier this week .
It doesn ’ t usually go down like this in the United States Senate .
Senator Josh Hawley also picked up the thread in his comments below .

We have yet to settle accounts with the Axis of Evil linking Democrats, mainstream media, and big tech. We have yet to settle accounts even with the perpetrators of the Russia hoax (and related hoaxes). In his current New York Post column Glenn Reynolds argues that the Deplorables remember and decline to stand down:
Leaving aside charges of voter fraud and vote-rigging, there is the undisputable fact that Big Media and Big Tech put not just a thumb, but both hands, on the scales to influence the result. As much as possible, the media ignored the Hunter Biden scandal and Joe Biden’s role in it, first reported in this paper. When blue-check reporters did pay attention, they claimed, falsely and without evidence, that the reports were “Russian disinformation.” Big Tech shut down the accounts of people who shared the story, and Twitter even blocked sharing the link via direct messages. The machinations worked, but at a high price: According to a McLaughlin poll, enough Joe Biden voters say they would have changed their votes had they known of the Hunter Biden scandal that they would have produced a solid Trump win. The impression of tech-media-corporate underhandedness will long endure. So the Deplorables are still around, and they’re still angry. And as long as they’re still around, and still angry, the Democrats can’t actually get what they want.
It’s an optimistic assessment, but I hope he’s right. At InstaPundit, Glenn attributes the thought behind the column to his road trip “driving through Lower Alabama and the Florida Panhandle last week[.]” He notes that “the InstaWife and I saw Trump signs still defiantly flying a month after the election. We quit counting after a couple of hundred, but we only saw a single Biden/Harris sign. The refusal of the Deplorables to give in inspired my latest NY Post column.” Whole thing here.
When I say we have yet to settle accounts, I have in mind the Russia hoax promulgated, promoted, and disseminated by the Axis to hobble President Trump with the assistance of the Obama administration for months before he took office and virtually every day thereafter.
One can observe the desire to settle accounts in the striking exchange between Senator Ron Johnson and Ranking Liar Gary Peters in the Homeland Security Committee hearing on election irregularities earlier this week. It doesn’t usually go down like this in the United States Senate.
Senator Josh Hawley also picked up the thread in his comments below.


powerlineblog--2020-12-19--Podcast: Is “Australian Wine Snob” an Oxymoron?

This is without doubt The .
Most .
Gonzo .
Episode .
Ever .
This week “ Lucretia ” ( “ That ’ s Doctor Lucretia to you , kiddo !
” ) and I put down our whisky and take up Australian red wines instead ( with brief consideration about whether the banana daiquiri represented the nadir of the West during the Cold War ) , as we range from Hegel to Snoop Dogg ( “ That ’ s Mister Dogg to you , kiddo !
” ) , from cyber espionage to cork versus screw-cap wine bottle coverings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , from folky Phil Ochs to punky Jello Biafra , with a side of Wagner and Roger Scruton ( “ That ’ s Sir Roger Scruton to you , kiddo !
” ) , all overlaid with commentary from Monty Python .
Above all , we finally get to our long-promised ( or threatened ? )
seminar on how snobbery is the formal core of modern liberalism , because how could you not after the “ Dr .
Jill issue ” blew up sky high .
The metaphysical roots of liberal snobbery is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certain .
One avenue into the depths of this is introduced with this astounding proposal from “ anti-racist ” Ibram Kendi a few months back : “ To fix the original sin of racism , Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution that enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals : Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals .
The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold , as well as racist ideas by public officials ( with “ racist ideas ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism ( DOA ) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees .
The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local , state and federal public policies to ensure they won ’ t yield racial inequity , monitor those policies , investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces , and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas .
The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ideas.
” The presumptions embedded in this statement are breathtaking , and all the more astounding given than it never even occurs to leftists why there might be anything defective about such a presumption .
The side of history , and all that .
We may need to stick with Australian red wines for several more episodes , but let is know if you want us to go back to single malt whisky .
You know what to do now .
If you don ’ t , then directing you here probably @ @ @ @ @

This is without doubt The. Most. Gonzo. Episode. Ever.
This week “Lucretia” (“That’s Doctor Lucretia to you, kiddo!”) and I put down our whisky and take up Australian red wines instead (with brief consideration about whether the banana daiquiri represented the nadir of the West during the Cold War), as we range from Hegel to Snoop Dogg (“That’s Mister Dogg to you, kiddo!”), from cyber espionage to cork versus screw-cap wine bottle coverings, from Mark Twain to Kurt Vonnegut, from folky Phil Ochs to punky Jello Biafra, with a side of Wagner and Roger Scruton (“That’s Sir Roger Scruton to you, kiddo!”), all overlaid with commentary from Monty Python.
Above all, we finally get to our long-promised (or threatened?) seminar on how snobbery is the formal core of modern liberalism, because how could you not after the “Dr. Jill issue” blew up sky high. The metaphysical roots of liberal snobbery is much worse than wine snobbery, for certain.
One avenue into the depths of this is introduced with this astounding proposal from “anti-racist” Ibram Kendi a few months back:
“To fix the original sin of racism, Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution that enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals: Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals. The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with “racist ideas” and “public official” clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won’t yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.”
The presumptions embedded in this statement are breathtaking, and all the more astounding given than it never even occurs to leftists why there might be anything defective about such a presumption. The side of history, and all that.
We may need to stick with Australian red wines for several more episodes, but let is know if you want us to go back to single malt whisky.
You know what to do now. If you don’t, then directing you here probably won’t help.
P.S. If you have a spare 15 minutes after this episode, take in this video of Glenn Loury and John McWhorter giving Kendi the business:


