Wednesday: Hili dialogue

July 3, 2024 • 6:45 am

Welcome to the first Hump Day (“ਹੰਪ ਦਿਨ” in Punjabi) in July: Wednesday, July 3, 2024. and National Fried Clam Day, best eaten at Woodman’s, in Essex, MA. And be sure to get them with the bellies on!  The only problem with the photo below (location unknown) is that there’s no beer:

“Fried Clams” by Joe Shlabotnik is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

 

It’s also American Redneck Day, National Eat Your Beans Day, National Chocolate Wafer Day, and Emancipation Day in the United States Virgin Islands (emancipation of the slaves in the Danish West Indies in 1848).  .

The start of the Dog Days according to the Old Farmer’s Almanac but not according to established meaning in most European cultures

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the July 3 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*Now Trump’s sentencing for the NYC “hush money” case is going to be delayed because of the new Supreme Court ruling giving him immunity. What the deuce?

Manhattan prosecutors on Tuesday agreed with Donald J. Trump’s request to postpone his criminal sentencing so that the judge overseeing the case could weigh whether a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling might imperil his conviction, new court filings show.

It is up to the judge to determine whether to postpone the sentencing, though with both sides in agreement, a delay seemed likely. The judge, Juan M. Merchan, could rule as soon as Tuesday.

A delay would represent a surprising setback for the case, which led to the first conviction of an American president. The sentencing was likely to be the only moment of criminal accountability for the twice-impeached and four-time indicted former president whose other cases are mired in delay.

Mr. Trump, who was convicted of falsifying business records related to his cover-up of a sex scandal during his 2016 presidential campaign, was scheduled to be sentenced on July 11, just days before he is to be formally nominated for president at the Republican National Convention. He faces up to four years in prison, though he could receive as little as a few weeks in jail, or probation.

On Monday, the planned sentencing hit a snag when the Supreme Court granted Mr. Trump broad immunity from prosecution for official actions taken as president. The landmark ruling, which was decided 6-3 along partisan lines, dealt a major blow to Mr. Trump’s federal criminal case in Washington, where he is accused of plotting to overturn his 2020 election loss.

Well, I know you’re asking yourself this: Why the sentencing should be delayed? After all, Trump was not engaged in an official duty when writing checks for hush money. But the Court’s decision still might have an effect. Why?

Although the Manhattan case does not center on Mr. Trump’s presidency or official acts — but rather on his personal activity during the 2016 campaign — his lawyers argued on Monday that prosecutors had built their case partly on evidence from his time in the White House. And under the Supreme Court’s new ruling, prosecutors not only cannot charge a president for any official acts, but also cannot cite evidence involving official acts to bolster other accusations.

So what were the official acts? The NYT piece gives only a hint when it says this: “The district attorney’s case framed the hush-money payment as part of a broader conspiracy by Mr. Trump and his allies to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.”

Oy!  I’m starting to think that this bad actor won’t be called to account for anything. Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent is sounding better every day.

*The WaPo reports that renegade Senator Joe Manchin, formally an independent but one who confabs with Democrats, was about to break with Biden, not endorsing him as President, before he was talked out of it by other Democrats. He was prescient about the President!

As panic and confusion over President Biden’sfalteringdebate performance swept the ranks of Democratic lawmakers late last week, Sen. Joe Manchin III informed a few key allies that he would soon break with Biden in an interview on a Sunday news show, a high-profile defection that would underscore the president’s weakness.

Democrats feared Manchin — a moderate West Virginia senator who recently registered as an independent but caucuses with Democrats — would call for Biden to step aside. If he did, the senator would then become the first prominent elected official allied with the party to call for Biden to exit the presidential race.

But he didn’t. Senior Democrats heard of Manchin’s plans and started making calls to the independent-minded senator, who once used a Sunday show appearance to announce his opposition to Biden’s top agenda item and effectively kill it. The “full-court press” was quickly assembled to help dissuade Manchin from appearing on the show, according to two people familiar with the response who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

The effort included a weekend phone call with Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who discussed the matter with Manchin, according to those people. Schumer talked with Manchin after the senator had already decided not to go on a Sunday show, one person said. The shows typically serve as a vehicle for prominent elected officials to discuss the news of the day and make their views known, both to the public and others in politics.

“Joe Manchin talks to lots of people because he wants to get different views and political perspectives,” Manchin senior political adviser Jonathan Kott said in a statement. “When he has something to say, you’ll hear it directly from him, and trust me, there’s nobody that can talk him out of speaking his mind.”

. . .Manchin’s reversal illustrates Democrats’ rapid tamping down of internal dissent over the 81-year-old Biden remaining their presumptive nominee as the campaign and party leaders argue that only the president and his family can decide his political future. Urging drastic action before examining post-debate polling is unwise, party leaders have argued, and Democrats are aware that being thefirst prominent Democratic officialto do so could come with a political cost.

