At the Sunrise Café...

... you can talk about whatever you want.

Photo by Meade. I skipped the sunrise for a second day in a row. It was raining. 

"Madonna, who for so long was pushing the boundaries of what women could and should be able to do, has instead become the most powerful avatar of our terror of aging."

"Everything about her appearance signals that she has capitulated to some very punishing beauty standards that insist women’s value lies only in their performance of youth.... After a childhood so influenced by her boldness, and years of being encouraged to express myself unapologetically, I confess I felt a sense of betrayal that she seemed to have finally succumbed to society’s expectations. But as uncomfortable as it can be for me to recognize, I wonder if Madonna isn’t simply once again forcing us to confront some hard truths. That deep down, we are not perhaps as bold or fearless as we’d like to believe ourselves to be. That none of us want to age, or lose our beauty or the power that comes with it. That in the end, we are all vain creatures desperate to hold on to, by any means possible, a shred of youth. Transgression is out; filler is in. Instead of being uniquely, aspirationally free, is she — are we all — trapped?"

Writes Glynnis MacNicol, in "Madonna Has Become an Avatar for Our Fear of Aging" (NYT).

MacNicol is 48. She doesn't really know how we all feel, but I'd just like to say, at age 76, that it certainly isn't youthful to be desperate about clinging to youth. And we're not "all... trapped." If all the singing about expressing yourself has value, it should mean respecting who we really are, not hating it to the point of attacking it with needles and knives.

***

People are talking about Madonna because her new album arrives today: "Madonna’s Confessions II is her best album in 20 years/A celebration of the dance floor that incorporates tributes to her earliest days on New York’s club scene, the queen of pop’s new music is engineered to make you move, or indeed, sweat" (Independent).

"I have a message, that's God's truth, I struggle, a mission, I have something to say, a message to communicate to humanity, to mankind"/"To mankind, my darling, your message!"

Said the old man and the old woman in Eugene Ionesco's absurdist play "The Chairs," which we saw last night at American Players' Theater — "A Comedy About the End of It All."

We settled into our chairs before the crowd arrived, and the 93-minute play is about a crowd arriving and settling into the many many chairs dragged onto the stage by the old woman:

"Democrats stopped talking about trans politics long before the court’s ruling this week."

"In June, which is L.G.B.T.Q. Pride month, no Democratic candidate mentioned the word 'transgender' in their TV ads, according to data from AdImpact, a media tracking firm. Their silence may be an attempt to deprive Republicans of campaign-trail ammunition.... A New York Times/Ipsos poll conducted in January 2025 showed that nearly 80 percent of Americans opposed allowing transgender athletes to participate in women’s sports.... May Mailman, director of the conservative legal organization Independent Women’s Law Center, said the ruling was less animating than it might have been a few years ago, because transgender advocacy feels 'less in your face' now, particularly in red states. Ms. Mailman recalled walking into retail stores across the country back when gender was one of the party’s most galvanizing topics and seeing mannequins of transgender people. That sort of display has become less prevalent, she said, as the opinion of most Americans has become clearer. By winning in the court of public opinion, Republicans in some ways lost ground on a potent political issue, she said.... 'It’s kind of like D.E.I.,' Ms. Mailman said.... 'Is D.E.I. gone, or is it hibernating?'"

From "Ruling on Trans Athletes Gave the G.O.P. a Win. Most Democrats Looked the Other Way. While Republicans celebrated the ruling, many Democrats stayed quiet on an issue that had proved divisive in the last election" (NYT).

I don't believe Nina Totenberg's explanation for why she reported that Justice Alito was retiring.

I'm reading "'I am so, so sorry': NPR reporter explains SCOTUS retirement error" (CNN):

"I rushed out of the courtroom after the opinion announcements, and when I realized that the usual rush of folks after a few minutes had not happened, I asked somebody [what] was going on inside, to which the answer was, ‘retirement announcements.’ I didn’t hear the ‘s’ on ‘announcements,’ and I assumed something no reporter should ever do, that you were retiring."

I don't believe she would report specific news about Alito based on a passing 2-word remark in answer to her question about why people are hanging back. Wasn't it already obvious that there could be a retirement announcement that day and therefore that there was reason to hang back and find out? If someone said "retirement announcements" — or "retirement announcement" — you couldn't assume it meant anything more than that people are waiting to hear if there are going to be any retirement announcements.