powerlineblog--2020-12-19--The 12 Days of Wokeness

The 12 Days of Wokeness

If you don ’ t live in Manhattan , well , first of all , congratulations , but also you probably haven ’ t heard about the meltdown currently underway at the Dalton School , one of Manhattan ’ s more elite private schools .
While many other private schools in New York City have reopened , Dalton has remained closed , much to the annoyance of tuition-paying parents .
The Dalton faculty , it seems , consists of community college rejects who flunked a Dr. Jill course , judging from their list of demands for agreeing to resume normal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ composers is to set this list of demands to music : think “ The Twelve Days of Wokeness.
” Meanwhile , apparently the New England Journal of Medicine , a formerly respected medical journal , is jealous of the wokery attitude The Lancet , and so offers us this : .
.
.
all of medicine , including my chosen field of obstetrics and gynecology , has deeply racist and exploitative roots .
The notion that medical providers are unbiased and objective , practicing within a profession free from the legacies of racism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is fictitious .
.
.
This ahistorical view has caused tremendous harm .
In addition to preventing us from identifying and exposing racist beliefs and inherent bias in medical systems , it has allowed us to continue to quietly funnel our patients and their families into the criminal legal system that our statements of solidarity purport to combat .
It is not simply interactions between Black people and law enforcement outside the hospital that put our patients at risk , it is also the criminalization of patients within the health care system .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ any better from there , but I thought I was merely joking a few months back when , as COVID authoritarianism started growing , I referred to “ white-coat supremacy.
” Little did I know .
.
.

If you don’t live in Manhattan, well, first of all, congratulations, but also you probably haven’t heard about the meltdown currently underway at the Dalton School, one of Manhattan’s more elite private schools. While many other private schools in New York City have reopened, Dalton has remained closed, much to the annoyance of tuition-paying parents.
The Dalton faculty, it seems, consists of community college rejects who flunked a Dr. Jill course, judging from their list of demands for agreeing to resume normal teaching:
The challenge for readers and composers is to set this list of demands to music: think “The Twelve Days of Wokeness.”
Meanwhile, apparently the New England Journal of Medicine, a formerly respected medical journal, is jealous of the wokery attitude The Lancet, and so offers us this:
#WhiteCoatsForBlackLives — Addressing Physicians’ Complicity in Criminalizing Communities Jamila Perritt, M.D., M.P.H. . . . all of medicine, including my chosen field of obstetrics and gynecology, has deeply racist and exploitative roots. The notion that medical providers are unbiased and objective, practicing within a profession free from the legacies of racism, genocide, and White supremacy, is fictitious. . . This ahistorical view has caused tremendous harm. In addition to preventing us from identifying and exposing racist beliefs and inherent bias in medical systems, it has allowed us to continue to quietly funnel our patients and their families into the criminal legal system that our statements of solidarity purport to combat. It is not simply interactions between Black people and law enforcement outside the hospital that put our patients at risk, it is also the criminalization of patients within the health care system. . .
It doesn’t get any better from there, but I thought I was merely joking a few months back when, as COVID authoritarianism started growing, I referred to “white-coat supremacy.” Little did I know. . .


powerlineblog--2020-12-19--In search of lost time

In search of lost time

Through sheer good luck , I came across the Osher Lifetime Learning Institute affiliated with Dartmouth College this past fall .
It has been my goal to do the assigned reading I didn ’ t get to in my favorite college literature courses .
Reviewing the Dartmouth Osher course offerings , I found two that met my needs .
The first — the one I happened onto — was Professor James Heffernan ’ s course on chapters 7-12 of James Joyce ’ s Ulysses .
Professor Heffernan was a member of the English Department when I was an undergraduate and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He is an expert on the Victorian novel and on Joyce , among many other things .
I regretted not having taken a course from him when I could .
He gave the 24-part Great Courses lecture series on Ulysses and taught the book for something like 50 years .
He must be one of the foremost living scholars of Ulysses .
I couldn ’ t believe my luck in finding the course with its availability via Zoom .
The second was a course in Classics of the Renaissance offered by Leon D. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crewe .
This was one of my favorite Dartmouth courses .
Although it omitted several of the longer works that we studied in the 1971 version of the course taught by Professor Dain Trafton , Professor Crewe covered shorter works including The Prince , Utopia , Praise of Folly , The Book of the Courtier , and The Life of Lazrillo De Tormes , all but the last of which were among the assigned reading for Comp .
Lit .
22 with Professor Trafton .
Digression : Leon Black , who endowed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ held , was one of my best friends at Dartmouth .
I lived with him and three other Dartmouth seniors during our last quarter before graduation .
We all knew Leon was going to be successful .
Leon spent his senior year working on a dissertation exploring the theme of the mask in European art and literature .
In the spring of 1973 I attended Leon ’ s presentation on the dissertation in Sanborn House .
It featured a slide illustration and accompanying discussion of Edvard Munch ’ s “ The Scream.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since then , I was unfamiliar with it at the time .
Munch created four versions of “ The Scream ” between 1893 and 1910 .
Only one of them was not in an Oslo museum .
When it came come up for sale at a Sotheby ’ s auction in 2012 , Leon paid nearly $ 120 million for Munch ’ s 1895 version of “ The Scream.
” End of Digression .
I found the Dartmouth Osher courses with Professors Heffernan and Crewe utterly exhilarating experiences .
They are both great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expressing my appreciation for the courses and was invited to talk about them by the Dartmouth Osher marketing crew ( video below ) .
The video has been posted on the Dartmouth Osher YouTube channel along with many other videos here .
With the current availability of the courses via Zoom , I wanted to bring the program to the attention of readers who might find something of interest .
The annual membership fee is $ 70 .
The cost of individual courses ranges from $ 45 to $ 85 .
The Dartmouth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Heffernan gave the Lannan Foundation lecture on chapter 9 of Ulysses this past June 16 , i.e.
, Bloomsday ( video below ) .
In chapter 9 Joyce alter ego Stephen Dedalus delivers a lecture on Shakespeare .
Stephen argues that the key to Shakespeare ’ s life is the ghost scene in Hamlet .
Professor Heffernan ’ s son Andrew is an actor who makes a cameo appearance to place the relevant passages from Hamlet before us .
The lecture was followed by a separate question and answer session .
The Lannan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here .