“Nobody wants to be the first one to knife Julius Caesar,” one Democratic Party official said.

But many people are fingering their knives:

Privately, many Democratic lawmakers have raised questions about Biden’s viability as a candidate, and have expressed anger at Biden’s campaign.These Democratic lawmakers and donors say that campaign aides are dismissing legitimate concerns about Biden’s fitness and are furious that the campaign is trying to spin the debate as an unfortunate one-off, multiple members and aides said. The lawmakers worry about Democrats’ ability to retain control of the Senate and potentially capture the House in an election with Donald Trump at the top of the GOP ballot and pre-debate polling showing a tight race.

This really is a conundrum, because it’s kind of late to replace Biden with anyone viable (except the inviable Harris), but if he stays in, I fear he’s going to lose. So there’s a choice between hanging in there with Biden, with the likelhood he’ll lose and Trump will, Ceiling Cat forbid, become President again, or put out a new candidate without prior publicity or, importantly, a war chest. It’ll be an interesting six months for politics. . . .

*Although I don’t think Biden is going to drop out of the Presidential race, the WSJ explains “Why Kamala Harris would be Biden’s likeliest replacement.”  Likely, perhaps, but surely not the best.

So far, Biden has shown no interest in exiting the race following a halting debate performance that raised questions about his age and abilities. But while some Democrats ponder a variety of governors or lawmakers who could step in as nominee, the likeliest alternative to the current ticket remains one led by Harris.

While that path carries risk because Harris’s poll numbers are roughly as lackluster as Biden’s, she is popular enough among Democrats—particularly among women and Black voters—that casting her aside could cause resentment and division within the party.

“This lady is ready to be president. She really earned her stripes,” said Keith Williams, chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party Black Caucus. “I would be angry if you try to leapfrog over a vice president.”

First of all, Harris is more Indian than black, but really, aren’t we past the point of electing someone based on their race and gender? Surely merit must count as Criterion Number One to run the country.  And no, she hasn’t earned her stripes, and no, she is not ready to be president. But read on:

Since the debate, Harris has emerged as Biden’s strongest public defender. Immediately after Biden’s poor performance against former President Donald Trump, she did several interviews trying to tone down the panic quickly spreading among Democrats. She then embarked on a cleanup tour on behalf of Biden, telling voters, donors and some celebrities to look past the debate and judge the president on his record.

Yes, Biden did a decent job in his first term. But those of us with qualms are more worried about how he’ll perform now, not how he performed in the last 3.5 years. If he’s ill or getting senile, we have good reason to worry.

Harris also countered Trump’s debate responses on abortion rights and the Jan. 6, 2021, riots in a clearer way than Biden did at the debate, while vouching for the president’s abilities. “In the Oval Office, negotiating bipartisan deals, I see him in the situation room keeping our country safe,” she said.

Yes, but being better than Biden in a debate is not saying much. Why is she better than Gretchen Whitmer or, for that matter, Gavin Newsom?

Top campaign officials briefed donors in a call Monday evening. A person familiar with the call said the campaign stressed that Biden knows he needs to do better after the debate and that they plan to have him out more. They pledged to stay the course, arguing that voters still care about issues like abortion and democracy and don’t want a return to Trump. Asked how they would respond if polls dip, the person said there wasn’t much of an answer beyond noting that polls fluctuate. Several donors on the call said they weren’t reassured.

Nor am I.  The Biden who runs the Oval Office isn’t reading off a teleprompter, and “getting out more” just means reading from more teleprompters. How about some television interviews?

*A lesbian activist group in NYT issued a statement welcoming Jews to the annual Dyke March, but quickly thought better of it and took it down almost immediately.

A far-left lesbian activist group walked back a social media post welcoming Jews and condemning antisemitism, saying the post was insensitive to “Palestinian people who are experiencing genocide.”

Last Thursday, ahead of the annual New York City Dyke March, held on Saturday, organizers posted a statement to the march’s Instagram account in response to concerns voiced by Jews interested in participating in the event.

“We have received many messages over the last several months, asking the committee members if Jewish dykes are safe and welcome to the 2024 NYC Dyke March.”

In their message, organizers welcomed Jewish participants and condemned antisemitism “in all forms.

“The answer is yes, as a committee we want to  reiterate our position that we stand against antisemitism in all forms.”

The march committee then went on to condemn that October 7th invasion of Israel, while accusing Israel of genocide in its war against the Hamas terror organization.

“While we believe it is urgent to center the dire plight of the Palestinian people, we understand the need from our community to address Jewish pain and fear in the face of rising antisemitism worldwide.”

