Wednesday: Hili dialogue

August 2, 2023 • 6:45 am

Welcome to a Hump Day ( “Skofdag” in Afrikaans): Wednesday, August 2, 2023, and National Ice Cream Sandwich Day. Here’s the best one according to the NYT’s survey (click to go to the Amazon site, but it looks like you can get them at Whole Paycheck):

It’s also Dinosaurs Day, National Coloring Book Day, and Roma Holocaust Memorial Day (Council of Europe, European Parliament)

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this by consulting the August 2 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*We discussed Trump’s indictment yesterday afternoon, but if you want to read more, go here or here. The WaPo says the case “could take months, or even years, to be resolved.” YEARS????

There are six unnamed (yet) co-conspirators. Can you guess who they are? From the NYT

The indictment, filed by the special counsel Jack Smith in Federal District Court in Washington, accuses Mr. Trump of three conspiracies: one to defraud the United States; a second to obstruct an official government proceeding, the certification of the Electoral College vote; and a third to deprive people of a civil right, the right to have their votes counted. Mr. Trump was also charged with a fourth count of obstructing or attempting to obstruct an official proceeding.

“Each of these conspiracies — which built on the widespread mistrust the defendant was creating through pervasive and destabilizing lies about election fraud — targeted a bedrock function of the United States federal government: the nation’s process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election,” the indictment said.

*The other day I discussed a NYT/Siena poll showing rankings of all the Republican candidates for President, with Trump way ahead of #2, Ron DeSantis, and everyone else in single digits. Now there’s a poll by the same organization showing that Biden is, right now, polling neck and neck with the odious and triply-indicted Trumpster.

Mr. Biden appears to have escaped the political danger zone he resided in last year, when nearly two-thirds of his party wanted a different nominee. Now, Democrats have broadly accepted him as their standard-bearer, even if half would prefer someone else.

Still, warning signs abound for the president: Despite his improved standing and a friendlier national environment, Mr. Biden remains broadly unpopular among a voting public that is pessimistic about the country’s future, and his approval rating is a mere 39 percent.

Perhaps most worryingly for Democrats, the poll found Mr. Biden in a neck-and-neck race with former President Donald J. Trump, who held a commanding lead among likely Republican primary voters even as he faces two criminal indictments and more potential charges on the horizon. Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump were tied at 43 percent apiece in a hypothetical rematch in 2024, according to the poll.

Mr. Biden has been buoyed by voters’ feelings of fear and distaste toward Mr. Trump. Well over a year before the election, 16 percent of those polled had unfavorable views of both Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump, a segment with which Mr. Biden had a narrow lead.

. . .To borrow an old political cliché, the poll shows that Mr. Biden’s support among Democrats is a mile wide and an inch deep. About 30 percent of voters who said they planned to vote for Mr. Biden in November 2024 said they hoped Democrats would nominate someone else. Just 20 percent of Democrats said they would be enthusiastic if Mr. Biden were the party’s 2024 presidential nominee; another 51 percent said they would be satisfied but not enthusiastic.

A higher share of Democrats, 26 percent, expressed enthusiasm for the notion of Vice President Kamala Harris as the nominee in 2024.

Well, she’ll be the nominee (Biden is too nice to nominate another VP, but Harris has been a washout since she took office. Remember how she was going to fix immigation?

Mr. Biden had the backing of 64 percent of Democrats who planned to participate in their party’s primary, an indicator of soft support for an incumbent president. Thirteen percent preferred Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and 10 percent chose Marianne Williamson.

Neck and neck, and Trump’s indictments continue to increase. Why on earth would we expect his ratings to fall. Perhaps a conviction would do it?

*And yet, at the Washington Post, political columnist Henry Olsen has an op-ed saying the opposite: “Admit it, GOP. Trump’s legal woes make him an unviable candidate.” Whaaat?  Well, here’s what Olsen thinks. First, there’s the money issue:

The revelation that Donald Trump’s political action committee spent more than $40 million on legal fees in the first half of 2023 does more than cast doubt on the former president’s ability to run a competitive primary campaign. It provides yet another reason why Republican voters should reject his candidacy if he does not drop out first.

Running for president requires more than charisma and a few rallies. It requires time and money — and lots of it. Candidates must constantly be on the road stumping for votes. They also need support from the modern apparatus that places digital and television ads and identifies persuadable voters that can cast ballots for them.