Through sheer good luck, I came across the Osher Lifetime Learning Institute affiliated with Dartmouth College this past fall. It has been my goal to do the assigned reading I didn’t get to in my favorite college literature courses. Reviewing the Dartmouth Osher course offerings, I found two that met my needs. The first — the one I happened onto — was Professor James Heffernan’s course on chapters 7-12 of James Joyce’s Ulysses.
Professor Heffernan was a member of the English Department when I was an undergraduate and is now retired from college teaching. He is an expert on the Victorian novel and on Joyce, among many other things. I regretted not having taken a course from him when I could. He gave the 24-part Great Courses lecture series on Ulysses and taught the book for something like 50 years. He must be one of the foremost living scholars of Ulysses. I couldn’t believe my luck in finding the course with its availability via Zoom.
The second was a course in Classics of the Renaissance offered by Leon D. Black Professor in Shakespearean Studies emeritus Jonathan Crewe. This was one of my favorite Dartmouth courses. Although it omitted several of the longer works that we studied in the 1971 version of the course taught by Professor Dain Trafton, Professor Crewe covered shorter works including The Prince, Utopia, Praise of Folly, The Book of the Courtier, and The Life of Lazrillo De Tormes, all but the last of which were among the assigned reading for Comp. Lit. 22 with Professor Trafton.
Digression: Leon Black, who endowed the chair in Shakespearean Studies that Professor Crewe held, was one of my best friends at Dartmouth. I lived with him and three other Dartmouth seniors during our last quarter before graduation. We all knew Leon was going to be successful.
Leon spent his senior year working on a dissertation exploring the theme of the mask in European art and literature. In the spring of 1973 I attended Leon’s presentation on the dissertation in Sanborn House. It featured a slide illustration and accompanying discussion of Edvard Munch’s “The Scream.” Although the image has become a cliché since then, I was unfamiliar with it at the time.
Munch created four versions of “The Scream” between 1893 and 1910. Only one of them was not in an Oslo museum. When it came come up for sale at a Sotheby’s auction in 2012, Leon paid nearly $120 million for Munch’s 1895 version of “The Scream.” End of Digression.
I found the Dartmouth Osher courses with Professors Heffernan and Crewe utterly exhilarating experiences. They are both great teachers. In November I submitted evaluations expressing my appreciation for the courses and was invited to talk about them by the Dartmouth Osher marketing crew (video below). The video has been posted on the Dartmouth Osher YouTube channel along with many other videos here.
With the current availability of the courses via Zoom, I wanted to bring the program to the attention of readers who might find something of interest. The annual membership fee is $70. The cost of individual courses ranges from $45 to $85. The Dartmouth Osher home page is here.
Professor Heffernan gave the Lannan Foundation lecture on chapter 9 of Ulysses this past June 16, i.e., Bloomsday (video below). In chapter 9 Joyce alter ego Stephen Dedalus delivers a lecture on Shakespeare. Stephen argues that the key to Shakespeare’s life is the ghost scene in Hamlet. Professor Heffernan’s son Andrew is an actor who makes a cameo appearance to place the relevant passage from Hamlet before us. The lecture was followed by a separate question and answer session. The Lannan Foundation has posted video and podcast versions here.


powerlineblog--2020-12-19--Coronavirus in one state (141)

Coronavirus in one state (141)

The Minnesota Department of Health held its final press briefing of the week yesterday .
While most of the briefing was devoted to vaccine distribution , the first question ( from Jeremy Olson ) addressed the the shutdown of indoor service at bars and restaurants throughout the state .
I have posted the audio below .
Olson ’ s question comes at about 12:00 .
Olson ’ s question is premised in part on the obvious recession of the current wave of the epidemic in Minnesota .
In fact , this wave of the epidemic has receded throughout the Upper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the states ( tweet below ) .
Kevin Roche has more data on this point here .
Olson notes that only 2 percent of cases can be traced to bars and restaurants .
What data support the current shutdown regime ?
MDH Commissioner Malcolm and Infectious Disease Division Director Kris Ehresmann both take stabs at an answer .
Ehresmann more or less concedes that they don ’ t have data specific to bars and restaurants to support the shutdown .
On this point , see John Phelan ’ s excellent Center of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So where does Ehresmann land ?
Sturgis !
It ’ s almost funny .
Ehresmann doesn ’ t cite the Sturgis data .
The MDH report on the Sturgis rally was posted here by the CDC on November 27 .
Ehresmann is a co-author of the report .
Summary : Four of the 86 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized and one died .
The study drew the following implications for public health practice : That ’ s it .
Eighty-six Minnesota COVID-19 cases were associated with the South Dakota motorcycle rally that drew a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the 10-day rally .
Conclusion : Avoid “ gatherings.
” You have got to be kidding me .
One more point .
Bars and restaurants remain open at tribal casinos and at the MSP International Airport .
If the closure of bars and restaurants is a matter of life and death , what accounts for the silence of the authorities on this point ?
They can ’ t be serious .

