Jesus ‘n’ Mo ‘n’ Whoa

April 17, 2024 • 8:15 am

In the new Jesus and Mo strip, called “Whoa,” the barmaid compares modern-day versions of Christianity and Islam, and judges Islam as palpably worse for humanity. In that she agrees with Richard Dawkins, though not with those sophists who simply cannot admit that one religion can have more pernicious effects on the modern world than another.

The artists’s comment in the post: “It is worse.”

x

Wednesday: Hili dialogue

April 17, 2024 • 7:00 am

Welcome to a Hump Day (“Küürupäev” in Estonian):  Wednesday, April 17, 2024, and National Cheeseball Day, a party treat from the Fifties.  Here’s a specimen from Wikipedia. (I was once called a “cheeseball” on one of my undergraduate course evaluations for wearing colorful Hawaiian shirts when I taught class.  It could have been worse!)

 

Valereee, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

There will be no “Readers’ wildlife” today, but those of you who sent pictures should not worry: I have them all. We’re running low, I am debilitated from getting no sleep last night, and I must prepare a lecture to give in Amsterdam. Posting will be light but not nonexistent. Bear with me; I do my best.

It’s also Bat Appreciation Day, International Haiku Poetry Day (cultural appropriation), School Librarians’ Day (special kudos here), National Crawfish Day, National Banana Day, International Ford Mustang Day, Malbec World Day, and World Hemophilia Day

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the April 17 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*The latest in the Trump hush money trial: 7 jurors have now been seated, they’re allowed to be vetted on their social-media posts, and the judge chewed out the Donald:

Another three jurors have been added, bringing the total to six. [JAC: it’s now seven. Remember that they need 18 because there must be six “alternates” if regular jurors drop out.]

The jurors are picked by process of elimination in a system that will repeat until a full jury is selected: Eighteen prospective jurors are brought to the jury box, then lawyers move to have certain prospective jurors eliminated “for cause.” They then eliminate some with peremptory challenges, which don’t require a reason.

Those remaining become jurors for the trial.

. . .With prospective jurors not yet back in the room, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche tells the judge that he has found a number of social media posts he says come from possible jurors that are “very much contrary to the answers they gave.”

As an example, he shows the judge a Facebook post that he said was from a prospective juror’s account and described going to a Manhattan dance party to celebrate Trump’s loss in the last election.

Judge Merchan says he’s going to ask the juror to come in and allow attorneys to ask her questions about it.

. . .Judge Merchan has dismissed a potential juror after Trump’s attorneys raised concerns about a 2017 Facebook post, which they said was shared by the man, celebrating a court decision against one of the Republican’s presidential policies.

Part of the post read, “Get him out and lock him up!”

The man was called into the courtroom and acknowledged the post was from his account, though he said he didn’t remember sharing it.

If Trump is found guilty in the hush money case, a potential sentence could include jail time, the judge said.

“I don’t think I can allow this juror to remain,” Merchan said.

And Trump got admonished, as I’m sure he will be–many times:

. . .Judge Juan Merchan admonished Trump for speaking loudly and gesturing while a prospective juror was being questioned about Facebook posts she made regarding his 2020 election loss.

“Before we continue, I just want to put something on the record. Mr. Blanche, while the juror was at the podium, your client was audibly uttering something,” Merchan said after the prospective juror left the courtroom, referring to lawyer Todd Blanche.

“I don’t know what he was uttering, but it was audible and he was gesturing and he was speaking in the direction of the juror. I won’t tolerate that. I will not tolerate any jurors being intimidated in this courtroom.”

Merchan then instructed Blanche to “take a minute and speak to your client about it.”

If Trump bad-mouths the judge or anybody else, though, he’ll violate the gag order and could be put in the pokey! This isn’t exactly the “Trial of the Century,” but I’m pretty sure that Trump is guilty, though not sure at all that he’ll spend any time in the slammer.

*Many of the rioters in the January 6 “insurrection” event have been charged with an obscure “obstruction” law, but now the Supreme Court has doubts about whether that charge is Constitutional. Those affected (i.e., freed or given lighter sentences) could include not only those already in jail, but Trump himself.

The Supreme Court seemed wary on Tuesday of letting prosecutors use a federal obstruction law to charge hundreds of rioters involved in the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021.

A decision rejecting the government’s interpretation of the law could not only disrupt those prosecutions but also eliminate two of the federal charges against former President Donald J. Trump in the case accusing him of plotting to subvert the 2020 election.

Mr. Trump’s case did not come up at the argument, which was largely focused on trying to make sense of a statute that all concerned agreed was not a model of clarity. But the justices’ questions also considered the gravity of the assault and whether prosecutors have been stretching the law to reach members of the mob responsible for the attack.

Justice Clarence Thomas, who returned to the bench after an unexplained absence on Monday, asked whether the government was engaging in a kind of selective prosecution. “There have been many violent protests that have interfered with proceedings,” he said. “Has the government applied this provision to other protests?”

. . .But the justices mostly considered whether a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, enacted in the wake of the collapse of the energy giant Enron, covers the conduct of a former police officer, Joseph W. Fischer, who participated in the Capitol assault, on Jan. 6, 2021.

The law figures in two of the federal charges against Mr. Trump in his election subversion case, and more than 350 people who stormed the Capitol have been prosecuted under it. If the Supreme Court sides with Mr. Fischer and says the statute does not cover what he is accused of having done, Mr. Trump is almost certain to contend that it does not apply to his conduct, either.

It all seems to hinge on the interpretation of one word—”otherwise”—in  2002 law that makes it illegal to “corruptly obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding.” This is really above my pay grade, but the Court’s decision could have a profound effect not just on Trump, but on many demonstrates already convicted or those yet to be charged.

*Israel has decided that it must respond to the attack from Iran, but also that it will probably do so by attacking Iranian proxies like Hezbollah or Iranian forces in Iraq. It will also take its time. I think that’s smart if it wishes to keep whatever goodwill Israel has acquired by simply defending itself against Iran.

The Israeli military said Iran would not get off “scot-free” following its unprecedented missile and drone attack early Sunday, as the country’s leaders continued to mull how to balance a forceful response with calls by the United States and other allies to keep the round of fighting from snowballing further.