This is especially true when running against an incumbent who can count on a united party for support. President Biden, along with the national Democratic Party and its state counterparts, will raise billions of dollars to crush whoever rises as his opponent. In 2020, Biden’s campaign and affiliated outside groups spent $1.6 billion while the Democratic National Committee and state and local parties spent another $1 billion. A cash-strapped candidate would not stand a chance against this onslaught.

Umm. . . Trump is particularly stumping hard, and he’s not even going to participate in the first debate of GOP candidates.  I don’t think money will be his problem.  And if he doesn’t need to show up to be elected, why would he worry about this next factor?

Running for president requires more than charisma and a few rallies. It requires time and money — and lots of it. Candidates must constantly be on the road stumping for votes. They also need support from the modern apparatus that places digital and television ads and identifies persuadable voters that can cast ballots for them.

This is especially true when running against an incumbent who can count on a united party for support.

Then there’s the time factor. Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that prosecutors are filing bogus charges to wound Trump politically. He might be able to beat all of those raps, either at trial or on appeal. But he would still have to manage his defense in at least two, and perhaps as many as four, major criminal cases. He has prodigious energy, especially for a 77-year-old man. But even he can’t be in five places at the same time.

I think Olsen is telling Post readers what they want to hear, not what is likely to happen. As Trump infamously said, he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and it wouldn’t hurt his election chances. I despise the man and hope with every fiber of my being that he doesn’t get re-elected, but one has to be realistic as well.

*The Wall Street Journal‘s answer to the issue of “Why America’s gun laws are in chaos” comes down to two issues: political preference, of course, but also history.

The Supreme Court last summer sought to clarify its expansive reading of the Second Amendment. Instead, it set off chaos.

The decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decreed that gun-control laws of today must have a clear forerunner in weapons regulations around the time of the nation’s infancy, regardless of the modern public-safety rationale behind them.

The result: Hundreds of gun cases litigated in recent months have become a free-for-all, with lower courts conflicted or confounded about how and where to draw limits on gun rights.

“There’s all this picking and choosing of historical evidence. ‘This is too early. This is too late. Too small, too big,’” Judge Gerard Lynch of the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said during a recent argument about a new law in New York that prohibits guns in sensitive places like parks, museums and bars. “The whole thing puzzles me.”

In that case, the right of licensed handgun owners to carry weapons into bars and theaters could hinge on 19th-century statutes that barred drunks from carrying firearms, and outlawed guns and butcher knives in social parties attended by ladies. A case decided last fall held that the federal ban on guns with obliterated serial numbers was unconstitutional because unmarked guns were perfectly legal in the 18th century.

. . . That practice watered down gun rights, the opinion said. Instead, Thomas wrote, to pass constitutional muster, gun restrictions within the scope of the Second Amendment must be deeply rooted in historical precedent. Governments defending them bear the burden of showing that their laws are similar, or at least analogous, to firearm regulations widely enforced around the time of Second Amendment’s ratification in 1791.

This is taking “originalism” way too far. And yet it’s spawned a new class of paid experts:

The case has given firearms historians new roles as key witnesses. California and other pro-gun-control states have assembled a roster of gun historians—compensating some at a rate of $500 an hour—to scavenge databases and newspaper archives for historic gun laws and render their opinion on them.

Well, you can examine the Constitution under an electron microscope, but you will find nothing there (nor anything in early history) about selling guns to people who are under protection orders for domestic abuse. It’s what the Germans call Wahnsinn. 

*Did you know that a U.S. government ban on the manufacture and sale of incandescent light bulbs (an energy-saving measure) started yesterday? No, you’re not violating the law if you still have them, but you won’t be able to buy them.

The rule passed by President Joe Biden’s Department of Energy in April 2022 states that light bulbs must emit a minimum of 45 lumens per watt. A lumen is a measure of brightness.

That effectively outlaws the manufacture and sale of common incandescent bulbs, the kind you screw into the vast majority of light sockets in your home. That’s because traditional incandescent bulbs provide just 15 lumens per watt, according to light bulb manufacturer Philips.

By contrast, most LED bulbs will get you 75 lumens per watt, or more.