The Minnesota Department of Health held its final press briefing of the week yesterday. While most of the briefing was devoted to vaccine distribution, the first question (from Jeremy Olson) addressed the the shutdown of indoor service at bars and restaurants throughout the state. I have posted the audio below. Olson’s question comes at about 12:00.
Olson’s question is premised in part on the obvious recession of the current wave of the epidemic in Minnesota. In fact, this wave of the epidemic has receded throughout the Upper Midwest regardless of the approach taken by the states (tweet below). Kevin Roche has more data on this point here.
I've already noted in the past few days that the entire upper midwest has seen a peak and decline almost in unison over the past weeks… regardless of shutdowns and mitigations… See below. pic.twitter.com/5Wg4dKBNIj — Clarity (@covid_clarity) December 17, 2020
Olson notes that only 2 percent of cases can be traced to bars and restaurants. What data support the current shutdown regime?
MDH Commissioner Malcolm and Infectious Disease Division Director Kris Ehresmann both take stabs at an answer. Ehresmann more or less concedes that they don’t have data specific to bars and restaurants to support the shutdown. On this point, see John Phelan’s excellent Center of the American Experiment post reviewing the data.
So where does Ehresmann land? Sturgis! It’s almost funny.
Ehresmann doesn’t cite the Sturgis data. The MDH report on the Sturgis rally was posted here by the CDC on November 27. Ehresmann is a co-author of the report. Summary:
Following a 10-day motorcycle rally in South Dakota attended by approximately 460,000 persons, 51 confirmed primary event-associated cases, 21 secondary cases, and five tertiary cases were identified in Minnesota residents. An additional nine likely rally-associated secondary or tertiary cases occurred. Four patients were hospitalized, and one died. Genomic sequencing supported the associations with the motorcycle rally.
Four of the 86 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized and one died. The study drew the following implications for public health practice:
The impact of gatherings as a source of virus transmission underscores the importance of reducing the number of attendees at gatherings, using face masks, and encouraging physical distancing to prevent ongoing transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, these findings demonstrate the rationale for consistent mitigation measures across states.
That’s it. Eighty-six Minnesota COVID-19 cases were associated with the South Dakota motorcycle rally that drew a total of 460,000 citizens over the course of the 10-day rally. Conclusion: Avoid “gatherings.” You have got to be kidding me.
One more point. Bars and restaurants remain open at tribal casinos and at the MSP International Airport. If the closure of bars and restaurants is a matter of life and death, what accounts for the silence of the authorities on this point? They can’t be serious.


powerlineblog--2020-12-19--The Week in Pictures: Doctor Who Edition

“ Arise and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.
” Winston Churchill “ Proclaim Liberty throughout @ @ @ @ @ the Inhabitants Thereof.
” Inscription on the Liberty Bell

“Arise and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.” Winston Churchill
“Proclaim Liberty throughout All the land unto All the Inhabitants Thereof.” Inscription on the Liberty Bell


powerlineblog--2020-12-20--Emboldened Harvard ramps up its racial discrimination

Harvard , fresh off of its victory ( so far ) in the racial discrimination case brought against it , has granted early admission to 747 applicants for its next undergraduate class .
African Americans constitute 16.6 percent of those admitted early this year .
That ’ s a significant increase from last year , when they were 12.7 percent last year of admittees .
( I can ’ t tell from this report in the Harvard Gazette whether the 12.7 figure is for all of last year ’ s admittees or just those admitted early . )
The percentages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans are essentially unchanged from last year .
Thus , it is White applicants for early admission who are taking the hit .
No surprise there .
It would be fascinating to compare the SAT scores ( or grades ) of the 124 Blacks admitted early to the top 124 SAT scores ( or grades ) of Whites and/or Asian-Americans who were not admitted .
We all know what such a comparison would show , but it would be nice to learn the exact magnitude of the disparity .
Harvard is free , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comparatively inferior test scores and grades .
If it wants to lower the quality of its undergraduate population , it can do so as much as it desires .
However , Harvard can not discriminate on the basis of race .
Yet , that ’ s what I believe it has been doing and is doing again this year , perhaps to an even greater degree than in the past .
( It ’ s possible that when Harvard completes the admission process this Spring , the percentage of admitted Blacks will decline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
The First Circuit disagrees with my assessment and I suspect that Harvard ’ s victory in that court has emboldened the college to boost its already artificially high number of Black admittees .
That ’ s all the more reason why I hope the Supreme Court will agree to review the First Circuit ’ s decision when the plaintiff files a cert petition .