“We cannot stand still from this kind of aggression,” Israel Defense Forces spokesman Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari told reporters in English at Julis military base near Kiryat Malachi, while displaying the remains of an intercepted ballistic missile. “Iran will not get [off] scot-free with this aggression.”

It was the latest threat from military officials, after IDF chief Herzi Halevi vowed Monday night that “there will be a response” to the approximately 350 drones and missiles launched at Israel late Saturday and early Sunday.

Israel’s high-level war cabinet was set to meet Tuesday for the third time in three days to decide on a response to Iran’s first-ever direct attack, which left one person with serious injuries and caused only minor damage to a military base.

The US and other allies have urged restraint, amid fears that an Israeli reprisal could fragment the US-led coalition that coalesced to take down Iran’s aerial attack. Despite worries of a larger conflagration breaking out, hardliners say Israel must mount a response to restore deterrence.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is now accusing Hamas rather than Israel of being an impediment to peace, as Hamas has rejected Israel’s peace proposal.

The United States on Monday accused Hamas of being the barrier to a temporary ceasefire in Gaza, adding that Israel had moved in a “significant way” to submit a reasonable proposal in the ongoing hostage talks.

“There’s a deal on the table that would achieve much of what Hamas claims it wants to achieve, and they have not taken that deal,” US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said in a briefing.

Truth be told, I suspect that only about 40 hostages are left alive, and Israel would be foolish to accept any deal that releases hundreds of jailed Palestinian terrorists for an unknown number of Israeli hostages (Hamas refuses to disclose the number of living hostages, or even total hostages, which tells you something.)  Bargaining like this encourages the taking of more hostages.

*I had heard this as a rumor, but the Wall Street Journal brings it out into the open: the three members of the Israeli war cabinet, charged with running the conflict with Hamas, not only disagree, but don’t even like each other.

Six months into the conflict against Hamas, the Israeli public is deeply divided about how to win the war in the Gaza Strip. So, too, are the three top officials in the war cabinet meant to foster unity in that effort.

Long-simmering grudges and arguments over how best to fight Hamas have soured relations between Israel’s wartime decision makers—Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and the former head of the Israeli military, Benny Gantz. The three men are at odds over the biggest decisions they need to make: how to launch a decisive military push, free Israel’s hostages and govern the postwar strip.

Now, they also must make one of the biggest decisions the country has ever faced: how to respond to Iran’s first-ever direct attack on Israeli territory. Their power struggle could affect whether the Gaza conflict spirals into a bigger regional fight with Iran that transforms the Middle East’s geopolitical order and shapes Israel’s relations with the U.S. for decades.

“The lack of trust between these three people is so clear and so significant,” said Giora Eiland, a former Israeli general and national security adviser.

Netanyahu, the nation’s longest-serving premier, increasingly is trying to direct the Gaza war by himself, while Gallant and Gantz are widely seen to be trying to cut out Netanyahu from decisions.

Gantz, the general who led Israel’s last major war against Hamas a decade ago, has previously expressed a desire to oust Netanyahu as prime minister. He called earlier this month for early elections in September after tens of thousands of people demonstrated against the prime minister’s handling of the war—a sign that Gantz’s base has grown frustrated with his role in a Netanyahu-led government.

. . . On April 8, Netanyahu said he has set a date to push into the Gazan city of Rafah, the last Hamas stronghold where more than a million Palestinians are sheltering. He has faced opposition, though, from Gallant, who wants to figure out how to manage American expectations before proceeding, said people familiar with the disagreements.

. . . All three men have different ideas about postwar Gaza. The prime minister has said the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority in its current form should play no role, and is focused on the Israeli army working with local leaders. Palestinians say Netanyahu’s plan amounts to occupation, something he says he opposes.

. . . The three men also don’t agree about how to free the hostages held by Hamas. Gantz has called publicly for a deal to secure their release, saying their lives are at risk. Netanyahu and Gallant have emphasized that only military pressure along with negotiations will lead to their release.

I might be accused of being antisemitic if I said, responding to the above, “Hey, they’re Jews. They’re not going to agree on anything!”  But in fact it’s true that Jews are known for arguing and disagreeing; that’s all the hyperorthodox Jews do besides studying the Torah.  But non-Orthodox argue, too. If they didn’t, Israel would have a constitution! But this disagreement is still distressing.

*The NYT has a story about the damning tweets by NPR’s new CEO Katherine Maher, following hard on the heels of the exposé of the organization by Uri Berliner in the Free Press (Berliner has since been given the boot; see below). The Free Press is really doing its job! From the NYT:

Katherine Maher, the chief executive of NPR, is facing online criticism for years-old social media posts criticizing former President Donald J. Trump and embracing liberal causes.

The posts, published on the social media platform Twitter, which is now called X, were written before she was named chief executive of NPR in January. They resurfaced this week after an essay by an NPR staff member who argued that the broadcaster’s leaders had allowed liberal bias to taint its coverage.

“Also, Donald Trump is a racist,” read one of Ms. Maher’s posts in 2018, which has since been deleted. Another post, from November 2020, shows Ms. Maher wearing a hat with the logo for the Biden presidential campaign.

“Had a dream where Kamala and I were on a road trip in an unspecified location, sampling and comparing nuts and baklava from roadside stands,” Ms. Maher wrote, an apparent reference to Vice President Kamala Harris. “Woke up very hungry.”

Ms. Maher, who had not worked in the news industry before joining NPR, was the chief executive of the Wikimedia Foundation, a nonprofit that supports the popular online resource Wikipedia, when she wrote many of the posts that were now being criticized.

An NPR spokeswoman, Isabel Lara, said in a statement that Ms. Maher “was not working in journalism at the time and was exercising her First Amendment right to express herself like any other American citizen.”

. . . . Ms. Maher said in a statement that in America, “everyone is entitled to free speech as a private citizen.” She heralded the network’s commitment to independent reporting and called on Americans to “listen, watch and read our work.”

Yes, of course, but it’s good to see who’s running what was (and likely will remain) the People’s Station., substantially fundied through tax monies though it’s biased and uber-woke.  Regardless of whether she was working in journalism, you can see some of her tweets on the site of Chris Rufo, who broke this story, or at Matt Taibbi’s article on her:

Two more from Taibbi (screenshots):

The NYT has more, but click to read for yourself (it’s archived here):

Of course progressives won’t object to these tweets, but liberals who want to listen to a variety of viewpoints will. And of course, conservatives shouldn’t tune in or they’ll blow an artery. All in all, Maher’s views, as expressed in her tweets, don’t seem to make her an optimal candidate for CEO at NPR.