Here’s what’s not banned:

Not all incandescent light bulbs are banned as part of the new rule, according to the Department of Energy. Here’s what manufacturers can still build and stores can continue selling:

  • Appliance lamps, including fridge and oven lights

  • Black lights

  • Bug lamps

  • Colored lamps

  • Infrared lamps

  • Left-handed thread lamps

  • Plant lights

  • Flood lights

  • Reflector lamps

  • Showcase lamps

  • Traffic signals

  • Some other specialty lights, including marine lamps and some odd-sized bulbs

And what’s next: CFL bulbs, some of which I bought to save energy!

Next on the banned list: compact fluorescent light bulbs.

In December 2022, the Department of Energy proposed a rule that would more than double the current minimum light bulb efficiency level, to over 120 lumens per watt for the most common bulbs. That would go into effect by the end of 2024 and effectively ban CFL bulbs.

*Finally an anti-“affirmative care” bill in Louisiana, presumed to be dead, has risen like Lazarus and is likely to become law in that state.

A controversial bill — that at one point had been presumed dead — banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender youths in Louisiana was passed by the Senate on Monday and is likely to reach the governor’s desk in the coming days.

The bill, which passed in the Senate mainly along party lines, 29-10, would prohibit hormone treatments, gender-affirming surgery and puberty-blocking drugs for transgender minors in Louisiana. The measure will go back to the House, which has already overwhelmingly passed the legislation, to approve of minor amendments, including pushing back the effective date of the law to Jan. 1, 2024.

If the House concurs, the legislation would be sent to the desk of Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat who opposes it. Edwards has not said whether he would veto the bill. If he does, lawmakers could convene a veto session to try to override his decision. Last session, Edwards chose not to block a law banning transgender athletes from participating in women and girls sports competitions in Louisiana, although he successfully vetoed a similar measure the year before.

. . .Opponents of the ban, argue that gender-affirming care, which is supported by every major medical organization, can be lifesaving for someone with gender dysphoria, which is distress over gender identity that doesn’t match a person’s assigned sex. Advocates for the LGBTQ+ community fear that without the care, transgender children could face especially heightened risks of stress, depression and suicidal thoughts.

“When people, especially our youth, talk about suicide, that’s not something that you take lightly,” said Sen. Gerald Boudreaux, a Democrat opposing the bill “You wait too long and you are at the funeral home.”

Proponents of the legislation argue that the proposed ban would protect children from life-altering medical procedures until they are mature enough to make such serious decisions.

I have to say that in light of the paucity of evidence about the long-term effects of puberty blockers (which are considered only for clinical trials in some European countries, and that the light doesn’t mandate any specific kind of psychotherapy, and finally because there’s no evidence that preventing young people from transitioning really does lead to suicide, I don’t find this law unseemly. Sure, lots of real transphobes and Republicans are dancing in glee, but in this case the scientific data tells me that we need to know more before we start allowing this brand of “affirmative care.”

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili has become interested in AI:

Hili: Can the artificial intelligence meow?
A: This may be the last question anyone thought of asking.
In Polish:
Hili: Czy sztuczna inteligencja umie miauczeć?
Ja: To może być ostatnie pytanie, którego jeszcze nikt jej nie zadał.

And here’s an old post from this day in 2016 when I was visiting and carried Hili inside from the windowsill. Andrzej put it up on his website.

Jerry: come, I’ll carry you home.
Hili: We have had much better social care since you arrived.

In Polish:

Jerry: Chodź, zaniosę cię do domu.
Hili: Od czasu jak przyjechałeś mamy znacznie lepszą opiekę społeczną.

From Pyers:

From Divy, a famous Far Side cartoon by Gary Larson:

From Beth:

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

From Masih: Not only no hijab, but flipping the bird by a police car! No wonder her face is blurred out.

Ricky Gervais astounds his cat Pickle:

From Jez; this is what a tiny (and ravenous) Galapagos tortoise looks like:

From Barry, and you’d better know the answer to this one!

From the Auschwitz Memorial, a mass gassing of the Roma. 4300 killed in two days:

From the visually unimpaired Dr. Cobb. Here’s the Google translation for the first one:

A lynx crossing a river on thin ice. He hears “cracking” sounds and decides to jump.