Harvard, fresh off of its victory (so far) in the racial discrimination case brought against it, has granted early admission to 747 applicants for its next undergraduate class. African Americans constitute 16.6 percent of those admitted early this year. That’s a significant increase from last year, when they were 12.7 percent last year of admittees. (I can’t tell from this report in the Harvard Gazette whether the 12.7 figure is for all of last year’s admittees or just those admitted early.)
The percentages for Asian-Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans are essentially unchanged from last year. Thus, it is White applicants for early admission who are taking the hit. No surprise there.
It would be fascinating to compare the SAT scores (or grades) of the 124 Blacks admitted early to the top 124 SAT scores (or grades) of Whites and/or Asian-Americans who were not admitted. We all know what such a comparison would show, but it would be nice to learn the exact magnitude of the disparity.
Harvard is free, of course, to admit applicants with comparatively inferior test scores and grades. If it wants to lower the quality of its undergraduate population, it can do so as much as it desires.
However, Harvard cannot discriminate on the basis of race. Yet, that’s what I believe it has been doing and is doing again this year, perhaps to an even greater degree than in the past. (It’s possible that when Harvard completes the admission process this Spring, the percentage of admitted Blacks will decline to something closer to the historical level.)
The First Circuit disagrees with my assessment and I suspect that Harvard’s victory in that court has emboldened the college to boost its already artificially high number of Black admittees.
That’s all the more reason why I hope the Supreme Court will agree to review the First Circuit’s decision when the plaintiff files a cert petition.


powerlineblog--2020-12-19--Starting at Second Base

Starting at Second Base

For the short 2020 season , major league baseball adopted a rule providing that in extra innings , each team @ @ @ @ @ a runner on second base .
Weird , I thought .
But stranger still , @ @ @ @ @ come to our nation ’ s colleges .
St. Olaf College in Northfield , Minnesota @ @ @ @ @ my kids graduated , is passing out a flyer with helpful suggestions on how to @ @ @ @ @ .
Reportedly the same helpful advice is being dispensed on other campuses as well .
@ @ @ @ @ avoid kissing : Wearing a mask during sex also seems like a buzz-killer ; on @ @ @ @ @ one ’ s number of sexual partners is good advice , regardless of respiratory ailments @ @ @ @ @ flyer is sheer silliness .
If you have been wondering whether there is any aspect @ @ @ @ @ hysteria can ’ t make dumber , the answer appears to be no .

For the short 2020 season, major league baseball adopted a rule providing that in extra innings, each team would start the inning with a runner on second base. Weird, I thought.
But stranger still, starting at second base has come to our nation’s colleges. St. Olaf College in Northfield, Minnesota, from which two of my kids graduated, is passing out a flyer with helpful suggestions on how to avoid covid while having sex. Reportedly the same helpful advice is being dispensed on other campuses as well. Pro tip #1: avoid kissing:
Wearing a mask during sex also seems like a buzz-killer; on the other hand, reducing one’s number of sexual partners is good advice, regardless of respiratory ailments. The rest of the flyer is sheer silliness.
If you have been wondering whether there is any aspect of our lives that covid hysteria can’t make dumber, the answer appears to be no.


Greetings From Mar-a-Lago

I have been in Florida for the last few days , attending Turning Point USA ’ s Winter Gala and Student Action Summit .
The gala was at Mar-a-Lago , our first visit to Trumpland .
It was a beautiful evening : The crowd was large and enthusiastic .
We chatted with a lot of interesting people , including a young woman who has been in charge of President Trump ’ s events–all his rallies , among other things–for the last five years .
The program featured speeches by Laura Ingraham , Kristi Noem , Rand Paul and Kayleigh McEnany @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we attended some Student Action Summit events , including a roundtable with Ric Grenell .
We also spent some time with the woman who is in charge of trying to assure that the voter fraud we witnessed in 2020 does not recur in 2022 .
She is very smart , very able , and has , I think , the right general plan .
How well it succeeds will vary from state to state .
Last night , the main student event kicked off .
TPUSA had made the necessary arrangements to limit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but at the eleventh hour , as students were entering the Palm Beach Convention Center , the local police department raided the event and stopped students from entering the building .
RedState has a good report .
The effect was to keep students packed together “ like sardines , ” as RedState puts it , ostensibly to protect them from covid .
Speakers , including Donald Trump , Jr. and Tucker Carlson , responded by going outside and addressing the stranded students .
Here is Don Jr. : It is nice to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closer to normal than in Minnesota .
You can eat in restaurants , for example .
It is warmer here , too , although the state is going through a cool spell .
In my opinion , Turning Point does a better job than any other national organization of bringing conservative ideas to young people and motivating and organizing them .
I would encourage you to go here and donate if you are able .

I have been in Florida for the last few days, attending Turning Point USA’s Winter Gala and Student Action Summit. The gala was at Mar-a-Lago, our first visit to Trumpland. It was a beautiful evening:
The crowd was large and enthusiastic. We chatted with a lot of interesting people, including a young woman who has been in charge of President Trump’s events–all his rallies, among other things–for the last five years. The program featured speeches by Laura Ingraham, Kristi Noem, Rand Paul and Kayleigh McEnany, all brief, happily.
Yesterday we attended some Student Action Summit events, including a roundtable with Ric Grenell. We also spent some time with the woman who is in charge of trying to assure that the voter fraud we witnessed in 2020 does not recur in 2022. She is very smart, very able, and has, I think, the right general plan. How well it succeeds will vary from state to state.
Last night, the main student event kicked off. TPUSA had made the necessary arrangements to limit crowd size and implement social distancing, but at the eleventh hour, as students were entering the Palm Beach Convention Center, the local police department raided the event and stopped students from entering the building. RedState has a good report.
The effect was to keep students packed together “like sardines,” as RedState puts it, ostensibly to protect them from covid. Speakers, including Donald Trump, Jr. and Tucker Carlson, responded by going outside and addressing the stranded students. Here is Don Jr.:
We are out here with @DonaldJTrumpJr bringing SAS outside to the crowd that the county leftists are trying to keep out of #SAS2020– we are doing everything we humanly can to make it available to everyone. Please be kind to our @TPUSA staff, we are working on it all pic.twitter.com/AYEsjWBdIR — Tyler Bowyer (@conservatyler) December 20, 2020
It is nice to be in Florida, where life is much closer to normal than in Minnesota. You can eat in restaurants, for example. It is warmer here, too, although the state is going through a cool spell.
In my opinion, Turning Point does a better job than any other national organization of bringing conservative ideas to young people and motivating and organizing them. I would encourage you to go here and donate if you are able.