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili and Szaron want their privacy from Andrzej:

Hili: Don’t spy on us. We are looking for privacy here.
A: OK, I’m going.
In Polish
Hili: Nie podglądaj nas, my tu szukamy prywatności.
Ja: O.K., już znikam.

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

From Kurt:

From The Dodo Pet:

From History for the Witty:

Masih also report on her site that Iran began increased enforcement of hijab-wearing on Saturday night, which of course is when Iran attacked Israel. Here’s a CNN report in which Maish and Reena Ninan discuss the Iran/Israel attack.

Related lagniappe: An eloquent Iranian woman tells off Western “saviors”:

Simon says this about the tweet below (Trump’s NY trial): ” I can see why Melania would have no sympathy – given that she was pregnant when these affairs occurred…..”

NPR suspended correspondent Uri Berliner, who, in a Free Press piece, called out the organization (of which he was an editor) for excessive bias:

A bit more; be sure you can find the damning tweets by CEO Katherine Maher on Rufo’s Twitter feed, and read the NYT story above

WHAT ARE THESE?

From the Auschwitz Memorial, one that I retweeted:

Several tweets from Dr. Cobb, who’s now safely back in Old Blighty. These show lost American architecture. Look at that library!

Loudest sounds ever

April 16, 2024 • 1:00 pm

Here’s a fun video with a range of sounds from an alligator to the loudest sound we know of, which you’ll have to watch to find out—and you’ll want to. (I have heard a white bellbird, and it was LOUD!)

There’s a wallet commercial from 3:00 to 4:00, so you can skip that minute.

I cannot vouch for any of the information given!

Students Supporting Israel is the only group that Vanderbilt rejects among 11 applicants for its Multicultural Leadership Council

April 16, 2024 • 11:30 am

What a life! First I defend the speech rights of pro-Palestinian student who may well favor the elimination of Israel, and now I’m back again at Vanderbilt University, where, according to both the student newspaper and the Jewish paper The Algemeiner, students have rejected precisely one out of 11 student groups that applied to joint the school’s Multicultural Leadership Council (MLC): Students Supporting Israel. Wouldn’t you know it!? (One other group, Vanderbilt United Mission for Relief and Development, is awaiting a vote.)

There are two articles that say largely the same thing, so I’ll quote from the shorter Algemeiner piece.  But let us not forget that Vanderbilt become an “Our Hero” school when its Chancellor, Daniel Diermeier (Chicago’s former Provost) had students removed and arrested after occupying the administration building for nearly a whole day, protesting Vandy’s supposed complicity in supporting Israel against Gaza. Many of the students were also given interim suspensions, and there’s no sign that those suspensions will be lifted.  It was not free speech that Diermeier was opposing, for he’s a big advocate of such speech (after all, he’s from the University of Chicago). He was enforcing “time and place” regulations for protest, and it’s simply against Vandy’s rules to sit inside the administration building.

According to these two articles, the rejection of Students Supporting Israel (SSI) was a decision of Vanderbilt students, not the administration, and I guess they just don’t like Israel. After all, Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine, both hate-filled groups favoring the elimination of Israel, are already members of the MLC (so is a subgroup from Hillel, but I bet it’s been a member forever).

Click below to see the piece from the Vanderbilt Hustler, the student newspaper:


Click below to go to the Algemeiner piece:

I’ll quote from The Algemeiner, but you can check the other piece, too:

According to The Vanderbilt Hustler, [Students Supporting Israel] is the only one to be rejected from this year’s applicant pool, an outcome that SSI president Ryan Bauman said is evidence of febrile opposition to dialogue and coexistence among some segments of the student body. The only Jewish group to be admitted, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), is a fringe anti-Israel organization that did not condemn Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel and has long celebrated terrorism against Israelis.

Among the nine groups to be admitted to the MLC this year were the Taiwanese American Student Association, Vanderbilt Pride Serve, the Vanderbilt Association for South Asian Cuisine, and the Vanderbilt Iranian Student Association. One of the 11 total organizations that applied, Vanderbilt United Mission for Relief and Development, is still awaiting an upcoming vote.

As a requirement of its application, SSI was told to deliver a presentation to the MLC but given only a few minutes to do so. Afterward, the group was cross-examined by the MLC — of which Students for Justice in Palestine is a member organization — about their opinions regarding “genocide” and “apartheid,” an apparent attempt to use the proceeding as a soapbox for anti-Zionist propaganda.

“We told them that we didn’t show up to discuss politics,” Bauman told The Algemeiner during an interview on Tuesday. “We told them we were there to celebrate Israeli culture and further the pro-Israel movement and invited them to have other dialogues at another time. We were then told to leave, and they held a closed session. And as you can see, it resulted in us being rejected by a wide margin.”

Is there any reason besides antisemitism or anti-Zionism that SSI would be the only group to be rejected? If you know Jewish Voice for Peace and especially Students for Justice in Palestine, you’ll know that they’re to a large extent hate groups who favor the abolition of Israel (SJP also celebrated Hamas’s October 7th attack on Israel). Is it too much to ask for a group supporting Israel to be added to the mix? Apparently so.

One more note from The Algemeiner:

This is not the first time that Students Supporting Israel has been denied membership in a student organization. In 2021, the president of Duke University’s Student Government vetoed a vote approving recognition of SSI, an incident which set off volleys of criticism and a sharp rebuke from the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law.

“Grant them the same access,” Brandeis Center president Alyza Lewin said at the time, warning of potential civil rights violations. “Treat them no differently than any other student recognized organization. If the university chooses not to intervene and does not make sure that SSI gets equal access and it is understood to be no different than any other organization, there could be potential legal liability for the university.”

That also holds for Vanderbilt, whose reputation for fairness could be besmirched by this act. As I said, I don’t blame the administration, which has been exemplary. Chancellor Diermeier also adopted the position of institutional neutrality as embodied in The University of Chicago’s Kalven report, making Vanderbilt one of only a handful of schools to take this essential position. Pity his efforts are being tarred by a bunch of hypocritical students.