Read what happened to the first “spy cat,” whose development cost over $10 million:

Nara is famous for its sika deer, whom are well protected by the locals.  And the deer clearly aren’t stupid!

Trump indicted in third case

August 1, 2023 • 4:54 pm

What a sweet headline! Trump now faces four charges of trying to overthrow the election, making a grand total of 79 charges against him. Will it hurt him? Naah, but it doesn’t make him look good to rational people, either.

This is his second federal indictment, the other being the Mar-a-Lago documents case, and there’s another state indictment in NY about the hush money to Stormy Daniels. And. . . one more liable to be handed down as well: a state indictment in Georgia for interfering in the election. The DA there said she was “ready to go”.

Click to read from the NYT:

An excerpt:

Former President Donald J. Trump was indicted on Tuesday in connection with his widespread efforts to overturn the 2020 election following a sprawling federal investigation into his attempts to cling to power after losing the presidency to Joseph R. Biden Jr.

The indictment was filed by the special counsel Jack Smith in Federal District Court in Washington.

It accuses Mr. Trump of three conspiracies: one to defraud the United States, a second to obstruct an official government proceeding and a third to deprive people of civil rights provided by federal law or the Constitution.

“Each of these conspiracies — which built on the widespread mistrust the defendant was creating through pervasive and destabilizing lies about election fraud — targeted a bedrock function of the United States federal government: the nation’s process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election,” the indictment said.

The indictment said Mr. Trump had six co-conspirators, but it did not name them.

The charges signify an extraordinary moment in United States history: a former president, in the midst of a campaign to return to the White House, being charged over attempts to use the levers of government power to subvert democracy and remain in office against the will of voters.

You can  read the indictment here.

This is an extraordinary moment in American political history. The only thing I can compare it to during my lifetime is the run-up to Richard Nixon’s resignation from the Presidency.

 

Neil deGrasse Tyson and a confusing ramble on sex and gender

August 1, 2023 • 11:30 am

Physicist Neil deGrasse Tyson gave his exercised take on sex and gender in a TikTok interview, but this section, shown below in a tweet, has caused considerable controversy on the internet, and was sent me by an offended woman reader.  Have a listen:

In general, I agree with some of the things he says and disagree with others.  To me, the two most bothersome things are his initial conflation of sex and gender.  Sex is largely determined by chromosomal constitution (though it’s a correlate with the real criterion for biological sex: whether one has the equipment to make eggs or sperm), but Tyson immediately segues from biological sex into gender roles, saying that biological sex is “insufficient” to specify gender roles.  Well, yes, that’s true, though the vast majority of people conform pretty well to an identifiable role. As, Tyson points out earlier in the interview (see link above), that you can with substantial accuracy identify someone’s biological sex from the “gender role” (earrings, makeup, clothes, etc.).

Where he’s right here is that nobody cares, or should care, whether someone conforms to the expected behavior and appearance of members of their biological sex. (People do care, of course about children being treated medically with hormones and surgery so their secondary sex characteristics conform to their own view of their gender.) And, in fact, do people really care that much? I thought most of the kerfuffle was about transgender people and not genderfluid people.

But then he goes wrong again when he adumbrates gender stereotypes:

Suppose no matter my chromosomes, today I feel 80% female 20% female. I’m gonna put on makeup. I’m gonna do this. Tomorrow I might feel 80% female. I’ll remove the makeup and put on a muscle shirt.

That offended my correspondent, who doesn’t consider herself genderfluid but objects to specifying makeup as the sign of a female gender and muscle shirts as the sign of male gender. Those are invidious gender stereotypes, and are opposed to the very kind of social pressure to which Tyson objects.

Below is a string of tweets from Kara Dansky, self-identified as “Feminist fighting for the sex-based rights of women and girls. Author, The Abolition of Sex. President, @WDI_USA”. 

She, like my correspondent, thinks the idea that one can wake up feeling “80% female and 20% male” complete lunacy. Dansky also agrees with me that even accepting that you’re of pure male gender doesn’t mean you have to conform to the dress code of “muscle shirts.”

.

And Emma Hilton’s take:

In other words, Tyson seems to object to social pressure to conform to a simple male/female dichotomy, and yet reinforces that dichotomy when specifying the secondary signs of gender.