“It was the worst professional mistake of my more than 50 years in journalism,” she wrote to Alito. “I could go on, but I don’t know what else to say except that I am so, so sorry.”

Say what really happened,  

"The DSA, in fact, seems to despise the Democratic Party. Darializa Avila Chevalier has called Joe Biden a 'rapist' and wrote 'Fuck Kamala Harris'..."

"... on social media. She proceeded to be nominated for a House race in New York last week by Democratic voters who presumably do not all share those feelings. The DSA now includes a growing caucus of supporters in Congress, has mayoral candidates well positioned to win in several big cities, and has plans to throw its weight behind a yet-to-be-determined presidential candidate in 2028. The DSA’s feelings about Democrats encompass not only the party’s leadership but also the philosophical commitments that have guided it since the New Deal: a mixed economy undergirded by democratic values. Chevalier, for instance, joined a post–October 7 celebratory rally and portrayed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a defensive response to Western 'bullying.' She previously called for seizing land and the means of production and has repeatedly praised communism. These positions are not holdovers from the idealism of youth or a bygone 'woke' era. They are a by-product of the DSA’s core ideology. The DSA has become a force in Democratic Party politics even as it has grown more hostile to the party, more illiberal, and more dogmatic...."

I'm reading "There’s Nothing Democratic About These Socialists," by Jonathan Chait, at The Atlantic.

At the Sundrop Café...

... you can talk all night.

Photos by Meade today. I slept in after the play.

"'It’s respectability politics at the end of the day, and Black women know this'..."

"... said Cyndia Robinson, who owns Cure Nailhouse in Detroit. 'We’ve been dealing with this our entire lives. We’ve been told our hair, nails, bodies, clothes are too much.' She also emphasized that salons are about more than beauty. Nail salons, she said, can be spaces where culture is 'protected and passed down.' 'When we decide that these spaces don’t matter,' she said, '“we lose rooms where women survive and take care of each other.'"

From "When Did Bare Nails Become a Status Symbol?/From a 'Love Story' plotline to runways and street wear, minimal or nude nails are everywhere" (NYT).

From the comments over there, there's this, from a guy called Norman:

"Melat Kiros, a 29-year-old democratic socialist... unseats a 15-term incumbent and further propels the insurgent coalition..."

"... that swept a series of congressional contests last week in New York. Ms. Kiros, an immigrant and first-time candidate, was born the year after [Rep. Diana] DeGette, 68, took office. Her victory in the solidly Democratic district [Denver] all but ensures her election in November.... Her opposition to U.S. support for Israel was also a cornerstone of her campaign and central to her political identity.... In her campaign biography, Ms. Kiros highlighted the fact that the Manhattan law firm where she once worked had fired her in 2023 after she refused to take down a letter that raised questions about Israel’s historical legitimacy, defended pro-Palestinian campus protesters and challenged the firm’s response to activist law students. She has faced criticism for declining to call antisemitic a fatal firebombing attack in Boulder, Colo., on people who were marching in support of Israeli hostages...."

The NYT reports.

Here's the Axios report, "House Dems rocked by another socialist upset: 'Wake up call'":

Be a mermaid.

We drove out to Spring Green last night to catch the American Player's Theater production of Chekhov's "Uncle Vanya."

It was 90°, but the sun was setting and there was a breeze. There were also about 100 women waving fans for the entire 3 hours, even after it got dark and cooled down. Just the idea of the heat is hard to take if that's what's stuck in your head.

We got to our seats a half hour early, and I used my time well by reading the beginning of the play, in the translation I blogged about yesterday. It was $16 in the (air conditioned) gift shop.

The play has 8 characters — 4 male, 4 female — and it's good to know in advance how they all relate to each other. It's hard to put the pieces together on the fly, listening in real time to the actors, who, by the way, did a great job even as they were bundled in heavy costumes, often huddling inside blankets.

Uncle Vanya is only the uncle to one person

"[Elon Musk] is reported to have told one of his children’s mothers he wants to use surrogates to 'reach legion level.'"

"In the meantime, he has goaded the competition. In response to a post about [Russian billionaire Pavel] Durov notching triple-digit offspring, Mr. Musk replied, '"Rookie numbers lmao" — Genghis Khan,' a nod to the Mongol leader’s supposed millions of descendants. What drives these men to reproduce at an industrial scale? Mr. Musk’s reference to Genghis Khan holds one clue.... Like kings of earlier eras who claimed divine lineage, many of these men hold their own bloodlines in exalted regard. Mr. Musk, who in 2021 changed his job title at Tesla to 'technoking,' has said he wants smart people — or even just rich people, according to a report in Business Insider — to have more children. One of the mothers of his offspring, an executive in his business, told his biographer that he encouraged her to have kids and suggested he be her sperm donor...."