USC forbids its hijab-clad valedictorian to speak at graduation because she minored in genocide

April 16, 2024 • 9:20 am

This is a true test of people like me who are pro-Israel in the current conflict but are also in favor of free speech. But it’s not a hard decision, for if you’re a hard line free-speech advocate, you must accept the fact that it’s most important to allow freedom of speech when what the person says offends you or many others.

And that is the situation in the case of Asna Tabassum, the valedictorian of the University of Southern California (USC), who, apparently because she might talk about (Israeli) genocide or advocate for a Palestine “from the river to the sea”, isn’t going to be allowed to speak at graduation. (Of course, the USC administration uses other excuses for censorship, like “safety”.)

I was alerted to the situation by this tweet sent to me by Luana:

Is this the case? Does USC really have a minor in genocide? Did the valedictorian minor in genocide?  And did USC also prevent its valedictorian from speaking because of the possibility she might discuss genocide? The answer to all four questions appears to be “yes”. But I think it’s wrong to prevent her from speaking—not if USC has a tradition of having valedictorians speak, which there is.

First, yes, USC does have a minor in genocide, or rather “resistance to genocide”. Here are part of the details of that minor (click to read), but if you look at the the courses, there’s nothing about Israel/Palestine: most of them are about the Shoah (Holocaust of Jews during WWII), Native American genocide, the Armenian genocide, and genocide and the law. It seems like a creditable minor.  Of course one suspects that Tabassum might have minored in this because of a belief that Palestine is undergoing genocide, but we don’t know that, and at any rate it’s irrelevant to this kerfuffle.

This article from the school’s site USC Today (click headline below to read) confirms that Tabassum was indeed the valedictorian:

USC’s 2024 valedictorian, Asna Tabassum, was also recognized. Tabassum, who is graduating with a major in biomedical engineering a minor in resistance to genocide, has studied how technology, immigration and literacy affect the type of medical care people receive. She has also been an advocate for the community through her service with the Muslim Student Union and the Mobile Clinic at USC.

 

And here are two articles, the first from the Los Angeles Times and the second from USC Annenberg Media, both confirming that Tabassum has indeed been banned buy USC’s administration from speaking. Click both to read, though the quotes below come from the L.A. Times.

From the L.A. Times:

And from the USC Annenberg site:

Quotes from the LA Times:

Saying “tradition must give way to safety,” the University of Southern California on Monday made the unprecedented move of barring an undergraduate valedictorian who has come under fire for her pro-Palestinian views from giving a speech at its May graduation ceremony.

The move, according to USC officials, is the first time the university has banned a valedictorian from the traditional chance to speak onstage at the annual commencement ceremony, which typically draws more than 65,000 people to the Los Angeles campus.

In a campuswide letter, USC Provost Andrew T. Guzman cited unnamed threats that have poured in shortly after the university publicized the valedictorian’s name and biography this month. Guzman said attacks against the student for her pro-Palestinian views have reached an “alarming tenor” and “escalated to the point of creating substantial risks relating to security and disruption at commencement.”

. . .“After careful consideration, we have decided that our student valedictorian will not deliver a speech at commencement. … There is no free-speech entitlement to speak at a commencement. The issue here is how best to maintain campus security and safety, period,” Guzman wrote.

The student, whom the letter does not name, is biomedical engineering major Asna Tabassum. USC officials chose Tabassum from nearly 100 student applicants who had GPAs of 3.98 or higher.

But after USC President Carol Folt announced her selection, a swarm of on- and off-campus groups attacked Tabassum. They targeted her minor, resistance to genocide, as well as her pro-Palestinian views and “likes” expressed through her Instagram account.

Here’s an Instagram post quoting Tabassum and calling for her deplatforming. Her own Instagram site is now private, but note that the words are probably not hers, but from a link in her own Instagram biography.

And even if the words quoted above were hers, do they promote imminent violence (presumably towards Jews)? Nope. It’s not a First-Amendment exception to call Zionism a “racist settler-colonial ideology, nor to call for the complete abolition of Israel. If it were, half of Twitter would be taken down.

As expected, Tabassum didn’t like this decision, and issued a mature but passionate statement:

In a statement, Tabassum opposed the decision, saying USC has “abandoned” her.

“Although this should have been a time of celebration for my family, friends, professors, and classmates, anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian voices have subjected me to a campaign of racist hatred because of my uncompromising belief in human rights for all,” said Tabassum, who is Muslim.

ADVERTISEMENT

“This campaign to prevent me from addressing my peers at commencement has evidently accomplished its goal: today, USC administrators informed me that the university will no longer allow me to speak at commencement due to supposed security concerns,” she wrote.

“I am both shocked by this decision and profoundly disappointed that the university is succumbing to a campaign of hate meant to silence my voice. I am not surprised by those who attempt to propagate hatred. I am surprised that my own university—my home for four years—has abandoned me.”

And of course the university issued a weaselly decision:

In an interview, Guzman said the university has been “in close contact with the student” and would “provide her support.” He added that “we weren’t seeking her opinion” on the ban.

“This is a security decision,” he said. “This is not about the identity of the speaker, it’s not about the things the valedictorian has said in the past. We have to put as our top priority ensuring that the campus and community is safe.”

A screenshot from Provost Andrew Guzman, who singlehandedly decided to ban Tabassum (he doesn’t even have the guts to name her in the letter):

Some of those who objected were, of course, Jewish groups:

We Are Tov, a group that uses the Hebrew word for “good” and describes itself as “dedicated to combating antisemitism,” posted Tabassum’s image on its Instagram account and said she “openly promotes antisemitic writings.” The group also criticized Tabassum for liking Instagram posts from “Trojans for Palestine.” Tabassum’s Instagram bio links to a landing page that says “learn about what’s happening in Palestine, and how to help.”

The campus group Trojans for Israel also posted on its Instagram account, calling for Folt’s “reconsideration” of Tabassum for what it described as her “antisemitic and anti-Zionist rhetoric.” The group said Tabassum’s Instagram bio linked to a page that called Zionism a “racist settler-colonial ideology.”