I’m not deeply offended by this, but it just seems a bit confused, and at least three women are offended. What do you think?

*******

UPDATE: Click for Colin Wright’s take:

An excerpt:

There is a significant amount of confusion and obfuscation to dissect here, especially concerning Tyson’s overt blending of sex and gender expression and his seemingly total acceptance of radical gender ideology that roots the terms woman, girl, man, and boy in identity and expression instead of biology.

Tyson is correct in pointing out that a person’s sex doesn’t inevitably dictate how they might choose to express themselves through clothing or makeup; but this is banal and rarely, if ever, contested point. From the context, it’s evident that Tyson is using the term “gender” to describe the ways in which people express themselves through grooming, attire, and makeup choices. Given this, it’s ludicrous to imply that people are “assigning” others a “gender.” No one is campaigning or attempting to enforce binary dress codes for males and females across society. So who is the “you” to which Tyson believes he is responding?

Tyson’s take appears to be the result of a successful Left-wing fear mongering campaign to dismiss and downplay legitimate concerns over gender ideology. Progressive gender activists wants to portray their critics as ignorant, backward bigots who retch at the mere thought of a man wearing nail polish. But this depiction strays far from reality.

Women’s FIFA world cup: Portugal and U.S. tie, 0-0; Netherlands thrashes Vietnam 7-0

August 1, 2023 • 9:15 am

Yesterday (or rather at 2 a.m. U.S. time this morning), the American women’s team tied Portugal nil-nil in the FIFA Women’s World Cup.  I’ve put the official Fox highlights below, and reporters all say this is a pretty tough break for the U.S., though the team remains in contention. From the NYT:

For more than a generation, the United States women’s national team has played out some of its best moments on the world’s biggest stages, in front of the biggest crowds in women’s soccer. World Cup finals. Olympic gold medal games. The team has, over the years, won many of those games, a long line of days to remember.

On Tuesday, though, on a chilly night in the depths of the New Zealand winter, the Americans almost endured a day they would never be able to forget.

The ending did not, in the end, go completely wrong: The United States players held on desperately to preserve a 0-0 tie with Portugal, a result that delivered them, safely but scared out of their wits, to the knockout rounds of the Women’s World Cup.

That will have to do after a game in which the United States failed to create enough scoring chances, wasted the ones it did and then flirted with catastrophe as a Portuguese shot hit the post and caromed out in second-half injury time.

The near miss was perhaps symbolic of a night that qualified as the same, of a game in which the United States, a four-time winner of the World Cup, came within inches of a stunning — and, for them, unprecedented — group-stage exit.

I haven’t been watching the games, as I have no way to do so, but the consensus I read is that the U.S. team isn’t playing up to par.

Five minutes of highlights (the U.S. is in white, Portugal in red). The Portuguese keeper made a number of good saves, and Portugal nearly scored in the 91st minute.

From Fox Sports on the U.S. performance:

But stability along the back-line is arguably the only positive Andonovski can claim from a game in which the forward-line was nearly invisible, the midfield lacked passing accuracy and the United States rarely showed it was capable of breaking down a stout Portuguese defense. This was the second straight game in which Andonovski’s 4-3-3 formation was overrun by a team with numerical advantages in midfield, which nullified the impact of midfielder Rose Lavelle, who was inserted into the starting lineup for the first time. Forwards Alex Morgan (34 touches) and Sophia Smith (36 touches) finished with fewer involvements than every other outfield starter for the USWNT in a reflection of how difficult it was for the Andonovski’s side to maintain possession both generally and, more critically, in the final third.

Yet in the end, a draw was enough. The United States has advanced to the Round of 16, where they’ll face the winners of Group G — likely to be Sweden — this weekend.

On Sunday the U.S. plays a team yet to be determined.

If you want to see goals, here’s yesterday’s victor of the Netherlands over Vietnam, a rout at 7-0.

From yahoo! sports:

The Netherlands thrashed Vietnam 7-0 early Tuesday morning to clinch Group E ahead of the United States as the U.S. scuffled to a 0-0 tie with Portugal.

The Dutch did what the U.S. couldn’t do against Vietnam and found the back of the net time and time again. The USWNT beat Vietnam 3-0 to open the Women’s World Cup; the Netherlands had topped the U.S. goal total within the first 25 minutes.