powerlineblog--2020-12-20--More than a woman

More than a woman

It seems obvious that Rep. Eric Swalwell had an intimate relationship with the Chinese Communist spy Fang Fang , who helped him launch his congressional career .
According to Swalwell , the answer to the question whether he was sleeping with her might be “ classified.
” That ’ s what he told Tucker Carlson Tonight .
“ Classified ” by whom , he didn ’ t say .
When Axios came calling on its story revealing Fang Fang ’ s penetration into the network of California politicians , Swalwell ’ s office told Axios : “ To protect information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not participate in your story.
” Swalwell wouldn ’ t discuss the nature of his relationship with Fang Fang with Politico either .
In an interview , however , Swalwell told Politico : “ As the [ Axios ] story referenced , this goes back to the beginning of the last decade , and it ’ s something that congressional leadership knew about it [ sic ] .
” The New York Post cited each of these references to “ classification ” in its December 9 story noting the continuing Facebook friendship of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ picked up a few loose threads in “ Swalwell Tries to Deflect from Chinese Spy Story by Attacking Tucker Carlson , Americans Let Him Have It.
” The loose threads proliferate .
By appointment of Nancy Pelosi , Swalwell has served on the House Intelligence Committee and as ranking member of its Central Intelligence Agency Subcommittee since his second term in Congress , beginning in January 2015 .
The Axios story on Fang reported that she took part in fundraising activity for Swalwell ’ s 2014 re-election campaign and that Fang helped place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s office .
Fang Fang beat her retreat to China when the feds got on her case in 2015 and the FBI gave Swalwell a defensive briefing about her “ around 2015 , ” according to the same Axios story .
One can infer that Swalwell ’ s membership on the Intelligence Committee overlapped with Swalwell ’ s relationship with Fang Fang , although this isn ’ t entirely clear in any of the reports .
Swalwell himself isn ’ t talking .
We do know , however , that Pelosi placed Swalwell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remains to this day .
He appears to have been at all times an extraordinarily poor choice .
What is he doing there ?
Pelosi has sought to implicate House leadership beyond herself .
This past Friday House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy received an FBI briefing on the case along with Pelosi .
He spoke to reporters immediately after the briefing .
Martha MacCallum ’ s interview with McCarthy following the briefing covered the basics ( video below ) .
John Boehner was the Speaker of the House and McCarthy the House Majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with MacCallum McCarthy stated directly that he had never previously been briefed on the matter .
McCarthy volunteered that he “ doesn ’ t know if the briefing before for [ House ] leaders , if they had the same information they [ the FBI ] had today.
” As for the current briefing , McCarthy stated : “ Anyone who was in that room with me would not allow Swalwell to be on the committee or to continue to be on it.
” While Pelosi was in the room with McCarthy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on it.
” MacCallum didn ’ t follow up on that point or bore in on about who knew what when in this important story .
UPDATE : Interviewed on Sunday Morning Futures this morning , McCarthy was even more emphatic about Swalwell ’ s disqualification from the committee .
I hope to post the video separately once it becomes available .

It seems obvious that Rep. Eric Swalwell had an intimate relationship with the Chinese Communist spy Fang Fang, who helped him launch his congressional career. According to Swalwell, the answer to the question whether he was sleeping with her might be “classified.” That’s what he told Tucker Carlson Tonight. “Classified” by whom, he didn’t say.
When Axios came calling on its story revealing Fang Fang’s penetration into the network of California politicians, Swalwell’s office told Axios: “To protect information that might be classified, he will not participate in your story.”
Swalwell wouldn’t discuss the nature of his relationship with Fang Fang with Politico either. In an interview, however, Swalwell told Politico: “As the [Axios] story referenced, this goes back to the beginning of the last decade, and it’s something that congressional leadership knew about it [sic].”
The New York Post cited each of these references to “classification” in its December 9 story noting the continuing Facebook friendship of Swalwell with Fang Fang. Yesterday RedSate picked up a few loose threads in “Swalwell Tries to Deflect from Chinese Spy Story by Attacking Tucker Carlson, Americans Let Him Have It.”
The loose threads proliferate. By appointment of Nancy Pelosi, Swalwell has served on the House Intelligence Committee and as ranking member of its Central Intelligence Agency Subcommittee since his second term in Congress, beginning in January 2015. The Axios story on Fang reported that she took part in fundraising activity for Swalwell’s 2014 re-election campaign and that Fang helped place at least one intern in Swalwell’s office.
Fang Fang beat her retreat to China when the feds got on her case in 2015 and the FBI gave Swalwell a defensive briefing about her “around 2015,” according to the same Axios story. One can infer that Swalwell’s membership on the Intelligence Committee overlapped with Swalwell’s relationship with Fang Fang, although this isn’t entirely clear in any of the reports. Swalwell himself isn’t talking.
We do know, however, that Pelosi placed Swalwell on the Intelligence Committee, where he remains to this day. He appears to have been at all times an extraordinarily poor choice. What is he doing there?
Pelosi has sought to implicate House leadership beyond herself. This past Friday House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy received an FBI briefing on the case along with Pelosi. He spoke to reporters immediately after the briefing. Martha MacCallum’s interview with McCarthy following the briefing covered the basics (video below).
John Boehner was the Speaker of the House and McCarthy the House Majority Leader in 2015. In the interview with MacCallum McCarthy stated directly that he had never previously been briefed on the matter. McCarthy volunteered that he “doesn’t know if the briefing before for [House] leaders, if they had the same information they [the FBI] had today.”
As for the current briefing, McCarthy stated: “Anyone who was in that room with me would not allow Swalwell to be on the committee or to continue to be on it.” While Pelosi was in the room with McCarthy, however, Swalwell “continues to be on it.” MacCallum didn’t follow up on that point or bore in on about who knew what when in this important story.
UPDATE: Interviewed on Sunday Morning Futures this morning, McCarthy was even more emphatic about Swalwell’s disqualification from the committee. I hope to post the video separately once it becomes available.