Well, I have little doubt, based on the above, that Tabassum is pro-Palestinian, may feel that Israel is committing genocide, and has made social-media posts that may smack of antisemitism and perhaps a desire to eliminate Israel.  But none of that is relevant here. The only consideration is whether Tabassum’s words are calculated and intended to promote imminent and lawless violence—something that would violate her First-Amendment freedom to speak. And, as a private university, USC doesn’t need to adhere to the First Amendment. They could ban Tabassum without citing freedom of speech. But, like any decent university, public or private, USC should follow the First Amendment. The only exception is that universities should allow “time, place, and manner” expressions of speech that don’t disturb the mission of the university. That means no disrupting speeches or blocking access to university facilities like classes.

Further, USC promotes First-Amendment-like freedom of speech on their website.  Here’s one bit from USC’s Policy on Free Speech:

As the Faculty Handbook declares, the University recognizes that students are exposed to thought-provoking ideas as part of their educational experience, and some of these ideas may challenge their beliefs and may lead a student to claim that an educational experience is offensive.  Therefore any such issues that arise in the educational context will be considered in keeping with the University’s commitment to academic freedom.

Except, of course, when the issue arises in a graduation speech!

Yes, there may have been threats, but it’s up to USC to have enough security on hand to both protect Ms. Tabassum and also allow her to speak without heckling. The mere citation of threats and palaver about “security decisions” is simply a way that USC can ban a controversial speaker without having to provide the conditions where and when she can speak freely.

Tabassum is a valedictorian, valedictorians traditionally speak at USC, and her speech is almost certainly not designed to incite imminent lawless violence. Even if she accuses Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, that is not sufficient grounds to ban her. (If USC is worried about First-Amendment exceptions, they can vet her speech in advance, but they better have constitutional lawyers look at it, too!).

In my view, USC is cowardly and censorious in preventing Tabassum from speaking at graduation.  The school is, as she notes, robbing her of her big moment: her reward for working hard over four years to become the best student in her class. I urge USC to change their minds and let her speak, but of course it’s too late.  The gutless wonders, fond of selective censorship, appear to be running USC. And the great irony here is that although the school offers a minor in genocide, it prevents someone from speaking because they might bring up the subject.

_______________

Full disclosure: I was the valedictorian in my college class, too, and was also prevented from the traditional (short) speech because the administration knew I was an antiwar activist. Thus they announced my award from the stage while I was in the audience. I got to stand up when I was recognized, but I was wearing a black armband and made the “Black Power” fist salute. (That cost me a summer job.)  I, too, felt a bit cheated, and for reasons similar to those of Tabassum. But I think that  the censorship of Tabassum is a much bigger deal than mine given that she was supposed to make a full speech and not just an elongated “thank you”. And, of course, free speech is especially important to emphasize these days.  Too many schools are using “safetyism” as a reason to cancel speakers, which merely empowers those who are encouraged to give the “heckler’s veto” and make threats. If a speaker isn’t going to violate the First Amendment, it’s up to the university to protect her and remove those who try to shout her down.

h/t: Luana Maroja

Readers’ wildlife photos

April 16, 2024 • 8:15 am

Thanks to the readers who sent in photos at my behest. And today we have one of most faithful contributors, Mark Sturtevant, with some lovely photos of arthropods. Mark’s captions and IDs are indented, and you can enlarge his photos by clicking on them.

Last summer I chose to go back to Ohio to spend a few days “bugging” the local parks with a camera. I had gone late the previous summer, but this trip was done much earlier. Here are some of the critters that I had found, beginning with moths.

Here is a Tulip Tree Beauty Caterpillar (Epimecis hortaria). This will become an intricately patterned Geometrid moth with variable color patterns, as shown in the link:

A Orange-patched Smoky Moth, Pyromorpha dimidiate. Larvae feed on decaying leaves in oak woods. The moth is clearly a mimic of one the toxic Net-winged Beetles, but I don’t know if this is a case of Batesian mimicry, where the beetle is the only one with a defense, or Müllerian mimicry, where both are unpalatable and so they mimic one another:

Deep in the woods, these boldly marked moths were quite common on the low vegetation, although they seldom allowed me to get close. It is one of the Haploa Moths (which is in the Tiger Moth family), but there are perhaps three species that are similar and I can’t be sure of the exact species. I can say that it is a dead ringer for Haploa lecontei:

Next up is a bumble-bee mimicking Robberfly Laphria sp. These robust predatory flies are always interesting to watch since they can swivel their heads around to look for prey. When I found this one, it had recently hauled in a Golden-backed Snipe Fly (Chrysopilus thoracicus), and it was still struggling. 

Next up are a pair of Leaf-footed Bugs, Acanthocephala sp. The female is feeding on bird poo, which is a thing that these bugs often do:

I was quite happy to see this Cocklebur Weevil, Rhodobaenus quinquepunctatus. Larvae bore into cocklebur stems and in other members of the sunflower family. I presume it is a Batesian mimic of the toxic milkweed bug:

Here is a pair of black-headed Ash Sawfly larvae, Tethida barda. Although they resemble Lepidopteran caterpillars, sawfly larvae actually grow up into stingless wasps:

There were quite a few of these Stoneflies near a river. I cannot even begin to ID these further with any confidence. The immature stages of these archaic-looking insects are aquatic:

The terrain gets quite hilly farther south in the state, and so the park trails there would send me down deep gorges. Along these trails the rocks and trees were generously festooned with large millipedes (the size of pencils) that I think belong to the Narceus americanus/annularis species complex. The taxonomy in the group appears to be messy and someone needs to sort them out:

Lastly, here is an interesting spider, the Humpbacked Orbweaver Eustela anastera with an unknown moth as prey. I don’t remember if I’ve ever seen one before:

Tuesday: Hili dialogue

April 16, 2024 • 6:45 am

Welcome to The Cruelest Day: Tuesday, April 16, 2024, and National Eggs Benedict Day, a dish that Anthony Bourdain (RIP) used to say that you should never order at brunch. In fact, he said to avoid restaurant brunches completely. See below at 1:40 for the brunch bit, along with a litany of Bourdain’s other food beefs:

It’s also the Day of the Mushroom (no, not psychedelic ones), National Orchid Day, National Stress Awareness Day, W9rld Semicolon Day, Free Cone Day at Ben and Jerry’s (if you leave near one, get yours!), National Librarian Day, Save the Elephant Day, Emancipation Day in Washington, D.C., National Healthcare Decisions Day, and World Voice Day

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

Da Nooz:

*Trump’s first criminal trial began yesterday; he’s accused of falsifying financial records to cover up hush money paid to two women. It promises to be a real show, with jury selection alone taking a few weeks since people can’t say they’ll be impartial. (Could you?) I think the state has pulled at least 6,000 names as potential jurors. Trump’s already calling people names as well as dozing off in court, but not a single juror was picked on the first day (it’s gonna be tough to find someone who’s “neutral” on Trump).  I’ve put the fun parts in bold:

The first criminal trial of an American president officially began on Monday as prosecutors and defense lawyers convened in a Manhattan courtroom to start selecting the jury that will decide Donald J. Trump’s fate.