The contrasting performances of the U.S. and the Netherlands in Group E makes it credible to argue the Netherlands is the team that should be the favorite for the World Cup and not the USWNT. By winning the group, the Netherlands has an easier draw in the knockout rounds. The USWNT is likely going to play Sweden on Sunday.

And the Netherlands has simply been playing better. While the U.S. put pressure on the Dutch in the second half of their 1-1 tie, the Netherlands was better in the first half and has been the better team across its other two games. The 2019 World Cup runners-up look fully capable of making it to the final once again while the United States looks disjointed.

Readers’ wildlife photos

August 1, 2023 • 8:15 am

I haven’t been monitoring the level of the photo tank, but it’s low, and I have about four days’ worth. If you have some good wildlife photos, send them in.  Note that I’ll be going to the Galápagos Islands from August 11 through the 20th, lecturing on an alumni cruise, so I won’t need photos during that time, and you should refrain from sending me posting items, as I might not be able to post. (Hili will continue.)

Today we have several items, first two videos from reader Gary Radice sent on July 22. The videos were taken in Corvallis, Oregon.  Gary’s notes (and those of others) are indented:

I saw these critters at 6:00 this morning when I took my dog out for a walk. The house you see in the background is right across the street.

I had seen a fox occasionally on my morning walks recently but I thought it was just one. Turns out it was probably one of a family of at least five! I believe these are gray foxes (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), based on the black stripe on the tail.

And here is one of them barking. [JAC: Note that a fox bark sounds nothing like a dog bark.]

. . . And here’s an amphibian to identify, sent in on July 3by Linda Calhoun in New Mexico.

John found this toad in our garden yesterday.  Don’t know the species, and have never seen one before.  Most of the toads around here are NM Spadefoots, which are tiny compared to this one.

When he checked last night before closing up shop, it was gone.

. . . ,. We have only had a little rain in the last few weeks.  The spadefoots come out when there has been enough rain for them to spawn in the puddles.  Their eggs hatch rapidly and the tadpoles grow quickly, lest the puddles dry up.  The adults are only as big as a half-dollar when fully grown.

This guy is about the size of a softball, or maybe a little bigger.

If you put it out there, maybe somebody with a lot more expertise than I could tell us.

Name the toad!

From Don Bredes:

Here’s a great clip pf a first-year American black bear cub (Ursus americanus) exploring.  No doubt his mama wasn’t far off.

These were collected on my trail cams mounted 100 yards or so from our place high in the wooded hills of Wheelock, Vermont, in the northeast corner of the state (known as the Northeast Kingdom).

A year earlier I got a few still images of an adult bear in about the same spot.   Might have been the mama.

 

And unidentified hummingbird photos by Emilio d’Alise.  Can you ID these?

2014 Flowers,

2014 Flowers,

Tuesday: Hili dialogue

August 1, 2023 • 6:45 am

Welcome to August! It’s the first of that month, Tuesday (the Cruelest Day) and 2023, as well as National Raspberry Cream Pie Day, a dessert I’ve never had the pleasure to eat.  And August is also:

National Catfish Month
National Panini Month
National Peach Month
National Sandwich Month

Here is the King of Sandwiches: a large pastrami sammy from Harold’s Deli in Edison, N. J. (Right off I-95; go if you’re in the area.). There’s a bread bar for extra bread and a pickle bar for those half sours.

It’s also American Family Day, National Girlfriends Day, Friendship Day, World Lung Cancer Day, Homemade Pie Day, Sisters’ Day, Statehood Day for Colorado, Swiss National Day (Switzerland), World Scout Scarf Day, and, of course,Yorkshire Day, which we’ll celebrate with this classic Monty Python video:

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this by consulting the August 1 Wikipedia page.

There’s a Google Doodle celebrating the FIFA Women’s World Cup today. Click to access:

I just heard that the U.S. tied Portugal 0-0 in the match today. For what that means, go here.

Da Nooz:

*Obituaries first: Paul Reubens, known to everyone as “Pee-wee Herman,” died of cancer at age 70.  Born Paul Rubenfeld, he entertained gazillions of kids with his movies and t.v. appearances, until he was arrested in 1991 for indecent exposure in an adult theater, and then later for weed possession. Nevertheless, he made a comeback. Here he is in the trailer for “Pee-wee’s Big Holiday” (2016).