From "Is Kidmaxxing the Ultimate Status Symbol for Ultimate Wealth?" (NYT).

"Technoking" is not a gerund. I can't believe I spent time trying to understand "to technok" as a verb. The "ing" goes with the K. It's "Techno King."

You know, "nok" isn't just the NYSE stock ticker for Nokia. It's the genus of the bare-faced bulbul (Nok hualon). The Nok were an ancient African people, known for their terra cotta sculptures.

And never forget the Nixies — Danish: nøkke, Norwegian: nøkk, Swedish: näck; Icelandic: nykur, Faroese: nykur; Finnish: näkki. These were "male water spirits who play enchanted songs on instruments, luring women and children to drown in lakes or streams." 

So, ladies, resist the nøkk, the techo-nøkk, the technoking. No kings! No nøkkings. Maintain a no-nøkk policy.

"The justices did find unanimity 45 percent of the time, up two points from last term. They joined together, for instance..."

"... to say a Texas man could not be prosecuted for violating a law banning drug users from gun possession merely because he frequently used marijuana, and they agreed that a New Jersey anti-abortion group could bring a challenge in federal court to government efforts to seek its donor list. There were also examples of ideologically diverse lineups during the term. In a 5-to-4 vote on Monday, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberals in supporting Mississippi’s grace period for late-arriving mail-in ballots, rejecting a push by the Trump administration to invalidate a state law. Justice Barrett also joined Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion this week to uphold birthright citizenship on constitutional grounds. Mr. Trump appointed Justice Barrett to the court in his first term, and her tendency to occasionally rule against his priorities has drawn harsh criticism from the president’s allies. Justice Gorsuch, who has a libertarian streak, also aligned at times with his colleagues on the left, more often than he has in the past.... But even so, a conservative bloc routinely controlled the outcome in cases large and small, with the center of the bench shifting considerably to the right...."

From "Despite Some Losses for Trump, Supreme Court Delivers Enduring Conservative Wins/The justices pushed back on some of President Trump’s signature moves, but they also expanded presidential power and supplied victories on long-sought conservative goals" (NYT).

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you want in the comments.

"Experts said that the decision would immediately cut into one of the Democratic Party’s critical financial advantages in television advertising."

"That’s because federal law requires that television broadcasters give political candidates low advertising rates, but extends no such requirement to super PACs, which are often charged double, triple and even four times as much for the same television time. Republicans in recent election cycles have been more reliant on super PACs and national party committees than Democrats, whose candidates have tended to out raise Republicans and who therefore often have been able to take advantage of the lower television ad rates. Allowing unlimited coordinated spending between candidates and parties would essentially permit both to take advantage of the lower rates...."

From "Supreme Court Lifts Spending Limits on Political Parties and Candidates/Republicans had asked the court to strike down restrictions on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates" (NYT)(gift link).

"I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN!"

Signed, "President DONALD J. TRUMP."

On Truth Social.

"In this new adaptation of Chekhov’s text by Nate Burger, Astrov calls himself a 'weirdo.'..."

"Burger has adapted the translated text with clarity and a sense of humor. I can’t recall ever hearing 'yada yada yada' in Chekhov before."

From "APT’s 'Uncle Vanya' drowns existential despair in vodka" (Capital Times).

APT = American Players Theater, in Spring Green, Wisconsin.

It's finally here.

It's finally here, folks! It's Wisconsin Kringle Day!

So, pick up a Kringle—or two, t'ree to share—and celebrate this iconic Wisconsin delicacy. pic.twitter.com/lUV0zZ9arR

— Governor Tony Evers (@GovEvers) June 30, 2026

"A transgender woman penalized for being perceived as aggressive has experienced discrimination 'on the basis of sex' just as much as a cis-gender woman has, no matter that the transgender woman’s behavior matches expectations of her sex assigned at birth."

"Either way, the institution has imposed its gender-based expectations upon her. And either way, the institution may have violated Title IX. In short, the majority is wrong to suggest that the term 'sex' in Title IX ' cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex.' Title IX makes room for individuals to live in the gender they choose; it cares not just about sex assigned at birth but also about individuals’ ability to match (or not) their gender presentation to their gender identity."