The initial pool of prospective jurors dwindled rapidly. More than half of the first group of 96 were dismissed in short order after indicating that they did not believe they could be impartial. Court adjourned for the day roughly two hours after jury selection began, with zero jurors chosen.

Before beginning the arduous process of choosing a jury for the landmark trial — on allegations that Mr. Trump falsified documents to cover up a sex scandal involving a porn star — the judge overseeing the case once again declined to step aside, rejecting Mr. Trump’s latest effort to oust him.

But there was also a ruling that favored the former president: The judge, Juan M. Merchan, rejected a request by prosecutors to introduce accusations of sexual assault that women lodged against Mr. Trump years ago, calling them “rumors” and “complete gossip.”

The Manhattan district attorney’s office, which brought the case against Mr. Trump, also asked the judge to hold Mr. Trump in contempt and penalize him $3,000 for violating a gag order barring him from attacking witnesses in the case.

On social media over the weekend, Mr. Trump assailed one of the prosecution’s key witnesses: Michael D. Cohen, his former fixer. Mr. Cohen paid $130,000 to the porn star, Stormy Daniels, during the 2016 presidential campaign to keep quiet about a sexual encounter she said she had with Mr. Trump.

After the lunch break — during which Mr. Trump posted a video of an ally yelling about the judge’s wife — Justice Merchan said he would hold a hearing later this month to discuss potential violations of the gag order, which also bars Mr. Trump from attacking the judge’s family.

The jury selection process could take two weeks or more, and the trial may spill into June. Mr. Trump is expected to be in the courtroom for much of it.

Mr. Trump seemed alternately irritated and exhausted during pretrial arguments on Monday, sometimes smirking and scoffing, but also appearing to nod off, his mouth slack and his head drooping to his chest. After the trial got underway in the afternoon, he chuckled when Justice Merchan told the first group of 96 prospective jurors that he would ensure a fair trial.

*I’m proud to say that my publisher, which I call “Random Penguin” has filed a lawsuit, backed by other major publishers and authors, against Iowa for banning books in public schools:

A group of major book publishers have joined a lawsuit seeking to block school book banning in Iowa, the latest effort to counter the removal of works from school classrooms and libraries.

The lawsuit was filed by Penguin Random House in November and targets parts of an Iowa law that bans books depicting or describing sex acts from school libraries or classrooms, with the exemption of religious texts. The law also focuses on books that address gender identity or sexual orientation for students in kindergarten through sixth grade.

On Monday, the Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan Publishers, Simon & Schuster and Sourcebooks announced they had joined the legal action. The rise of book bans nationwide prompted the collective action, the publishers said.

HarperCollins is owned by News Corp NWSA , the parent of Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co. Sourcebooks is majority owned by Penguin Random House.

The lawsuit has so far prevented Iowa from enforcing book bans, said Dan Novack, associate general counsel for Penguin Random House, in an interview. The additional publishers will share the costs of the lawsuit going forward, Novack said.

“Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird is defending the law that keeps sexually explicit books out of the hands of kids in elementary schools,” said a spokeswoman for the Iowa Attorney General’s office. “Parents trust that when they send their kids to school, their kids are there to learn, not to be exposed to inappropriate books in their classrooms or libraries.”

On Friday a federal judge ruled that the ban cannot be enforced so long as the legal challenge is going on, which could take ages.

Bravo to Random Penguin and the other publishers for fighting censorship! The idea that libraries and school librarians will expose kids to inappropriate books is pretty misguided, because school librarians love kids, love books, and are there to educate the kids. The issue of “inappropriate books” should be addressed by the school librarians and by parents, who can exercise power to keep kids from being totally corrupted by the sight of genitalia. The issue should not be addressed by state governments banning books.

*It now looks as if Israel has decided to mount a “forceful response” to last Saturday’s attack by Iran, but doesn’t seek a wider war (is that a contradiction?)

The war cabinet on Monday afternoon wrapped up a discussion on Israel’s response to Iran’s massive missile and drone barrage, amid calls for Jerusalem to exercise caution, so as not to spark a regional war, and reports that a retaliatory move could come “as soon as Monday.”

In an unsourced report, Channel 12 claimed the war cabinet has decided to hit back “clearly and forcefully” against Iran with a response designed to send the message that Israel “will not allow an attack of that magnitude against it to pass without a reaction.”

The response will also reportedly be designed to make plain that Israel will not allow the Iranians to “establish the equation” they have sought to assert in recent days. This was an apparent reference to Iran’s warning that future Israeli strikes on Iranian territory, including its international diplomatic premises, will henceforth again be met by Iranian retaliatory strikes on Israel.

However, the Channel 12 report added that Israel does not want its response to spark a regional war, or to shatter the coalition that helped it defend against Iran’s attack. It noted also that Israel intends to coordinate its action with the US.

The war cabinet meeting finished as the Axios news site reported that Defense Minister Yoav Gallant had told his US counterpart in a Sunday call that Israel has “no choice but to respond” to Iran’s attack, given the use of ballistic missiles.

*Over at her Substack site, Melanie Phillips argues that the mess in the Middle East is largely America’s fault for empowering (and, to some extent, allying with) Iran. She also laughs off the concept of Israel’s “deterrence” on Saturday:

What country other than Israel would be told by the so-called civilised world that it must not respond to an onslaught of more than 300 cruise and ballistic missiles and armed drones fired at the entire country?

If a minute fraction of such an attack were to be mounted against America  or Britain, they would declare themselves at war and destroy the enemy before it could attack them again. It’s only Israel that is not to be allowed to defend itself in the same way.

Does the Biden administration need to see a few thousand Israelis killed in skyscrapers if missiles get through to Haifa or Tel Aviv before it comes to its defence again?

