Sunday: Hili dialogue

Welcome to the Sabbath made for goyische cats: it’s Sunday, August 16, 2026, and it’s National Tell a Joke Day.  Here’s a grammatical joke, and it may even be true:

France’s greatest lexicographer, Émile Littré, was once found by his wife, in flagrante delicto, and in the conjugal bedroom at that, with their housemaid.
“Emile,” cried Mrs Littré, “I am surprised!”
“No, my dear,” replied the adulterous lexicographer calmly. “You are astonished. It is WE who are surprised.”

Here’s another joke (it can stand alone without the photo):

It’s also National Airborne Day (the Chicago Air and Water show is this weekend), National Bratwurst Day (another speciality of Chicago), National Rum Day, and National Roller Coaster Day.

Here’s what’s labeled “one of the scariest roller coaster on Earth.” You flip upside down at times! Would you ride it?

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the August 16 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*The Wall Street Journal tells us, in a news piece, “The Iran war is now about who blinks first under economic pressure.”

Senior Trump administration officials have doubled down on economic pressure in the fight with Iran, making lower oil prices a top war aim and vowing unprecedented financial sanctions that would force Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran late Thursday attacked two United Arab Emirates ships in the strait, Emirati officials said.

With those strikes, Iran is signaling that it is impervious to more economic sanctions and is willing to take the military initiative even when President Trump appears reluctant to return to a shooting war. With Trump relying more on the Navy’s blockade of Iranian ports as financial pressure on Tehran, Iran’s leaders are trying to show they won’t relent and will keep the strait closed until energy prices force the U.S. to back off, analysts said.

“Tehran has drawn a simple lesson from every game of chicken with Washington: Hold your nerve long enough, and America swerves first,” said Ali Vaez, the International Crisis Group’s deputy program director for the Middle East and North Africa. “For a system that believes it is fighting for survival…existential threats tend to harden resolve, not impose a price ceiling on resistance.”

Washington this week indicated it would slap new restrictions on Iran’s economy in the coming days. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said it would be a “one-two punch” along with the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports.

The efforts by both sides to inflict economic damage on each other put them further from the diplomatic off-ramp they appeared to reach with the deal in June. That agreement set out financial rewards for Tehran if it reopened the strait and entered serious negotiations on its nuclear program.

There’s one more thing:

While Iran is suffering mounting economic pain, it is shifting into a survival economy designed to endure it. Tehran, which has endured years of sanctions, is pushing more of the burden onto households by rationing fuel and electricity, restricting scarce foreign currency and cutting investment while preserving essential imports and state resources.

Unless Trump takes some military action and stops with the sanction stuff, he is going to lose this war. Iran will neither allow the Strait of Hormuz to go back to the way it was before the war, nor promise (and take action) to stop trying to make nuclear weapons.

*In light of the U.S. aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln leaving the Middle East after reports of poor maintenance, food, and facilities, now Trump has stuck his nose into the design of new U.S. aircraft carriers, and it’s a nose-sticking that will be expensive and perhaps injurious to carriers themselves:

The U.S. Navy is considering a major redesign of its new aircraft carriers to better match President Donald Trump’s preferred aesthetic for the warships, according to seven current and former U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The service isevaluating the feasibility of moving the multistory tower that acts as the carrier’s command center farther forward, toward the middle of the ship, to resemble older vessels, the officials said. The review, which has not been previously reported, is in response to Trump’s concerns about the “look” of the new Ford-class ships, where the tower is near the rear, these people said.

The timing and extent of the Navy’s evaluation is unclear, with current and former officials cautioning that the service was concerned that such a change would require significant time and money. Like others, they spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation.

. . .The U.S. Navy is considering a major redesign of its new aircraft carriers to better match President Donald Trump’s preferred aesthetic for the warships, according to seven current and former U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The service isevaluating the feasibility of moving the multistory tower that acts as the carrier’s command center farther forward, toward the middle of the ship, to resemble older vessels, the officials said. The review, which has not been previously reported, is in response to Trump’s concerns about the “look” of the new Ford-class ships, where the tower is near the rear, these people said.