A Christmas Story

I posted this , my favorite Christmas story , in 2012 .
It harkens back to a better time , or , at least , a more inspiring one .
You can take all your Tiny Tims and your Grinches and your Miracles on Whatever Street and stuff them in your stocking .
The best Christmas story is about a boxer .
It starts the day in 1918 when a doctor tells a slender heavyweight named Billy Miske that his bum kidneys give him five years to live , if he ’ s lucky .
Turns out he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This comes as rotten news to Billy , who ’ s only 24 years old and not half bad in the ring .
But that ’ s the end of the story .
Let ’ s go back to the beginning .
In the early years of the 20th century , St. Paul , Minnesota was a boxing hotbed .
The best remembered St. Paul boxers of the era are the Gibbons brothers , Tommy and Mike .
( The Gibbons family is still around ; the great-grandson of one of the brothers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is a friend of one of my daughters . )
But Billy Miske was in the same league .
For some years , he was a top contender in the light-heavyweight and heavyweight ranks .
In his prime , he weighed in between 180 and 190 .
Miske could box , hit like a piledriver and take a punch .
He was known as a gentleman and a sportsman , and was universally liked within the world of boxing .
He was inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 2010 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Billy Miske .
My son is a boxing fan and is friends with some of the top fighters in this part of the world .
For Christmas , he gave me a copy of the newly-published Billy Miske , the St. Paul Thunderbolt , by Clay Moyle , inscribed to me by the author .
Moyle ’ s book not only chronicles Miske ’ s short life , but is a fascinating history of boxing from around 1914 to 1923 .
Boxing in Minnesota was illegal , actually , when Miske started @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s rise to become one of America ’ s most popular sports .
In those days , boxers must have been almost unimaginably tough .
They would often fight with just a few days between bouts ; in 1918 , Miske fought 17 times .
He rose steadily through the light-heavyweight and heavyweight ranks , and in 1920 he fought Jack Dempsey for the heavyweight championship of the world in Benton Harbor , Michigan .
By the time he fought for the title , Miske was already under a death sentence .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had Bright ’ s Disease , an incurable kidney ailment , and had no more than five years to live .
Billy never told anyone other than his manager , not even his wife , how dire his situation was .
But , knowing that his health was in decline , in 1919 he invested most of his ring earnings in an Elgin automobile dealership .
Unfortunately , Billy must have been a poor businessman , because the dealership lost money and absorbed more and more of his winnings .
So Miske @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1920 , he went on a winning streak : in 1921 and 1922 he was 19-1-1 , with his only loss to Tommy Gibbons .
But by the end of 1922 , his health had deteriorated badly .
The five years his doctors had given him in 1918 were almost up .
He fought one bout in January 1923–which he won on a first round TKO–and then was too sick to train .
For most of the rest of 1923 , he rested , hunted and fished .
And watched what was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smoke .
By the fall , Billy knew he would see only one more Christmas .
He wanted to enjoy his last Christmas with his wife , Marie , and their three young children .
He also wanted to leave Marie something other than debts .
There was only one way out : Miske needed one last fight .
Many years ago , a sportswriter friend of Miske ’ s recorded Billy ’ s conversation with his manager , Jack Reddy : “ You must be kidding , you ’ re in no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Look , Jack , ” pleaded Billy , “ I ’ m flat broke .
I know I haven ’ t long to go , and I want to give Marie and the kids one more happy Christmas before I check out .
I won ’ t be around for another .
Please get me one more payday .
I want to make Christmas this year something Marie and the children will always remember me for.
” “ Look , ” said Jack , “ you know as well as I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in your present condition you might be killed.
” “ Sure , but I ’ m a fighter and I ’ d rather die in the ring than while sitting home in a rocking chair.
” Jack pulled out his wallet .
“ Let me help you .
How much do you need ?
” “ No way , ” Bill put his hand up like a wall .
“ I ’ ve never taken a handout and I ’ m not gon na start now.
” “ Here ’ s what I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ You go to the gym and start working out .
If you get into any reasonable kind of shape , we ’ ll talk about getting you a match.
” “ You know I can ’ t do that , ” Billy replied .
“ It ’ s impossible for me to train , but I ’ ve got to have one more fight for my family ’ s sake .
Please do it for me .
Please.
” Jack sighed .
“ I ’ ll live to regret this.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pocket .
“ Let me see what I can do.
” Reddy made a bout in Omaha , Nebraska , with a brawling heavyweight contender named Bill Brennan , whom Miske had fought before .
So , on November 7 , 1923 , a dying Billy Miske–in 55 days , he would be dead–climbed through the ropes one last time , in hopes of staying on his feet long enough to bring home a $ 2,400 purse .
He did .
And , through sheer willpower , Billy lasted until Christmas , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Billy bought a piano for Marie , who was an accomplished singer , and piles of gifts for his three children .
The next day , Billy called Jack Reddy and asked Jack to take him to the hospital .
En route , Billy told Marie for the first time that his prognosis was hopeless .
Billy Miske , 29 years old , died on New Year ’ s Day , 1924 .
But that isn ’ t quite the end of the story .
Let ’ s give the floor back @ @ @ @