Deterrence does not mean being able to defend yourself against attack. Deterrence means deterring an attack in the first place. Biden’s prohibition would destroy the very concept of Israeli deterrence and allow Iran to continue to tighten its ring of proxy fire around Israel in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen — and Gaza (where Biden wants Israel to submit to a Palestinian terrorist administration after the war).

and on the U.S.’s responsibility (Phillips’s take, not necessarily mine):

But the reason Iran/Hamas felt emboldened to design and perpetrate [the October 7] attack was because it had been empowered over the past two decades by American appeasement and gross ideological irresponsibility — or worse.

In 2015, President Obama’s nuclear deal, which would have enabled a legitimate Iranian nuclear bomb with only a short delay, funnelled billions in sanctions relief into Tehran’s coffers, enabling it to advance its aim of regional hegemony and expand its terrorist empire of Islamic holy war across the world.

This strategy of empowering Iran was continued by the Biden administration. It grovelled to Tehran in an attempt to restore the nuclear deal, relaxed sanctions once again and retaliated only sporadically and limply to repeated attacks by Iranian proxies on US forces in Iraq and Syria.

Iran correctly thought that it could get away with unleashing Hamas on October 7, as well as increasing attacks by Hezbollah on northern Israel, because the Biden administration would prevent a full-on Israeli response.

*Below, a piece on the NPR “scandal” from the Free Press‘s daily newsletter. Remember their NPR essay by Uri Berliner, in which he revealed how horribly ideological the whole enterprise was? (I posted it about it here.)

NPR has struggled to contain the fallout from the essay by Uri Berliner published in these pageslast week. On Friday, NPR’s new CEO Katherine Maher issued a letter to staffers that skirted the substance of Uri’s concerns and instead called his character into question: “Questioning whether our people are serving our mission with integrity, based on little more than the recognition of their identity, is profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning,” she wrote. Of course, Uri did no such thing. Read the essay and judge for yourself.

Now, with the world watching and wondering what has gone wrong at NPR, some inconvenient old tweets of Maher’s have resurfaced.

Like this one about looting:

Or this one, with a selfie out campaigning for Biden. Or this one where she chided Hillary for using the phrase “boy and girl.” Or this one about “white silence.” Or this one about her “cis white mobility privilege.”

Okay. But that last one is a joke, right? Right? Either way, it’s no wonder that a (publicly funded) news organization run by a person with these political reflexes isn’t as evenhanded and intellectually curious as it once was.

Here’s another tweet from the brand-new CEO of NPR.

Matt Taibbi has an article on Maher on his Substack with more bizarre racist tweets, but I don’t subscribe so I can’t read it all.

* I just learned that anti-Israel protestors blocked not only the roads to Chicago’s O’Hare airport yesterday, but also the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco.  Travelers were royally peeved. The Bridge was closed for at least five hours because protestors had chained themselves to their vehicles and had to be cut free, while O’Hare road access was blocked for a shorter time, though people had to get out of cabs and Ubers and drag their luggage a considerable distance to the terminal.

“People who block traffic should be arrested,” one person wrote on X.

Another said: “This is why Jesus invented tasers.”

A third person wrote, “There’s no better way to make people dislike you and your cause.”

Indeed, and I wonder why people are doing this.  (There were apparently such obstructive demonstrations all over the U.S., all by pro-Palestinians.) This is not the same kind of civil disobedience as sitting at lunch counters or trying to register for college, acts that don’t inconvenience anyone.

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili has an arcane conversation, but she does look satanic. Malgorzata’s explanation, “Andrzej is connecting to Darwin’s ‘devil’s chaplain’ while HIli is taking it literally and talking about her ‘bad side’, like being mean to Kulka.”

A: Nature is a devil’s book.
Hili: One is sitting in me as well.
A: And?
Hili: We somehow manage to come to an agreement.
In Polish:
Ja: Natura jest księgą diabła.
Hili: We mnie też jeden siedzi.
Ja: I co?
Hii: Jakoś się dogadujemy.

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

From Stacy:

From America’s Cultural Decline into Idiocy. Get it?

Stacy also drew my attention to this exchange of tweets by J. K. Rowling. She readers her comments!

From Masih: This 1.5-minute video has one clip of Iranians celebrating their failed attack on Israel and six short clips of men going after women for showing their hair.  What kind of country prompts its men to harass women for showing a bit of hair?

How did they do this in one take?

From Barry, a bouncing Trumpeter Hornbill (Bycanistes bucinator). I may get to see one of these when I go to South Africa:

From Malcolm, a stunning video that looks as if an ape is aping a human by showing off its own baby:

No more clamping of tires!

From the Auschwitz Memorial, one that I reposted. Have a look at her Wikipedia page:

Tweets from Matthew. Look at the size of this “tame” eagle!

Matthew finds this video (apparently of an Italian imitating an American accent and American sayings) “very funny”:

Biden once again tells Israel how to defend itself—by not striking back

April 15, 2024 • 10:00 am

What do you suppose the U.S. would do if, say, Russia launched an attack on the West Coast with several hundred non-nuclear missiles, justifying that attack by saying that the U.S. had given weapons and money to Ukraine to defend itself against Russia?  Imagine further that U.S. planes and anti-missile defenses managed to fend off all the Russian missiles, and then the Russian attack stopped.

Would the U.S. then refrain from all further action, avoiding all retaliation by proclaiming that we had won a “great victory” over Russia? Would we listen to, say, Canada if they told us to avoid retaliating because Russia had stopped attacking and we’d only promote a “wider war”?  I doubt it.  We might not attack Russia with nukes, but you can bet that we would do something, even though we’ve put about as many sanctions on Russia as we can.

But, after Iran’s attack on Israel Saturday night, an attack to which Israel didn’t retaliate (but has contemplated doing so), and an attack in which Israel’s planes did not leave Israeli airspace, Biden has butted in,once again, preventing Israel from retaliating against an attack. It’s reported in this NYT piece (click to read, or find it archived here):

 

An excerpt:

President Biden and his team, hoping to avoid further escalation leading to a wider war in the Middle East, are advising Israel that its successful defense against Iranian airstrikes constituted a major strategic victory that might not require another round of retaliation, U.S. officials said on Sunday.