March organizers said the group stans “against the ongoing genocide in Palestine,” while “publicly acknowledging the attacks of October 7th has also caused harm.”

That comity, weak as it is, didn’t last long:

Shortly afterwards, however, organizers deleted the post, and later posted an apology and clarification.

“Late at night on June 27, a member of the Dyke March Committee posted a statement on our Instagram. The statement was approved by several other committee members. However, it was published without a full committee-wide vote and does not reflect the official stance of the Dyke March. The post was a mistake. Therefore, within 30 minutes we deleted it.”

In its follow-up message, the group explicitly endorsed “Palestinian liberation and condemned Zionism as an “imperialist agenda.”

“We take full responsibility and apologize for the process and communication breakdown that led us here, as well as the harm our statement caused. Dyke March unapologetically stands in support of Palestinian liberation. This moment is a critical reminder to our committee to remain firm in our stance that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism, and any language we put out which is not clearly opposed to a Zionist, imperialist agenda is harmful to all.”

I sent this to a Jewish lesbian I know, who said, “These are no longer my people.”

*At the Skeptical Inquirer, Robyn Blumner (CEO of the Center for Inquiry and head of the Dawkins Foundation) column deals with the “Is a frozen embryo a person?” problem. Remember when a fertility clinic in Alabama got sued because somebody dropped and ruined a batch of frozen embryos, the leftovers from and IVF treatment?  Her piece is called “The eight-cell person, religion, and the legality of in vitro fertilization.”

But in addition to throwing a hypocrisy spotlight on the anti-abortion caucus, the ruling got attention for the way religion entered into the decision making. Normally jurists who impose their religion through the law do so with their inside voice.

Not so Tom Parker, Alabama’s chief justice, who likened the tiny cell clusters to you and me because Jeremiah 1:5 says so!

Here’s Parker’s take on Alabama’s “Sanctity of Unborn Life Amendment” in his IVF concurring opinion:

The People of Alabama have declared the public policy of this State to be that unborn human life is sacred. … It is as if the People of Alabama took what was spoken of the prophet Jeremiah and applied it to every unborn person in this state: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, Before you were born I sanctified you.” Jeremiah 1:5. … Carving out an exception for the people in this case, small as they were, would be unacceptable to the People of this State, who have required us to treat every human being in accordance with the fear of a holy God who made them in His image [emphasis added just for the absurdity factor].

Beyond Jeremiah, I think Justice Parker could have offered some other equally fictional references to bolster his point that size does not matter when establishing personhood. For instance, what about the evident personhood of Lilliputians from Gulliver’s Travels? Lilliputians were less than six inches tall but had all the self-importance and other character flaws of humans, so QED, people! Thumbelina also comes to mind. She emerges from a flower, which makes her extrauterine just like frozen embryos. Or Parker could have thrown in a Dr. Seuss quote from Horton Hears a Who!: “A person’s a person no matter how small.” Perfect, don’t you think? If only ribosomes and cytoplasm could yell “We are here!”

And, if you think about it, there are some upsides to this for IVF clients, some of whom may be storing half a dozen or more fertilized eggs. I mean, that’s a whole lot of dependents to claim on one’s taxes. And because they can live forever and never actually grow up, they will always be minors. Alabamians found a way to avoid death and taxes!

Kidding aside, currently four states (Alabama, Missouri, Georgia, and Arizona) grant the unborn personhood status in law, although the law in Arizona has been blocked by court action. At least seventeen other states have brought up the issue for debate, meaning more such laws are probably coming (Hatzipanagos 2024).

These measures are a prime example of the morass that results from religion colliding with science and the law. It comes after the disastrous Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 that overturned Roe v. Wade and the constitutional right to obtain an abortion—another ruling that is, at its heart, about theology, not the science of human life. That ruling opened the door to states adopting and enforcing fetal personhood laws that make a mockery of biological science, common sense, and the law.

It goes on, but I you can read it for free.  Robyn, like Nellie Bowles, is putting snark in her take on the news, a species of reporting I quite like.

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is resting but Szaron is up and about:

A: Hili, what are you doing?
Hili: I’m announcing a break.
In Polish:
Ja: Hili, co ty robisz?
Hili: Zarządzam przerwę w pracy.

And here’s Szaron:

*******************

From Cat Memes via Chan Riaksa:

From Malcolm:

From Nancy via Merilee:

From Masih, a woman imprisoned by Iran for “armed rebellion” in protests.  I doubt highly whether she was armed.

From Malcolm, who says to note how covered up the girls are. This may be an original color video with the colors enhances.

Maarten Boudry sent me this tweet he made. Listen to Ajl’s complete insanity about the Houthis (it’s a short bit).  This is arrant worship of terrorism and hatred.