The timing and extent of the Navy’s evaluation is unclear, with current and former officials cautioning that the service was concerned that such a change would require significant time and money. Like others, they spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation.

. . .Relocating the island would be “a major redesign,” said Bryan Clark, a former Navy officer who studies the service at the Hudson Institute, a right-leaning think tank in Washington. Such an alteration to the carrier’s layout, he said, would affect the ship’s buoyancy and weight and come at a significant cost.

“You could change it,” he added, “but it’s very disruptive.”

Here we have the man who’s destroyed a wing of the White House to build a ballroom, who’s designing a triumphal arch that will ruin the entry to Wsshington from Virginia, and who renamed the Kennedy center (or rather forced others to do so). Now he wants to aircraft carriers to be redesigned to look like ones in World War II. That will not only cost a gazillion sollars, but will, as the officer above says, affect the ship’s weight and buoyancy. It seems to be infinitely preferable to let the ship designers design the ships.

*The NYT has an op ed “Is Ocasio-Cortez ready for the glass cliff?” The author, Tressie McMillan Cottom, seems to think that AOC should run, but she’ll face misogyny. Yes, for sure, but that’s not the reason I oppose her candidacy. (The article is archived here.)

Oh, she’s running.

I’ve been watching the signs that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may be considering a bid for president for over a year. She spoke about foreign policy at the Munich Security Conference in February. A few months later, she brandished her organizer street cred with a visit to a rural Georgia community fighting a data center. She is among the astonishingly few big-name Democrats embracing data center resistance, a rare point of bipartisan agreement in a divided electorate.

This week she all but soft-launched the presidential bid so many of us have been expecting, with a video series about freezing her eggs. The rollout — personal, confessional and intimate — had all the social media savvy that made her a political star. It also gets ahead of the inevitable questions about how, or if, she will have children. In short, Ocasio-Cortez has crafted a political message in which the form and content suggest that she will run as a woman but unlike how every woman before her was forced to run.

To be a viable potential presidential candidate is no small feat for any woman, much less a young, attractive woman without a political dynasty. Were she to formally declare a presidential bid, she would be one of the youngest and most progressive people to do it. She can run. But can she win?

To say women haven’t had an easy path to presidential power would be an understatement.

. . . Hillary Clinton was both too unfathomable (a first lady who wanted more) and too well known (saddled with her husband’s scandals and positions). Kamala Harris was, alternately, too novel (a mixed-race Black woman) and too much like the same old (a capitalist hawk). They each were condemned as too uncharismatic to overcome a culture that is supremely suspicious of women who want, pursue and hold power. The ambition that brought them within reach of the of the presidency was a trap that ensured they couldn’t win it.

But these are different times. Ocasio-Cortez is a different woman, and Americans love to turn to women when the house is burning down. Social scientists call it the glass cliff — the phenomenon in which women are recruited to lead failing companies. President Trump’s businessman brand of governance has many Americans feeling this nation is failing. I suppose the dumpster fire of climate denialism, political corruption and general scamminess of, well, everything would be dire enough circumstances to make a female president possible.

In particular, Democrats — whom you might expect to be wary of placing another female candidate before the American public — are facing a political disaster of their own making. Americans are primed for an anti-incumbent electoral wave. They want an alternative to Trump’s MAGA-dominated Republican Party, but a lot of them indicate they would have to hold their nose to vote for mainstream Democrats.

Well, there are many of us who would have to hold our noses to vote for progressives like AOC.  She has done almost nothing in terms of getting bills passed in the House (she’s originated some, but they didn’t pass, and has co-sponsored some more bipartisan bills that became law), seems to spend most of her time either flubbing speeches and interviews or promoting herself on social media, and is unable to answer even very simple questions if she has to extemporize rather than stick to a script.  As a progressive, she is a Democratic Socialist, and many of their policies don’t resonate with either me or the public (AOC will, of course, disavow the bad ones before she runs). She has no executive experience or foreign-policy expertise. Like all “progressives,” she detests Israel. What she has is big ambition, and it shows. As for electability, her progressivist views will energize Republicans, something we don’t need. And this seems batty to me:

This is why Ocasio-Cortez’s choice to lead her campaign intentions with a very public discussion of reproductive choices is so important. She is performing the preservation of her status as a mother for the public, creating the possibility that she would be a mother for the nation, even if she is not yet a mother..