The interception of nearly all of the more than 300 drones and missiles fired against Israel on Saturday night demonstrated that Israel had come out ahead in its confrontation with Iran and proved to enemies its ability to protect itself along with its American allies, meaning it did not necessarily need to fire back, the officials said.

Whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and his government will agree to leave it at that was not yet clear as the country’s war cabinet met for several hours on Sunday to make decisions about its next steps.

The leaders of the Group of 7 major industrial democracies echoed Mr. Biden’s message on Sunday morning, condemning Iran for the attack and warning that it could provoke what they called an “uncontrollable regional escalation” in the Middle East.

“This must be avoided,” the joint statement said. “We will continue to work to stabilize the situation and avoid further escalation.”

Although damage from the attack was relatively light, the scope of the strikes went well beyond the small-bore tit-for-tat shadow war between Iran and Israel in recent years, crossing a red line with the firing of weapons from Iranian territory into Israeli territory. Had defenses not held, scores or hundreds could have been killed.

American officials said it was clear to them that wide-scale death was Iran’s intent, despite the fact that its leadership telegraphed the attack well in advance, publicly and privately. Officials said that even as the attack was underway, Iran’s government sent word through Swiss intermediaries that it considered the matter closed.

As the Elder of Ziyon remarks acidly,

Saying that Israel should regard this as a victory is shortsighted. As others have pointed out, surviving someone shooting at you many times because of your bulletproof vest is not a victory. The shooter can reload and only needs one bullet to make it through. Israel cannot afford to remain in a purely defensive posture forever, especially as Iran has proven that it is now willing to directly attack Israel.

If Iran fired a lot more missiles and drones at once, and Hezbollah launched a gazillion Iranian missiles, which it has, it might overwhelm the Iron dome completely and destroy considerable parts of Israel.

Yes, wide-scale death was Iran’s intent, and if you think it’s going to stop with that one attack, I’d argue that you’re wrong. Iran continues to supply its proxies, including Hezbollah and Yemen, not to mention Hamas, with money, material, and rockets. And of course Iran is developing nuclear weapons, one of which can easily destroy nearly all of Israel. (For some reason the U.S. doesn’t worry about that, though Israel tried to stop the program earlier by bombing Iranian nuclear facilities or assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists.) And yet Biden tells Israel to keep its hands off Iran, which, if there’s such a thing as an “axis of evil” in the Middle East, surely qualifies for the title. Even many Iranians dislike their oppressive theocracy, and there was some celebrating in Iran when its attack on Israel failed.

Now don’t get me wrong. I’m grateful to the U.S.—and to Britain, France, and Jordan—for defending Israel against the Iranian attack. And indeed, an Israeli retaliation could destabilize the Middle East and create a wider war—for now. But if I’m not wrong, that wider war is coming anyway. Iran will keep supplying countries who attack Israel, and if you think that its failure has deterred it from further attacks on Israel, all I can say is “I doubt it.” Someday, and it won’t be long now, Iran will have nuclear weapons and a delivery system. Further if war comes from Hezbollah in Lebanon, which might as well be an extension of Iran’s military, that can also be put on Iran. I guess I should add that I am not a big fan of Netanyahu and believe he needs to go as soon he can without his departure hurting Israel’s war effort.

What bothers me is not so much as America being a buttinski in this case, but its tendency to be a buttinski about everything that Israel does. And that includes the U.S.’s constant pressure on Israel not to go into Rafah. At best, Israel is told to evacuate its civilians (which it surely will) but then engage in targeted strikes rather than a big attack. (Is the U.S. an expert in that?) The U.S. doesn’t like any civilians being killed, despite the fact that the way Hamas operates is to ensure that Gazan civilians will be killed, for that gains them the world’s sympathy. Those who doubt that are dead wrong.  “Collateral” deaths of Gazan civilians are not on Israel but Hamas. Further, the ratio of Gazan civilians killed to Hamas terrorists killed is on the order of 1.5:1 or even 1:1, and no country has achieved that in modern warfare.  Does that placate the U.S.? Of course not, even though our own ratios are far worse than Israel’s. (Again, I am not by any means celebrating the tragedy of dead Gazan civilians, just noting who bears the responsibility.)

In the end, I can’t help but believe that a huge factor in Biden’s buttinski behavior about Israel involves boosting his own chances of re-election. The Muslim vote may be key in some states like Michigan, and younger Americans are more pro-Palestinian than older ones as well as far less approving about how Biden is dealing with the Israel/Hamas war. Biden needs those young voters.  It seems to me unethical—indeed, reprehensible— to interfere in other countries’ affairs of state so you can buttress your own chances of re-election.  If you imagine that America were in Israel’s shoes, as I tried to in my clumsy scenario above, I seriously doubt that we’d pay attention to other countries who tried to prevent us from defending ourselves.

To quote the learned Elder of Ziyon again:

After all, Iran has to defend its honor. And the US understands that – unlike Israelis, they are irrational Muslims who cannot live with themselves unless they project power and force millions of Israelis into shelters. Risking Israeli lives is a worthwhile bargain to let Iran feel victorious. Then, the bargain goes, the US will stop Israel from responding, because no one died (rumors that the Bedouin girl in the Negev hit with shrapnel died were not true) and Iran is happy.

Iran can announce that its operation is over, vengeance is theirs, they can return to their proxy war through Hezbollah and Syria and Iraq and  Yemen, and warn the US to do its part of the bargain and not allow Israel to do anything against them.

Iran is not deterred in the least.

Any self respecting nation would respond harshly to such an open attack on its territory. Israel should be striking at every drone factory and every missile site in Iran, at the very least, and those attacks should have started as soon as Iranian aircraft crossed Iran;s own borders towards Israel.

At the moment, with the US constraining Israel’s ability to respond, Iran pays no price at all for its blatant aggression. Which means it has a green light to do it again.

The entire Middle East sees that this is what the US means when it says its support for an ally is “ironclad.” Which strengthens Iran a lot more than its drones do.

I still plan to vote for Biden this fall, and of course there’s no way I’d ever vote for the narcissistic disordered personality embodied by Trump. But my enthusiasm for voting at all has waned quite a bit, not only because Biden seems old and out of it, but because of his self-aggrandizing behavior towards Israel. If I didn’t vote at all, Biden would still win this Democratic state and all its electoral votes, so I wouldn’t be helping Trump in the least. We shall see.