 

*Oy! Though this is not surprising, a new NYT/Siena poll shows that Trump has a huge lead over DeSantis and his other rivals for the Republican Presidential nomination. We discussed this yesterday morning, but here’s the NYT’s take. First, the depressing stats again:

Mr. Trump held decisive advantages across almost every demographic group and region and in every ideological wing of the party, the survey found, as Republican voters waved away concerns about his escalating legal jeopardy. He led by wide margins among men and women, younger and older voters, moderates and conservatives, those who went to college and those who didn’t, and in cities, suburbs and rural areas.

The poll shows that some of Mr. DeSantis’s central campaign arguments — that he is more electable than Mr. Trump, and that he would govern more effectively — have so far failed to break through. Even Republicans motivated by the type of issues that have fueled Mr. DeSantis’s rise, such as fighting “radical woke ideology,” favored the former president.

Overall, Mr. Trump led Mr. DeSantis 54 percent to 17 percent. No other candidate topped 3 percent support in the poll.

Below those lopsided top-line figures were other ominous signs for Mr. DeSantis. He performed his weakest among some of the Republican Party’s biggest and most influential constituencies. He earned only 9 percent support among voters at least 65 years old and 13 percent of those without a college degree. Republicans who described themselves as “very conservative” favored Mr. Trump by a 50-point margin, 65 percent to 15 percent.

I just don’t get it. I can’t fathom the mentality of anybody who would vote for a lying, blustering authoritarian narcissist, a sexual predator, and probably a crook to boot. The man is a parody of himself: a living “It Can’t Happen Here.” Somebody please explain it to me!

*The war goes on.  Yesterday, Russians killed five in two missile strike on Ukrainian President Zelensky’s home town.

Six people were killed and at least 75 injured in Russian strikes on a residential building and a university building in Kryvyi Rih.The head of the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Administration said one of the dead was found trapped in the rubble of a destroyed laboratory at the university.

Emergency workers in Kryvyi Rih were able to rescue a 10-year-old girl who initially had been reported dead, according to the Ukraine’s Ministry of Internal Affairs.

This, and the strike in Kherson described below, may have been Putin’s retribution for the drone strikes in Moscow and Crimea the other day, no doubt coming from Ukrainian forces.

CNN adds that Russian shelling of civilian areas also occurred in Kherson:

Ukraine says Russian shelling of the city of Kherson has killed at least 4 people and injured 17 others, the head of the Ukrainian President’s Office, Andrii Yermak posted on Telegram on Monday.

“The enemy is hitting residential areas,” Yermak wrote. “The Korabelny district and the central part of the city suffered the most. There are 4 dead and 17 wounded as of now.”

Local officials said Russia had intensified shelling on the city to provide cover for rotating troops.

In the meantime, a Russian official unwisely mentioned the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons:

The White House is criticizing senior Russian defense official Dmitry Medvedev’s comments suggesting Russia may resort to nuclear weapons if Ukraine is successful in its counteroffensive.

A National Security Council spokesperson called the rhetoric “reckless and irresponsible” on Monday. So far, the US has not seen any indications Russia is preparing to turn to nuclear weapons, the spokesperson added.

“The use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine — or anywhere — would be disastrous for the world and would have severe consequences for Russia,” the spokesperson said.

“We continue to monitor this closely, but we have not seen any reason to adjust our own nuclear posture nor any indications that Russia is preparing to use a nuclear weapon,” they added.

This is probably a threat that’s merely bluster, but I wonder what the allies would do if the Russians did employ tactical nukes.

*The heat wave in the American Southwest continues, and scientists now say that July may have been the hottest month (worldwide) in the history of human civilization. That’s about 6,000 years.

Phoenix sizzled through its 31st consecutive day of at least 110 degrees Fahrenheit (43.3 Celsius) and other parts of the country grappled Sunday with record temperatures after a week that saw significant portions of the U.S. population subject to extreme heat.

The National Weather Service said Phoenix climbed to a high of 111 F (43.8 Celsius) before the day was through.

July has been so steamy thus far that scientists calculate it will be the hottest month ever recorded and likely the warmest human civilization has seen. The World Meteorological Organization and the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service on Thursday proclaimed July beyond record-smashing.

The historic heat began blasting the lower Southwest U.S. in late June, stretching from Texas across New Mexico and Arizona and into California’s desert.

. . .Back in Phoenix, slight relief may be on the way as expected seasonal thunderstorms could drop temperatures Monday and Tuesday.

“It should be around 108 degrees, so we break that 110 streak,” meteorologist Tom Frieders said. “Increasing cloud cover will put temperatures in a downward trend.”

The relief could be short-lived, however. Highs are expected to creep back to 110 F (43.3 C) Wednesday with temperatures reaching 115 F (46.1 C) by the end of the week.

Phoenix has also sweated through a record 16 consecutive nights when the lows temperature didn’t dip below 90 F (32.2 C), making it hard for people to cool off after sunset.

I checked in with some friends who live near Phoenix, and of course heard that it was intolerable. They posted a photo of their indoor/outdoor thermometers and humidity measures, and told me that no matter how long you run the cold water tap, the water never gets cold. When I see this I’m glad I’m in Chicago!

*At the Women’s World Cup, co-host Australia smashed Canada 4-0, winning group B and advancing to the knockout stage.

The women’s World Cup continued Monday with the final round of matches in Group B. Co-host nation Australia advanced to the knockout stage with a convincing 4-0 win over Canada. The Canadians would have advanced with a win or a draw. In the other match that was played simultaneously, Nigeria and Ireland finished in a scoreless draw, and Nigeria advanced. Continue reading for highlights.

. . .Hayley Raso scored early in the first half. The Australian midfielder also did so late in the opening 45 minutes. Mary Fowler added a third and Stephanie Catley a fourth for emphasis in the second half as women’s World Cup co-host Australia advanced into the knockout stage following an efficient and comprehensive 4-0 victory over Canada on Monday at Melbourne Rectangular Stadium.

The result, combined with Nigeria’s 0-0 draw against Ireland, put the Matildas atop Group B, setting up a round-of-16 match against the Group D runner-up in Sydney on Aug. 7.

The Aussie women’s team is called “The Matildas”! Here are the game highlights:

Portugal plays the U.S. today.

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili wants to go out:

Hili: Are you coming?
A: No, I have to water the flowers.
Hili: First, open the door for me.
In Polish:
Hili: Idziesz?
Ja: Nie, muszę jeszcze podlać kwiaty.
Hili: Najpierw otwórz mi drzwi.

. . . and a photo of Baby Kulka:

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

From Nicole, an Elizabeth McNair cartoon:

From Divy, with the operant word blotted out (but it’s easy to guess):

From Amazing Stuff: “That awkward moment when you are working on Saturday projects around the house and are suddenly confronted by an ostrich. 😲
Credit: Brian Hollingsworth”:

Masih’s daughter is apparently in Iran, though I’m surprised given that the government could take her hostage. But here’s the photo, and her daughter is, of course, sans hijab:

From Emma Hilton, mocking Jacqueline Rose’s New Statesman essay on why sex isn’t a binary. And yes, the first sentence is taken from Rose’s “argument.”

From Simon:

From Barry. Trust the science.

From the Auschwitz Memorial, marking the beginning of the Warsaw Uprising, which failed and led to the expulsion of the entire civilian population of Warsaw, many sent to the camps:

Tweets from the clear-seeing Dr. Cobb. The first one will make you the life of the party:

A recursion cat with a cat on its nose!

Matthew says the “pearls” are secondary sex characters. They’re bigger in males, and are apparently used in male-male fighting as well as during the weird way that the males bury fertilized eggs.

 

 

Discussion

July 31, 2023 • 9:20 am

I got zero hours of sleep last night. Zero. That’s twice in four days, so you can well imagine that my neurons are somewhat gummed up.  Let’s have a discussion while I recover (and feed the ducks).

Here’s the new result of a new NYT Siena Poll for the GOP candidates:

With all the indictments against him pending, Trump still looks unbeatable.  My question is this: readers have already prognosticated that there’s no way Trump could see jail time. And even if he’s multiply indicted, I don’t see anybody in the lineup moving ahead of him. This is above my pay grade, but can Trump still be elected President, and serve as President, if he’s convicted of a felony?

Also, do you think any of the candidates above can overtake him? If not, will he beat Biden?