Rowling is reacting to the “old frum” insult:

Also Malcom and FB: The owl and the pussycat:

From the Auschwitz Memorial, one I posted:

Two tweets from Dr. Cobb. His question about the first one, “What are your hypotheses re the hunch, and the low-slung head? It’s clearly a wasp mimic, but why hide your head?”  He’s referring to the last two photos, and my guess is that wasps have predators, too, and hiding your head helps stave off predators that go for the head. Alternatively, predators may have learned to suss out that this is an edible mimic because the head looks different from the head of a wasp.

I tried this and had no problem, but I guess some people do. You just switch both hands!

20 thoughts on “Wednesday: Hili dialogue”

  1. … but really, aren’t we past the point of electing someone based on their race and gender?

    No, America is definitely not past that. And that’s the problem with picking diversity hires on “identity” rather than merit.

    The Democrats either have to run with Harris, a candidate many regard as sub-standard, or shove her aside and thus implicitly admit that she was only picked in the first place for being female and “of color”.

    I’d bet that, were it not for that condundrum, Biden would already have been replaced.

  2. I’ve never heard any argument (other than autocrats arguing the need for population growth to maintain strength) that wasn’t at its root a religious one. I’ve always thought that was the best way to go after abortion bans.

  3. I’ve never heard of that India Willoughby person that Rowling is responding to, but she accuses Keir Starmer of speaking “with a forked tongue.” Can we still say that? Sounds a little off the reservation to me.

  4. Yes. When I read the Jewish dykes story I was angered but not surprised. As I wrote a few months ago to a rabbi I know, Jews who continue to keep company with social justice activists—congregation after congregation lists social justice advocacy as a major activity—need to rethink the company they keep. Why do we continue to ally with people that want us gone?

    The fact that the Jewish lesbian you mentioned in your post said “These are no longer my people” is an indication that at least some Jews are getting the sad message.

    1. More than just “some” Jews, Norman. Lots. The whole issue is like an IQ test.

      Those on the left side of the bell curve are still all in for “social justice” – but the smarter people know what started as a good idea decades ago has become a disaster, a grift and a mental illness. Movements, ideas and institutions change over time – it takes IQ to put together the evidence and see change.

      D.A.
      NYC
      ps Great editorial today on Kamala etc. PCC(E).

      1. Yes, yes Norman and David. I think the old idea of social justice (lower case s & j) was fine, but as soon as grifters like kendi grabbed it, monetized it, trademarked it, and capitalized the S & J, it all went down the drain. Grabbing ideas and converting them to “truths” I think it was in Winesburg Ohio. I love the line, “these are no longer my people”…very bari weissian I think.

        1. “Every great cause starts out as a movement, turns into a business and eventually degenerates into a racket.”–Eric Hoffer.

    2. If the so-called anti-Zionists claim that they are for the Jewish people but not the state of Israel, then why are they removing a post that only condemned anti-Semitism and that did not endorse Zionism? It’s quite obvious that anti-Zionism really is code for anti-Jew.

      1. It was clear that a senior commissar over-ruled a junior there. This actually illustrates the origin of the term “political correctness.” The original tweet or post or whatever it was contained a doctrinal error—the correction even alluded to error—in welcoming Jews and so had to be replaced with language that hewed to doctrine. You can even see some independent thinking in the original, replaced and smothered with cliches that we have all come to know and love over the years. Really quite a fascinating glimpse into the hive mind.

  5. Martha Veterman looked like someone who probably had a lot of friends. Bright eyes.

    1. I look at those every day and wonder what sort of person they were, what sort of life they would have lived, who the world was deprived of. Never forget!

  6. The Democratic Convention is scheduled for Aug 19. How about they move it up
    to July 19 and have an open convention? That would give more time for whoever is chosen to campaign before election day.

    1. From everything I’ve read it seems Biden is determined to stay put.

      Not much can be done if that’s the case.

  8. Really good Hili today, Professor. Great memes, articles and always appreciate your own take on things. I forwarded the Robyn Blumner article to a friend who is extremely pissed off about, well, everything but, especially the nonsense around IVF. Thank you for the time and effort you put into your website. I’d feel lost without it.

  9. Soft shell clams ARE bellies! That’s the only edible part….though lots of people eat the siphon too. No bellies? No clams. Some restaurants may remove the siphon before serving them though there’s no reason to do that. Note: add sliced garlic to your butter when you melt it. And dunk the clams well in their cooking water/broth before you eat them, to remove the sand. These are one of the best American
    seafoods along with soft shell crabs.

    1. The best fried clams I ever ate were from a take-out on U.S. 1 in Searsport, Maine. (The chips were those crinkle cut ones just like in the photo.). I’ve eaten them in neighbouring New Brunswick and across the Gulf of Maine in Nova Scotia but there’s nothing quite like those New England ones. Must be the sand.

Comments are closed.