Is Administrative Law Either? A Debate

On Monday evening, the Notre Dame Student Chapter of the Federalist Society hosted a “Feddie Fight Night” debate on the topic: “Is Administrative Law Either? (Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Administrative State),” between Professors Gary Lawson of Boston University and Nicholas Bagley the University of Michigan. The online event featured a rollicking and wide-ranging exchange on delegation, expertise, constitutional history, and legal interpretation, among other aspects of administrative law.

Video of the event is available on the Federalist Society’s website, as well as on YouTube.

 

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3jxthC8
via IFTTT

“We Are F**king Abandoning American Citizens” Says Livid Army Colonel In Leaked Afghanistan Texts

“We Are F**king Abandoning American Citizens” Says Livid Army Colonel In Leaked Afghanistan Texts

Encrypted text messages between an Army colonel and a former Special Forces soldier working on a private effort to extricate stranded Americans from Afghanistan reveal that the US evacuation was anything but the ‘extraordinary success’ President Biden declared on Tuesday.

“We are fucking abandoning American citizens,” said an Army colonel assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division in an encrypted Sunday text message to Michael Yon, who revealed the message to Just the News.

Yon told Just the News that a group of Americans were abandoned at the Kabul airport, pleading for help as military officials told them they were finished with evacuations.

We had them out there waving their passport screaming, ‘I’m American,'” Yon said Tuesday while appearing on the John Solomon Reports podcast. -Just The News

People were turned away from the gate by our own Army,” said Yon, the former Special Forces soldier and war correspondent.

Text messages between Michael Yon and an Army Colonel. “AMCITS” is shorthand for American Citizens.

Yon’s account, which he shared with JTN’s John Solomon, is backed by three dozen text and email exchanges with frontline Army officials in Afghanistan.

The stranded Americans eventually scattered to safe houses to avoid capture by the Taliban, after which Yon wrote a ‘stinging email’ to an Army major whose team abandoned the rescue effort.

“You guys left American citizens at the gate of the Kabul airport,” wrote Yon on Tuesday. “Three empty jets paid for by volunteers were waiting for them. You and I talked on the phone. I told you where they were. Gave you their passport images. And my email and phone number. And you left them behind.”

“Great job saving yourselves. Probably get a lot of medals,” he added.

While the helper group worked frantically to get the Americans through the gate, members texted one another to say they had seen National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on CNN saying that neither he nor U.S. Central Command chief Gen. Kenneth McKenzie were told that Americans were abandoned.

“Hey did they end up just taking off?” one correspondent texted the helper group. “Because the National Security Advisor just told Tapper that neither he nor McKenzie had heard anything about Americans being left at the gates.” 

The correspondent noted that the private group heard differently from a lieutenant colonel (O-5): “Given we had comms with an O-5 on the ground, that means CENTCOM C3 is s–t, or someone is lying.”

According to the private rescue effort, the US Army was told by the State Department not to rescue the Americans.

“We get them to the gate, and the U.S. Army completely fails this saying, ‘Oh, we can’t do it, because the Department of the State tells us we can’t do it,” Yon told Just the News.

Read the rest of the report here.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 09:10

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3gMtAY7 Tyler Durden

OPEC+ Meeting Preview: Another 400kbpd Production Increase

OPEC+ Meeting Preview: Another 400kbpd Production Increase

In today’s online meeting, OPEC+ is expected to agree to another production increase of 400,000 barrels per day, a move which is a continuation of the process of rolling back production cuts introduced in the depths of the Covid-19 crisis. The organization expects supplies to remain tight through the rest of the year, before flipping to a surplus in 2022. Oil is trading slightly higher this morning ahead of the decision.

Below, courtesy of Newsquawk, is a detail summary of what to expect in today’s meeting

SUMMARY

  • The JTC will meet on Tuesday at 12:00BST/07:00EDT; JMMC and OPEC+ will meet on Wednesday at 15:00BST/10:00EDT and 16:00BST/11:00EDT respectively – subject to further delays
  • Sources have suggested that the planned 400k BPD hike output will likely go ahead, although surprises cannot be ruled out

RECENT COMMENTARY 

  • Kazakhstan considers the existing OPEC+ decisions as sufficient to stabilise the market, TASS reported
  • The Kuwati oil minister, over the weekend, suggested OPEC+ could reconsider output increase due to COVID

RECENT SOURCES

  • OPEC+ is likely to roll over its output policies this week, with a planned 400k BPD hike from September, according to sources
  • An informed source has intimated that considering the outcome of the JTC meeting yesterday, it appears that the OPEC plus meeting today will continue its previous policy; i.e. an increase of 400k BPD, via Energy Journalist Zandi
  • OPEC+ focus remains on an increase of 400k BPD despite the upward revision to demand forecast, according to four sources
  • Sources have said “current oil prices around $70 are okay.”

JTC FORECASTS 

  • OPEC+ forecasts oil stocks falling in 2021 even as it raises production, according to reports – If output is fully restored, the group forecasts a new oil surplus next year
  • OPEC+ JTC revises figures and now sees OECD stocks below 2015-2019 average until May 2022 (prev. Jan 2022)
  • OPEC+ JTC now sees 2022 market in 1.6mln BPD surplus – after revising figures down from earlier forecast of a surplus of 2.5mln BPD.

OVERVIEW: The OPEC+ decision-making meeting will be taking place against potential supply threats from a rampant Delta variant and the US’ desire for lower oil prices. The group have several options on the table for September production: 1) stick with the planned +400k BPD monthly hike, 2) defer the hike and maintain current production for at least September, or 3) increase output by a smaller volume. OPEC+ ministers have been relatively quiet since the mid-July meeting, but sources have suggested that the planned 400k BPD hike will likely go ahead. The Kuwaiti oil minister, however, has indicated that producers could mull halting the planned hike, citing COVID as the main factor, although he added that nothing had yet been discussed among participants.

SCHEDULE: The Joint Technical Committee (JTC) will meet on Tuesday at 12:00BST/07:00EDT to assess oil market conditions and examine its developments and trends. The Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee (JMMC) will then review this data on Wednesday at 15:00BST/10:00EDT and make a recommendation to OPEC+, with a meeting slated for 16:00BST/11:00EDT. As always with OPEC, timings are indicative and subject to delays.

PRIOR MEETING: Ministers at the last meeting agreed to hike total group production by 400k BPD per month from August (subject to market conditions), through to the end of 2022 (it moved this from April 2022). For the extended period (from May 2022 through the end of the year), production baselines, which the OPEC+ pact is premised on, have been revised higher for the UAE (3.5mln vs prev. 3.168mln), Iraq (4.803mln vs prev. 4.653mln), Kuwait (2.959mln vs prev. 2.809mln), Saudi and Russia (both to 11.5mln vs prev. 11mln). Russian Deputy PM Novak at the time stated that Russia would raise its oil output monthly by 100k BPD beginning in August and expects to return to pre-crisis levels of production in May next year. However, since then, some desks’ notes have suggested that OPEC’s exports for August were running at around 500k BPD higher than the average seen in July, which would represent an outpacing the corresponding relaxation in OPEC+ supply curbs.

DELTA VARIANT: The surge and dominance of the Delta variant across many economies have triggered fears of peak global growth and softer jet fuel demand. Nations, particularly in the East with low vaccine uptakes, have resorted to various lockdown measures to stem outbreaks. Furthermore, a recent Oxford study showed the AstraZeneca, and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines’ efficacies dropped in 90 days compared to two weeks after the 2nd dose – with the AstraZeneca vaccine efficacy at 61% and Pfizer vaccine at 75% at 90 days after the 2nd dose. There has also been growing noise surrounding a booster jab to reinforce against the Delta variant. The figure below shows the growth of dominance of the Delta variant across several regions over the past months. OPEC+ will likely reinforce caution surrounding COVID and express progress with regards to vaccinations.

US PRESSURE: The US has asked OPEC+ to ramp up output in a bid to stem the follow-through to US consumers. “We are engaging with relevant OPEC+ members on the importance of competitive markets in setting prices,” the statement said. A Senior White House official also noted that President Biden would “like his administration to use whatever tools that it has to help address the cost of gas, to help bring those prices down.” Subsequently, the US Department of Energy announced the sale of up to 20mln barrels of crude from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). OPEC sources believe oil markets do not need more oil than they plan to release in the coming month. Texas Governor Abbott noted in a tweet that Texas can “can easily produce” the oil the White House desires – Texas produced some 4.74mln BPD in May 2021, according to EIA data, with pre-pandemic production (Jan 2020) just under 5.50mln BPD. Elsewhere, some have suggested that the US production taken offline by Hurricane Ida provides OPEC+ members with some room to manoeuvre – with the resumption of US production expected to be gradual, whilst damage assessments are underway.

IRANIAN OIL: Iranian supply may also gain some attention after Javad Owji was appointed Iran’s new oil minister – who is seeking to expand in new oil markets. Furthermore, JCPOA talks have hit a snag, with the prospect of a Nuclear Deal dimmer than it was at the previous OPEC+ confab. Iran is currently exempt from OPEC+ quotas amid the overarching US sanctions, although a return of Iranian barrels is widely expected – but contingent on JCPOA talks. That being said, reports have flagged illicit Iranian oil exports, albeit at a fraction of market price and to the detriment of Iran’s current account. Further, Hezbollah Secretary-General Nasrallah also announced that a ship carrying Iranian fuel will set sail for Lebanon, with Tehran warning against US intervention in what they called a “legitimate trade”. Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson on Monday suggested a decision will be taken “in the coming days” on which Iranian body will manage the JCPOA talks, and hence it is safe to assume progress on a Nuclear Deal will be minimal ahead of the OPEC+ meeting.

OTHER POTENTIAL STICKING POINTS: Members can also complicate matters by seeking higher baseline, as did the UAE, Kuwait and Iraq in July talks, although there has been very little (so far) to indicate that this may be the case. OPEC+ needs unanimity to pass the next set of production quotas.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 09:06

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3gNqCT6 Tyler Durden

ARK Launches Yet Another ETF, World Collectively Sighs And Braces For More Cathie Wood TV Appearances

ARK Launches Yet Another ETF, World Collectively Sighs And Braces For More Cathie Wood TV Appearances

In what is quickly becoming an example of “how to start a brand new actively managed ETF about some new buzzword term every single day”, Cathie Wood is launching yet another ETF.

Adding to her flagship “Innovation” ARKK ETF, alongside of her Genomics and Self-Driving ETFs, Cathie Wood is now starting an ETF focused on transparency.

What does that mean? We didn’t really have any idea, either.

But according to Bloomberg the ETF will “closely follow an index that excludes industries including alcohol, banking, gambling and oil and gas”. Doesn’t sound like tons of fun, if you ask us.

Yet despite the supposed focus on virtue signaling (we’re guessing that’s why Wood is excluding gambling and oil and gas), Wood still has massive exposure to names like DraftKings elsewhere and will be including companies like Apple and Nike – notorious for their labor practices – in the latest ETF offering.

The inclusion of these names hasn’t stopped Wood from trying to position this ETF as some type of pious pathway into the world of investing.

Friend of Zero Hedge and Bloomberg ETF expert Eric Balchunas said: “This is kind of Ark’s version of ESG. It’s intriguing because it doesn’t have a moralizing vibe to it, it’s like they’re saying if you go after transparency, you’re probably going to buy good companies.”

The question of Wood is spreading herself too thin could start to come up if her funds can’t continue to perform. This ETF marks the second ETF launch for ARK this year, despite the firm’s “flagship” ARKK fund down 2% and underperforming the S&P this year. 

“An index-based ESG ETF doesn’t necessarily scream ‘disruptive innovation,’ which ARK has branded themselves around,” Nate Geraci, president of the ETF Store, concluded.

And of course, what would the launch of a new ETF be without the TV appearances to go with it? Expect to see Wood taking every opportunity to shill her latest “actively managed” product on Bloomberg and CNBC in coming weeks. We’ll have the “mute” button ready…

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 08:50

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2WIiQ6c Tyler Durden

The Academic Freedom Podcast #4 with David French

A new episode of The Academic Freedom Podcast from the Academic Freedom Alliance is now available. Subscribe through your favorite platform so you don’t miss an episode.

This episode of the podcast features my conversation with David French, the former president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and current senior editor at The Dispatch. We talk about his experience in the trenches defending free speech on college campuses, the growing hostility to liberal values in some segments of the American right, and recent legislative efforts to ban “divisive concepts” and “critical race theory” in American schools, including state universities.

From the podcast, on the difference between students and professors in free speech controversies:

We had a lot of professor inquiries, but very few professors willing to sort of make a public stand. So the students were much more willing to sort of like saddle up and go to battle against their university. And the professors were much less willing. There were there was more than one instance where I would talk to a professor who’d be in there and they would have tenure. But they would be in their office and they would be talking to me in hushed tones, lest anyone overhear them. And this is, again, going back 15 years. And so we did have some professor litigation, including what I think is either the first or one of the first cases where we actually won a jury trial on behalf of a professor who had been denied a promotion because of his political point of view. And that was Mike Adams sadly committed suicide during the pandemic. And that case was- you know, it’s understandable why people would have reluctance to challenge their school. He won. He won. He got his promotion. He got all of the back pay that he was due. You know, he was vindicated. But the whole process also took seven years. So that’s a hard, hard thing to endure when you’re when your professional reputation in your professional, in your peer relationships are on the line.

On recent state legislative efforts to ban “critical race theory” in schools:

You will see young kids in a public school system in this state or this city being taught some pretty outrageous stuff about race. You know, you’ll see some diversity, DEI diversity, equity, inclusion training programs that are almost like a caricature of critical race theory that will place people into racial affinity groups that will, you know, put people on privileged walks. I mean, these things actually exist. And many of them are so, actually so outrageous as to, in all likelihood, violate civil rights law by being racially discriminatory. But there’s been little sense of how widespread it is. For example, how much does it actually exist in your own local school?

And so there was there was a rush to try to ban critical race theory. And so because critical race theory is such a slippery concept to define concisely, it’s got a lot of different branches, a lot of different scholars, a lot of the scholars will argue with each other. They instead began to ban the not just the advocacy of certain specific concepts, but the inclusion of these concepts in courses in some of the concepts. So the concept it might be the idea that one race is inherently superior to another, which is a concept that, if taught in class, would violate civil rights law. Right. But it began to be these concepts. There were a variety of these concepts that were attempted that that schools attempted or legislatures attempted to ban. And that the breadth and the vagueness of these statutes began to be very, very concerning, they weren’t just replicating the requirements of civil rights law, for example, they weren’t just replicating the requirements of the First Amendment, which prohibits, for example, compelled speech. They were going way beyond that.

And they were both under inclusive and overinclusive. They were under inclusive in the sense that they weren’t banning critical race theory. They weren’t. But they were overinclusive in that they were banning kinds of conversations and an instruction that even the legislators themselves would say we didn’t intend to ban. And so they were very sloppily written. They would have a profound, chilling effect and wouldn’t even accomplish the goal that they were drafted to accomplish. Other than that, they were fine.

Listen to the whole thing.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3kHXo9n
via IFTTT

The Academic Freedom Podcast #4 with David French

A new episode of The Academic Freedom Podcast from the Academic Freedom Alliance is now available. Subscribe through your favorite platform so you don’t miss an episode.

This episode of the podcast features my conversation with David French, the former president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and current senior editor at The Dispatch. We talk about his experience in the trenches defending free speech on college campuses, the growing hostility to liberal values in some segments of the American right, and recent legislative efforts to ban “divisive concepts” and “critical race theory” in American schools, including state universities.

From the podcast, on the difference between students and professors in free speech controversies:

We had a lot of professor inquiries, but very few professors willing to sort of make a public stand. So the students were much more willing to sort of like saddle up and go to battle against their university. And the professors were much less willing. There were there was more than one instance where I would talk to a professor who’d be in there and they would have tenure. But they would be in their office and they would be talking to me in hushed tones, lest anyone overhear them. And this is, again, going back 15 years. And so we did have some professor litigation, including what I think is either the first or one of the first cases where we actually won a jury trial on behalf of a professor who had been denied a promotion because of his political point of view. And that was Mike Adams sadly committed suicide during the pandemic. And that case was- you know, it’s understandable why people would have reluctance to challenge their school. He won. He won. He got his promotion. He got all of the back pay that he was due. You know, he was vindicated. But the whole process also took seven years. So that’s a hard, hard thing to endure when you’re when your professional reputation in your professional, in your peer relationships are on the line.

On recent state legislative efforts to ban “critical race theory” in schools:

You will see young kids in a public school system in this state or this city being taught some pretty outrageous stuff about race. You know, you’ll see some diversity, DEI diversity, equity, inclusion training programs that are almost like a caricature of critical race theory that will place people into racial affinity groups that will, you know, put people on privileged walks. I mean, these things actually exist. And many of them are so, actually so outrageous as to, in all likelihood, violate civil rights law by being racially discriminatory. But there’s been little sense of how widespread it is. For example, how much does it actually exist in your own local school?

And so there was there was a rush to try to ban critical race theory. And so because critical race theory is such a slippery concept to define concisely, it’s got a lot of different branches, a lot of different scholars, a lot of the scholars will argue with each other. They instead began to ban the not just the advocacy of certain specific concepts, but the inclusion of these concepts in courses in some of the concepts. So the concept it might be the idea that one race is inherently superior to another, which is a concept that, if taught in class, would violate civil rights law. Right. But it began to be these concepts. There were a variety of these concepts that were attempted that that schools attempted or legislatures attempted to ban. And that the breadth and the vagueness of these statutes began to be very, very concerning, they weren’t just replicating the requirements of civil rights law, for example, they weren’t just replicating the requirements of the First Amendment, which prohibits, for example, compelled speech. They were going way beyond that.

And they were both under inclusive and overinclusive. They were under inclusive in the sense that they weren’t banning critical race theory. They weren’t. But they were overinclusive in that they were banning kinds of conversations and an instruction that even the legislators themselves would say we didn’t intend to ban. And so they were very sloppily written. They would have a profound, chilling effect and wouldn’t even accomplish the goal that they were drafted to accomplish. Other than that, they were fine.

Listen to the whole thing.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3kHXo9n
via IFTTT

Texas ‘Heartbeat Bill’ Becomes Most Restrictive Abortion Law In US As SCOTUS Stays Silent

Texas ‘Heartbeat Bill’ Becomes Most Restrictive Abortion Law In US As SCOTUS Stays Silent

The Supreme Court made millions of pro-choice advocates extremely nervous on Wednesday when it decided not to intervene as a new Texas abortion law took effect. If it remains intact, the Texas heartbeat bill will be the most restrictive abortion law in the country, preventing 85% of women in Texas, the country’s second-most-populous state, from getting an abortion. In other words, it’s the biggest victory for pro-life advocates since the dawn of the Roe v. Wade era.

The bill outlaws abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which typically occurs around 6 weeks into a pregnancy, before many women even know they are pregnant.

A group of abortion providers are asking the Supreme Court to step in and overturn the law. At least 12 other states have enacted bans on abortion early in pregnancy, but all have been blocked from going into effect.

The Supreme Court could act on Wednesday, though the justices don’t have any firm deadline. The providers are challenging a federal appeals court decision that effectively blocked any pre-enforcement challenge.

One provision that makes the law unique is the fact that private citizens will be allowed to sue providers and anyone involved in “facilitating coverage”, which could mean people who drive others to the abortion clinic could be found liable in court to losses of at least $10,000. The ACLU says this provision “actively encourages private citizens to act as bounty hunters”.

Unsurprisingly, the law taking effect elicited outraged cries from the blue-check commentariat, including CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Fortunately for Toobin, masturbation doesn’t lead to pregnancy.

One doctor accused the Texas legislature of practicing “eugenics”, although we’re not certain that word means what the good doctor thinks it means.

Unsurprisingly, pro-choice groups seized on the occasion as a fundraising opportunity.

In the coming months, SCOTUS will hear a Mississippi appeal that seeks to overturn Roe v Wade. But even before then, a decision to protect the Texas law could signal that SCOTUS is leaning toward “toppling precedents that protect abortion until much later in pregnancy,” according to Bloomberg.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 08:30

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3jwKn39 Tyler Durden

“The Job Market Recovery Is Dented” – ADP Private Payrolls Miss Huge, Only 374K Jobs Added In August

“The Job Market Recovery Is Dented” – ADP Private Payrolls Miss Huge, Only 374K Jobs Added In August

For the second month in a row, the ADP Private Payroll employment report has been a complete disaster, and one month after the the ADP missed by almost half printing at 330K in June (missing expectations of 683K), moments ago ADP reported that private payrolls in August rose just 374K, which while a modest improvement from July’s downward revised 326K (which was the lowest since February), was again a huge miss to the 638K expected.

“Our data, which represents all workers on a company’s payroll, has highlighted a downshift in the labor market recovery. We have seen a decline in new hires, following significant job growth from the first half of the year,” said Nela Richardson, chief economist, ADP.

“Despite the slowdown, job gains are approaching 4 million this year, yet still 7 million jobs short of pre-COVID-19 levels. Service providers continue to lead growth, although the Delta variant creates uncertainty for this sector. Job gains across company sizes grew in lockstep, with small businesses trailing a bit more than usual.”

Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, said, “The Delta variant of COVID-19 appears to have dented the job market recovery. Job growth remains strong, but well off the pace of recent months. Job growth remains inextricably tied to the path of the pandemic.”

For the second month in a row, medium-sized businesses added the most jobs:

The Services economy continues to dominate the recovered jobs in June, with only 12k manufacturing jobs added.

More ominously, the only jobs added were waiters and bartenders (i.e., leisure and hospitality).

Finally, it is worth noting that ADP has under-guessed Nonfarm Payrolls in 5 of the last 7 months, and remember that Fed Governor Christopher Waller recently said the U.S. central bank could start to reduce its support for the economy by October if the next two monthly jobs reports show employment rising by 800,000 to 1 million, as he expects, adding that there’s “no reason” to go slow on tapering the Fed’s bond purchase program.

So if today’s ADP print is anything to go by, and if for once the ADP is predictive of what this Friday’s payrolls will reveal, then we may have a major taper problem, as inflation soars yet as the job market suddenly crumbles leading to the dreaded stagflation.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 08:27

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3t2i0gq Tyler Durden

The New Yale Book of Quotations Is Published (Post 3 of 3)

Immediately after the publication of the original Yale Book of Quotations, readers—some of them scholars, but more of them ordinary quotation-lovers—sent excellent new information to the editor. These discoveries are now incorporated into The New Yale Book of Quotations. The preeminent contributor was Garson O’Toole, who was inspired to create the magnificent quoteinvestigator.com website. The help furnished by the crowd-sourcing resulted in a new volume that not only traces famous quotes to their true origins, but also captures the many famous quotations omitted by other reference works. Below is the third part of the NYBQ’s introduction.

The publication of the first edition of The Yale Book of Quotations triggered a remarkable “crowd-sourcing” response by quotation-lovers and researchers spanning the globe. Employing printed books, online searching, and their own memories, many readers emailed, or communicated by other avenues, outstanding contributions of quotations for inclusion or of improvements in information about quotes in the YBQ. The names of the more active such contributors are given in the Acknowledgments above, but special credit needs to be elaborated here for Garson O’Toole.

In 2007 O’Toole became curious about the genesis of the supposed Chinese curse “May you live in interesting times,” which Wikipedia had traced back to 1950. He then was able to find the curse in a 1944 book and posted his discovery on a blog. This posting was noticed by the Yale Book of Quotations editor, who added a comment pointing out that the YBQ had a 1939 citation. O’Toole later wrote that he “purchased a copy of The Yale Book of Quotations and began purposefully scanning its entries.” The rest is history, as he was inspired by the Yale volume to create, three years later, a website he titled Quote Investigator (quoteinvestigator.com). Quote Investigator has grown to include well over a million words of authoritative quote-sleuthing. O’Toole’s brilliant researches have greatly aided The New Yale Book of Quotations, which has many dozens of entries reflecting Quote Investigator findings.

The compilation of the present book has also benefited from extensive use of the electronic mailing list of the American Dialect Society and the Project Wombat network of reference librarians and researchers, both of which bring together very skilled people dedicated to answering sophisticated questions. Specific contributors are listed in the Acknowledgments. Finally, traditional methods of library research, utilizing the resources of the Yale University Library and Yale Law Library as well as interlibrary borrowing from other institutions, were pursued to verify quotations and to find their origins.

The research efforts outlined above were devoted not only to tracing and verifying quotation origins, but also to ensuring that all of the most famous quotations were included in this book. As a result, many important quotations not found in prior quotation dictionaries appear here, such as Willard Motley’s 1947 suggestion to “Live fast, die young, and leave a good-looking corpse”; the famous sentence from Lou Gehrig’s farewell speech at Yankee Stadium in 1939: “Today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth”; and Friedrich Nietzsche’s 1888 epigram, “Whatever does not kill me makes me stronger.” More than a thousand previous quotation collections and other types of anthologies were canvassed; many Internet resources were perused; and experts on specific authors and types of literature were consulted.

As a result of the unique approaches and methods employed, The New Yale Book of Quotations has a Janus-like duality. As noted above, the NYBQ serves a very traditional function of gathering the monuments of literary expression and other forms of enduring culture. It also, however, captures the most celebrated items of contemporary discourse and public life. Thus William Shakespeare and Donald Trump coexist in these pages. One of them is far less eloquent than the other, but, for better or worse, both are now part of our verbal heritage, with Mr. Trump’s most remarkable utterances and Tweets carefully recorded here. Other recent individuals whose quotes have been introduced or supplemented in this edition include, among many others, Warren Buffett, Hillary Clinton, Pope Francis, Jonathan Franzen, Alan Greenspan, Steven Jobs, Cormac McCarthy, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Toni Morrison, Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, David Foster Wallace, and Warren Zevon.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3mSmJAk
via IFTTT