Whaaaat?  Where did that crazy idea come from? Who cares if a woman President has kids or not? Certainly not I. Nor am I opposed to a woman President; in fact, it’s time we had one, though she has to be qualified. That’s why I wrote in Gretchen Whitmer in the last election, and I’d be delighted if she were to run. But no, not Kamala Harris, who brings me no joy.

*A bit more on the death (likely suicide) of Jason Arday, which I reported yesterday. Although the police, as is the case in the UK, didn’t release his name, they noted that the deceased was 41—Arday’s age. And his family did issue a death notice. From the NYT:

Jason Arday, the former Cambridge University scholar whose remarkable rise to stardom was followed by a rapid fall from grace in recent weeks, has died, his family said on Friday.

“Jason was subjected to a campaign of sustained abuse” in the years since he accepted a role at Cambridge, his family wrote in a statement. “The campaign of misinformation was too much for Jason, who was a gentle man and who always wanted to see the best in everyone.”

The Metropolitan Police of London said that an ambulance was called on Friday afternoon to a South London residence connected to Mr. Arday after a report that a man there had been found unresponsive. The man was pronounced dead at the scene, the police said, without confirming his identity, in keeping with British police practice.

The death was being “treated as unexpected” but was not believed to be suspicious, the police said.

“We are desperately saddened to hear this tragic news,” Professor Deborah Prentice, the Cambridge vice-chancellor, said in a statement. “Our heartfelt sympathies go to Jason Arday’s family and friends at this incredibly difficult time.”

The family’s statement was issued by his publisher, and appears in full in The Independent. Here it is:

“Jason was subjected to a campaign of sustained abuse for more than three years since he accepted the role of professor at Cambridge University by those who would leave no stone unturned in their quest to undermine him.

“The campaign of misinformation was too much for Jason, who was a gentle man and who always wanted to see the best in everyone.

“We are in shock to have lost this amazing father, partner, brother, uncle and son.

“We won’t comment further at this point beyond asking the press to leave us alone now, and to stop the campaign of harassment which has been waged against Jason and his family for too long.”

The family is going along with Arday’s claim that he was abused and subject to a “campaign of misinformation” and “harassment.” While some people might have been motivated by bigotry in going after Arday, the fact is that what was uncovered were very disturbing allegations, and an autobiography that was at best exaggerated and at worst an arrant litany of lies.

But of curse the man had a family who loved him, and that is why his death saddens me. I cannot bear those who say he “had it coming” because of what he did. He was either mentally ill or a grifter, but either way he had a bad comeuppance, and that is a tragedy which triggered his suicide—another tragedy. He needed help and didn’t get it, but we can’t blame those who didn’t intercede. He is no longer at Cambridge; he resigned before killing himself. It is all ineffably sad.

*Finally, from the UPI’s “odd news” site, we hear about a hula-hoop record, all derived from a doctor’s diagnosis of obesity:

A Chinese man managed to spin 33 hula hoops around his body while suspended upside down to break a Guinness World Record.

Yan Yanjia was suspended upside down from playground equipment in Guilin, Guangxi, and two friends then helped pull the hula hoops over his head and down to his hips.

Yanjia was able to keep the hoops spinning for the time required by Guinness World Records, earning him the title for the most hula hoops spun while suspended upside down. He beat the previous record by 10 hoops.

Yanjia said he started hula hooping eight years ago as a means of losing weight.

“In 2018, I was diagnosed with fatty liver due to obesity, and my doctor advised me to lose weight. At that time, I bought a 2-kilogram [4.4-pound] hula hoop for exercise, and in a month, I went from 80 kg [175 pounds] to 63 kg [132 pounds],” he told Guinness World Records. “Of course, the main factor in successful fat loss is gradual control of diet.”

Yanjia said the next record his has his eye on involves spinning hula hoops while doing pullups.

“This exercise consumes many times more force than dozens of hula hoops upside down, requiring much greater core stability,” he said.

Of course you’ll want to see it, so here is Mr. Yanjia:

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili puts things in their proper perspective:

Hili: We talk about everything while leaving out the most important thing.
Andrzej: And what’s the most important thing?
Hili: Buying beef.

In Polish:

Hili: Rozmawiamy o wszystkim pomijając to, co najważniejsze.
Ja: A co jest najważniejsze?
Hili: Kupno wołowiny.

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

From Stacy, original posted by the National Park Service:

From Give Me a Sign:

From Cats That Have Had Enough of your Shit: I can haz cheeszburger?

From Masih, detailing two women who were killed for defending themselves against rape; she notes the insuperable obstacles, under Muslim law, of even mounting an accusation of rape:

Under Sharia law in Iran, to prove rape, a woman must produce four male witnesses to the act itself. Four. Male. Witnesses. If she cannot, her accusation becomes a confession. She is no longer the victim. She is the criminal, facing flogging, prison, or death.

To those who asked why Iranian women Marzieh and Reyhaneh didn’t report rape in court before defending themselves.

Marzieh Nayeri was forced to marry a man at 17. Child marriage is legal under Sharia law in Iran.

At 18, her husband’s business associate, drunk, in her own home,… pic.twitter.com/a0abJbocKe

— Masih Alinejad (@AlinejadMasih) August 15, 2026

From Richard Dawkins via Luana: an infuriating exposé about how Cambridge University (yes, the school that hired Arday) is promoting creationism. This time it’s in the education faculty, and the anti-science, pro-creationist view is promoted, don’t you know, by “the Islamic Educator Learning Community (IELC), [which] is led by Cambridge’s assistant research professor of education, Farah Ahmed, a former activist in the since banned terror group Hizb ut-Tahrir..  It’s being done to placate Islamic sentiments, which don’t countenance evolution. Read the whole tweet:

Extracts from a further Spectator article (Aug 15) by Andrew Gilligan:

An academic project hosted by Cambridge University platforms creationism, the belief that the world was created by God in seven days. It promotes an academic paper demanding that schoolchildren be taught to…

— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) August 15, 2026

From Jeff Maurer, who retweeted this saying, “Somebody should fix this.”  The “fix” involved putting up a waning sign:

Someone made the really, really poor decision to situate the chair in nonstop direct sunlight, and the bronze doesn’t just get hot. It becomes literally SCALDING. Like today, a breezy 80°, you can’t put your hand on it for more than a second before >actually< burning yourself. pic.twitter.com/N1NI7lF8Oc

— Nick Carr (@nickcarrscouts) August 14, 2026

From Barry.  The next tweet says, “Credit @sarahseeandersen.bsky.social“.  That’s Sarah Andersen’s site, which has a gazillion great cat cartoons.

— Wil Eelsing (@wileelsing.bsky.social) 2026-07-25T10:26:58.195Z

Speaking of AOC, Jay sent this in:

Maybe I should be her translator. pic.twitter.com/CYkTEVXvLV

— Ami Kozak (@amiKozak) August 10, 2026

One I reposted from The Auschwitz Memorial:

This Austrian Jewish girl was gassed to death as soon as she arrived in Auschwitz. She was about ten years old. https://t.co/OU6jj5D2oM

— Jerry Coyne (@Evolutionistrue) August 16, 2026

And two from Dr. Cobb. First, a whole show about the Beatles in one post:

The prologue is superb, and just how I recall shows like this in the 60s. Sitting up with my parents / elder sister watching some music prog like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TDL&#8230;

— Gary Cummins (@garyinscotland.bsky.social) 2026-08-13T16:57:18.900Z

. . . at least they’re not eating them!

They're wearing the cats…..

— JeffTrnka (@jefftrnka.bsky.social) 2026-08-07T14:57:53.477Z