I posted this, my favorite Christmas story, in 2012. It harkens back to a better time, or, at least, a more inspiring one.
Some years ago, the sportswriter Rick Reilly wrote:
You can take all your Tiny Tims and your Grinches and your Miracles on Whatever Street and stuff them in your stocking. The best Christmas story is about a boxer. It starts the day in 1918 when a doctor tells a slender heavyweight named Billy Miske that his bum kidneys give him five years to live, if he’s lucky. Turns out he’s dying of Bright’s disease. This comes as rotten news to Billy, who’s only 24 years old and not half bad in the ring.
But that’s the end of the story. Let’s go back to the beginning.
In the early years of the 20th century, St. Paul, Minnesota was a boxing hotbed. The best remembered St. Paul boxers of the era are the Gibbons brothers, Tommy and Mike. (The Gibbons family is still around; the great-grandson of one of the brothers, I’m not sure which, is a friend of one of my daughters.) But Billy Miske was in the same league. For some years, he was a top contender in the light-heavyweight and heavyweight ranks. In his prime, he weighed in between 180 and 190. Miske could box, hit like a piledriver and take a punch. He was known as a gentleman and a sportsman, and was universally liked within the world of boxing. He was inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 2010.
Until recently, I was unaware of Billy Miske. My son is a boxing fan and is friends with some of the top fighters in this part of the world. For Christmas, he gave me a copy of the newly-published Billy Miske, the St. Paul Thunderbolt, by Clay Moyle, inscribed to me by the author. Moyle’s book not only chronicles Miske’s short life, but is a fascinating history of boxing from around 1914 to 1923.
Boxing in Minnesota was illegal, actually, when Miske started fighting. His career coincided with boxing’s rise to become one of America’s most popular sports. In those days, boxers must have been almost unimaginably tough. They would often fight with just a few days between bouts; in 1918, Miske fought 17 times. He rose steadily through the light-heavyweight and heavyweight ranks, and in 1920 he fought Jack Dempsey for the heavyweight championship of the world in Benton Harbor, Michigan.
By the time he fought for the title, Miske was already under a death sentence. Doctors had told him in 1918 that he had Bright’s Disease, an incurable kidney ailment, and had no more than five years to live. Billy never told anyone other than his manager, not even his wife, how dire his situation was. But, knowing that his health was in decline, in 1919 he invested most of his ring earnings in an Elgin automobile dealership. Unfortunately, Billy must have been a poor businessman, because the dealership lost money and absorbed more and more of his winnings.
So Miske kept fighting. After losing to Dempsey in 1920, he went on a winning streak: in 1921 and 1922 he was 19-1-1, with his only loss to Tommy Gibbons. But by the end of 1922, his health had deteriorated badly. The five years his doctors had given him in 1918 were almost up. He fought one bout in January 1923–which he won on a first round TKO–and then was too sick to train. For most of the rest of 1923, he rested, hunted and fished. And watched what was left of his savings go up in smoke.
By the fall, Billy knew he would see only one more Christmas. He wanted to enjoy his last Christmas with his wife, Marie, and their three young children. He also wanted to leave Marie something other than debts. There was only one way out: Miske needed one last fight. Many years ago, a sportswriter friend of Miske’s recorded Billy’s conversation with his manager, Jack Reddy:
“Jack,” said Billy, “get me a fight.” “You must be kidding, you’re in no condition to fight,” Jack replied. “Get me a fight anyway!” Jack shook his head. “I won’t do it.” “Look, Jack,” pleaded Billy, “I’m flat broke. I know I haven’t long to go, and I want to give Marie and the kids one more happy Christmas before I check out. I won’t be around for another. Please get me one more payday. I want to make Christmas this year something Marie and the children will always remember me for.” “Look,” said Jack, “you know as well as I do that if you were to fight in your present condition you might be killed.” “Sure, but I’m a fighter and I’d rather die in the ring than while sitting home in a rocking chair.” Jack pulled out his wallet. “Let me help you. How much do you need?” “No way,” Bill put his hand up like a wall. “I’ve never taken a handout and I’m not gonna start now.” “Here’s what I’ll do,” Jack said. “You go to the gym and start working out. If you get into any reasonable kind of shape, we’ll talk about getting you a match.” “You know I can’t do that,” Billy replied. “It’s impossible for me to train, but I’ve got to have one more fight for my family’s sake. Please do it for me. Please.” Jack sighed. “I’ll live to regret this.” He stuffed his wallet back into his pocket. “Let me see what I can do.”
Reddy made a bout in Omaha, Nebraska, with a brawling heavyweight contender named Bill Brennan, whom Miske had fought before. So, on November 7, 1923, a dying Billy Miske–in 55 days, he would be dead–climbed through the ropes one last time, in hopes of staying on his feet long enough to bring home a $2,400 purse.
He did. And, through sheer willpower, Billy lasted until Christmas, the most festive ever in the Miske household. Billy bought a piano for Marie, who was an accomplished singer, and piles of gifts for his three children. The next day, Billy called Jack Reddy and asked Jack to take him to the hospital. En route, Billy told Marie for the first time that his prognosis was hopeless. Billy Miske, 29 years old, died on New Year’s Day, 1924.
But that isn’t quite the end of the story. Let’s give the floor back to Rick Reilly: