The Lincoln Memorial was dedicated today.

President Harding spoke of Lincoln as a "natural human being with the frailties mixed with the virtues of humanity." And Chief Justice Taft spoke of Lincoln's "Christ-like character."

"21-INCH WAIST PASSES.; Boston Corset Maker Says Women Have Grown Stouter."

Oh, no! With the "no-corset fad," we've become fat! It's embarrassing to admit it, but now the average waist measurement for women is 28 inches! And men have been suffering the same fate as they've changed from belts to suspenders. Is it not enought to eat sensibly and exercise? Do we really need bondage to keep us from ballooning?

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1922.

"Should he be introduced as a Neanderthal man, a bigot, a warmonger, looking out at us from the 19th century?"

Asked "the youthful-looking former Hollywood actor" Ronald Reagan, introducing Barry Goldwater. Is that sort of satirical edge going to help him best Nelson Rockefeller in next Tuesday's California primary?

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1964.

"Mr. Clark's quintet... swirl their hair around their foreheads instead of wearing it in a beefeater bob."

Thanks to the NYT for explaining how to tell the difference between a Dave Clark 5 hairdo and a Beatles hairdo — assuming you know what the hell a "beefeater bob" is. (I'm picturing some guy saying "Hi, I'm Beefeater Bob.") The Times notes that the DC5 played Carnegie Hall and claims that the "big question" was whether they got their fans to scream more than the Beatles did 2 months ago.

The determinant in such cases is how much of the music, if any, can penetrate the sustained sound emitted by the votaries.

Yeah, that is the way the NYT insists on continuing to write in the modern world. The newspaper is hopelessly square. Where is the mod newspaper that I want to read now?

Look, here's how they describe the DC5's clothes:

They wear high, tight, wight collars, black jackets and what were once known as "ice cream pants."

Ice cream pants! Again, a helpful description. What the hell are ice cream pants? You know, I know what the Dave Clark 5 look like. These descriptions only make me wonder what these other references are. Descriptions are supposed to work the other way around.

In challenging the sonic inspirational qualities of the Beatles, Mr. Clark had one more man than the first group and two particularly penetrating instruments (saxophone and electronic keyboard) that the Beatles lack.

Congratulations on figuring out the the Dave Clark 5 has 5 guys in it.

Would it kill you to say something interesting?

The Clark group appears to play louder than the Beatles.

But you still couldn't hear them. That's the main point, as far as the Times can see. Oh, these noisy, noisy groups, and their noisy, ridiculous fans. You know the day will come when they'll figure out how to turn all the instruments and microphones up and we won't hear the girls scream anymore. We'll go deaf, of course, but before we do, we'll get to hear our favorite bands play.

Anyway, the Dave Clark 5 played for 24 minutes (the same as the Beatles). 24 unheard minutes. What pleasure. Well, they filled out th show with 2 "folk-singing groups" but it just bored the DC5 fans. And the NYT doesn't even tell us the names of those folky groups. Man, talk about getting no respect. The Dave Clark 5 fans don't care about them and the NYT won't even name them.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1964.

"Unknown Man Commits Suicide."

"An unknown man, believed to be from New York, committed suicide on Saturday night in the woods back of the brownstone Episcopal church at Fort Lee by shooting himself. He was about sixty-five or seventy years of age, was six feet in height, and well but slimly built. He is clean shaven and bald, with a little gray hair on each side of the head."

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT WAS: 1899.

''This Administration has been philosophically opposed to appointing people to any job on the basis of race or sex."

So says Gary L. Bauer, assistant to President Reagan, insisting that "it would be absurd to turn around and start appointing people based on sexual preference" to a public policy committee devoted to the AIDS epidemic. The committee has no openly gay members, and gay activists think it ought to have one. There is so much fear about AIDS testing. The most important thing is to find a cure, but, meanwhile, let's think carefully about the point of testing. What good does it do to learn you have a fatal disease when nothing can be done? Yes, you need to avoid spreading it, but everyone — especially anyone in a risk group — would do well to behave as if they or their partner is infected. I don't pretend to know what's best here, but isn't it a good idea to have representatives of the gay community on the committee? With so many people — young people — dying, is it really so important to make a philosophical point about affirmative action?

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1987.

"There is little use in trying to beautify Central Park West if the line serving it terminates in the black belt of Harlem."

That's the objection of J. Bowie Dash, a director of the Central Park West and Columbus Avenue Association, about the proposed extension of the subway in New York City. The Association wants the route bent eastward so Harlem residents don't flow downtown.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1922.

"Will no one weep for tulips?"

A million tulip bulbs — that could live through the winter and bloom next spring — will be cruelly burned to ashes because they are aliens. They came into the United States duty-free to appear at the World's Fair, but now they must be destroyed. Maintaining the federal government's tariff structure is more important than beauty — more important than life. I saw those flowers. I am crying as I write this.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1939.

"Jews in Berlin were warned today that the 'ghetto' law forbidding them to live in Aryan-owned houses would soon be enforced..."

"... and they had 'better seek lodging in Jewish-owned houses now to avoid having quarters assigned to them by the city government.'"

The NYT reports today.

The law, proclaimed May 4, stipulates that Jewish householders must take in Jews at present living in "Aryan-owned" houses.

At the same time certain sections of Berlin — some of which were formerly regarded as "Jewish districts" because of a predominance of Jewish inhabitants — were declared "Aryan districts where Jews are not permitted to live."

These districts include the fashionable Tiergarten district, the near-by Luetzowplatz, the Potsdammerstrasse — one of the more important business streets — the Tauentzienstrasse, the Kurfuerstendamm, the Bayerisches Viertel and the Hansa Viertel. Both of the last-named formerly were largely populated by Jews.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1939.

"President Reagan and the lawyers he has put in charge of protecting civil rights should stand ashamed."

"Racial hatred is not tax-exempt, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday by a lopsided vote."

The NYT excoriates the Reagan Administration:

On what basis could the Administration have sided with private academies claiming a religious basis for discriminatory admissions? It's hard to think of any basis other than pandering to the religious right. Courts have repeatedly ruled that such schools are not entitled to pick the taxpayer's pocket for money to finance racial bias. And three previous Administrations, of both parties, obeyed the courts. Ronald Reagan tried to sneak past a change in this policy with a quiet announcement.

When that produced a storm of criticism, the President claimed he was legally bound to grant the tax exemptions. He had the gall to say that if Congress wanted to forbid them, it would have to pass another law. Congress rightly refused to dignify that ploy with an answer. The Court now explains that Congress has already given it - in laws passed over 90 years and reaffirmed twice since 1976.

Here's that "lopsided" decision in Bob Jones University v. United States. The lone dissenter is — as anyone could have guessed — William Rehnquist. How much "gall" are we talking about? Enough to make Congress seem noble for not passing more specific legislation? Rehnquist wrote:

The Court points out that there is a strong national policy in this country against racial discrimination. To the extent that the Court states that Congress in furtherance of this policy could deny tax-exempt status to educational institutions that promote racial discrimination, I readily agree. But, unlike the Court, I am convinced that Congress simply has failed to take this action and, as this Court has said over and over again, regardless of our view on the propriety of Congress' failure to legislate we are not constitutionally empowered to act for it.

Why let Congress off the hook? It's a shame that all this litigation was necessary.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1983.

1. "Carpers, critics and killjoys" and 2. "reactionaries."

2 targets of the National Socialist party, as the NYT reports:

All the party speakers are scheduled for a whirlwind campaign that like some famous American newspaper mergers will combine the best features of both previous efforts.

Hmmm.... I'm not sure the NYT is taking the Nazis seriously enough. Like a newspaper merger? That's strange.

The new treason law provides decapitation as the extreme penality for conspiracy against the State, but whether the régime will go to the length of chopping off any notable heads is presently open to some doubt.

Notice the jocose use of the word "notable"? Does the NYT think the Nazis are just posturing?

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1934.

"Racial minorities cannot be racist in the U.S.A." and "all whites are racist in the U.S.A."

2 statements in a NYC teachers' training manual. The "Lora Training Handbook: A Leader's Guide" — now withdrawn — was a response to an order by U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein in a class action case about the disproportionate number of minority school kids who were getting assigned to special ed classes for the emotionally disturbed. The city was supposed to sensitize teachers to the problems of racism.

Here's the earlier NYT report on the manual:

One excerpt declares, ''In the United States at present only whites can be racists, since whites dominate and control the institutions that create and enforce American cultural norms and values.''

Another passage says: ''Even if an individual white American is free from all conscious racial prejudices, he/she remains a racist, for he/she receives benefits distributed by a white racist society through its institutions. . . . They do not have to consciously decide to oppress racial minorities in order to be racist.''

At another point, the handbook advises instructors that ''challenges are to be expected'' on the book's contentions that ''racial minorities cannot be racist in the U.S.A.'' and that ''all whites are racist in the U.S.A.'' The manual, Mr. Hikind noted, then provides instructors with ways to respond to such challenges.

Elsewhere... the manual declares, ''In order to change a racist society, all persons, particularly white persons in the U.S., must actively choose in some instance to question and go against authority, rules and values, in order to behave in an anti-racist way and fight a racist system"...

What is the conventional wisdom in academia is highly inflammatory when quoted to the general public. People don't want to hear that they are racist. I understand that the idea is to loosen up set ideas and to get people to rethink their perceptions and assumptions, but a different approach is going to be needed.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1987.

"The ideal thing is to have a home near a small city where there are girls and movies."

Here's a report on the "rest homes" and service clubs in Australia for our servicemen on leave from battle. A Red Cross worker says our boys get along "awfully well" with the Australian girls — because they "speak the same language." I wish there was more in these meager reports! Do they get along well just because they speak the same language — and our boys are simply happy to be around any girls? Or is there something particular about Australians? Australians! I don't know anything about these girls. In my mind, they are just girls — speaking English. But they are making our boys happy. Thanks, Australian girls. I have a picture of them, those girls, with our boys. It's a vague picture, but it means something to me. Australian girls and American boys, going to the movies. What movies? What movies are playing in that small city in Australia? The article says the boys' favorite item on the rest home/service club menu is milk, and that they pick milk — and are healthier than the boys in the last war — because "health education has borne fruit." It's a wholesome image I'm getting from this tiny article: milk-drinking boys, going to the movies with English-speaking Australian girls. What movie are they seeing? I'm just going to go ahead and picture "Yankee Doodle Dandy."



THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1943.

"More news of the anti-Jewish campaign in Poland..."

"... picked up today from SWIT, the secret Polish radio station."

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1943.

"Record Bag of Japanese Is Captured by Chinese."

A headline.

More headlines today:

"JAPANESE KILLED AT RATE OF 14 TO 1; OWI Reports on Casualties of Enemy From Guadalcanal to Naha Outskirts."

"TOKYO DENIES TALK OF BID FOR PEACE; Washington Doubts Reports of 'Feelers' Because Army Still Controls Japan."

"What the GI Is Thinking About; He doesn't like the idea of going to the Pacific but knows the job must be done."

And finally, depressingly:

"'Kamikaze'; Japan Fights Fiercely." ("As the Allied ring drew tighter around the Japanese empire last week, as American air blows rained heavier on the home islands, Japan's strategy of defense was "kamikaze" — a suicidal resistance.")

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1945.

Now that the curfews are lifting and people are going to nightclubs again...

... let's ask a psychology professor: Why do people go to nightclubs?

Nightclubs evolved out of the speakeasies of the Prohibition Era, and these days they are mostly legal, but there is still a bit of a sense that they are sinful and risqué.

At the bar of the Stork Club... a coated matron raised her voice.

"I do as much for the war effort as anybody," she told her male civilian companion defiantly. If consuming liquor was aiding the war effort, she seemed to be in a fair way that night night of winning the Japanese conflict single-handedly....

People come to nightclubs just to congregate — to see and to be seen...

J. Edgar Hoover is to be found at the far part of the Cub Room with his aide, Clyde Tolson...

The debs com in for lunch, drink mostly coke (at 75 cents a bottle, nickel size) or milk....

"I wonder if they're going to be married," they say. "Isn't that a divine hat?" or a "fetching frock," or a "charming ensemble," or "Why isn't he in the Army?"...

Taking in a night club is a big event in small people's lives. Most people have always had the desire to go and now they feel they can satisfy that desire.

Do we really need an explanation? People want to enjoy life — and the enjoyment of life is within reach. It's not wrong to want to dress up and go out to eat and drink and have a little fun. It's a simple pleasure.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1945.

Don't backslide into "bourgeois democracy."

Pravda warns Czechoslovakia.

Czechoslovakia wasn't named, but the meaning of "some people" — who want political freedoms — was clear enough in an article that touted the superiority of socialist democracy for providing "economic and spiritual benefits" instead of bourgeois concerns about constitutions. Say a prayer for Czechoslovakia.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1968.

"Rabblerousers and hatemongers, members of the New Left who are really unwashed members of the old right, practicing storm trooper tactics."

Governor Ronald Reagan doesn't mind telling us what he really thinks of student protesters.

By the way: NYT, do you think you could spell his name right more than 75% of the time — now that he seems to be running for President?

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1968

It is not an outside enemy that will destroy America, but our own "materialism, paganism, lust, sin and selfishness."

So says the Rev. Dr. Norman Vincent Peale. No matter how big our armies and how powerful our weapons, he says, "The enemy will get into the hearts of a wicked and disolute people." We need religion, in his view. "One individual, completely surrendered to God, is of more value than an army."

"London is almost reduced to ruins now. But if peace is made now and we go on for the next twenty-five years as we have lived for the last, it will be pulverized to dust by the war of 1960."

I must confess that I cannot understand this Peale character. What have we done in the last quarter century that's all that terrible? Look at what is going on in the world right now. Can't he be clear and say that is wrong and we need to fight? Instead he picks on us for the ordinary human character flaws we might have. Maybe he is saying that we need to be strong so we'll be able to fight. But he just can't help making that into an occasion for insisting that we be more religious. Eh. It's a sermon. What can you expect? I'll tell you what: a little more optimism. I don't need to hear about getting pulverized to dust in some war 19 years from now. You know, there's something to be said for positive thinking.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1941.

"France is not a dominion of the United States."

That's the attitude of the French press today:

"As far as Mr. Roosevelt's decisions are concerned one must ask by what right on on the basis of what treaties he is interfering," said the Matin.

"France did not fall in this war in behalf of Roosevelt or Churchill but for France," added L'Oeuvre.

THE YEAR THAT BLOG FORGOT IS: 1941.