Writes Justice Jackson, in West Virginia v. B.P.J.

But what is "gender identity" if it stands apart from gender stereotypes? What is being identified with?

NPR got something very right and wrong or just very very wrong.

But if you go to the link now, you get this:

Is this what Justice Thomas was so jovial about yesterday?

Justice Brett Kavanaugh — who has long coached girls' basketball teams — channels the emotions of female athletes.

From his opinion for the majority in West Virginia v. B.P.J.,  allowing states to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex:

Some might ask: What is the harm in allowing an additional athlete to compete in women’s or girls’ sports? That sentiment, though understandable, misunderstands the nature and reality of sports. 

Sports are highly competitive and generally zero sum. At almost every turn, someone wins and someone loses. Every athlete who makes a team takes a roster spot from another athlete. Every player who earns playing time reduces the playing time of a teammate. Every player who makes the starting lineup sidelines another who remains on the bench. Every competitor who wins a race or competition deprives another athlete of that victory, or medal, or prize. Every team that wins because of an added player means that another team has lost because of that added player. Every player who makes all-conference beats out another player who does not. Every student who earns an athletic scholarship takes that opportunity away from another student. And so on. 

Women and girls who play sports care deeply about all of those things. They obsess about them.

The Supreme Court is about to hand down its last decisions of the term.

Here's the live blog at SCOTUSblog.

And here's where to get the text of the opinions immediately, starting in a few minutes, at the Supreme Court's website.

UPDATE: West Virginia v. B.P.J.: "Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex, and West Virginia has permissibly maintained female sports for biological females consistent with Title IX." Kavanaugh has the opinion joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett. Thomas and Gorsuch have concurring opinions. There's an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, by Sotomayor that is joined by Kagan and Jackson, and then Jackson has an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part. To what extent is this unanimous? 

From the Kavanaugh opinion: "In short, States are not required to conduct an individual-by-individual comparison of the physical and athletic capabilities of all biological males in order to satisfy intermediate scrutiny. Intermediate scrutiny permits a sex-based classification that, as here, is 'not invidious, but rather realistically reflects the fact that the sexes are not similarly situated in certain circumstances.”

UPDATE 2: "FECA’s political-party coordinated-expenditure limits violate the First Amendment." The case is National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Committee. Another Kavanaugh opinion. It's joined by the 5 you'd expect to join, and the 3 dissenters are then, as you'd know, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson. 

UPDATE 3: Birthright citizenship survives. Here's the opinion, Trump v. Barbara. Roberts writes the majority opinion and is joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson. Kavanaugh writes an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part. Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch all write their own dissenting opinions, with Gorsuch also joining the Thomas opinion. 

From the Roberts opinion: "If Congress intended to limit American citizenship to the children of those domiciled in the United States, nothing in the succinct language of the Citizenship Clause conveyed that design. Words appearing frequently in the Executive Order—'mother,' 'father,' 'lawful,' 'temporary'—are absent from the Clause. For a simple reason: they did not matter. And while the Clause does ensure state citizenship attaches for U. S. citizens in 'the State wherein they reside,” Amdt. 14, §1, the explicit invocation of residence for state citizenship only highlights its absence from the criteria for U. S. citizenship. See Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 74 (1873) (a person can 'be a citizen of the United States without being a citizen of a State'). When the principal dissent does grapple with the operative legal text—'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States—it has little to say...."

Also from Roberts: "Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to 'every free-born person in this land.”' Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., at 600 (Sen. Trumbull). We keep that promise today."

UPDATE 4: From SCOTUSblog: NPR is announcing that Alito is retiring -- but still has not been confirmed... "Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the Supreme Court's opinion reversing Roe v. Wade, is retiring, the court announced Tuesday."

"[T]he court overruled its 91-year-old decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States... [M]ore broadly, Monday’s decision was a major victory for proponents of the 'unitary executive' theory..."

"... the idea that the president should have complete control over the executive branch. Under this theory, the president should be able to fire any member of the executive branch, and laws – like the one that the court struck down – that restrict his ability to do so violate the separation of powers. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts contended that 'the President must have the assistance of officers he can trust. Although it is up to the Senate to decide whether to confirm those with whom the President would prefer to work, neither Congress nor the courts may saddle him with those with whom he cannot work. Subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him. Then, and only then, can they remain accountable to the President, and the President to the people.'..."

I'm reading "Supreme Court allows Trump to fire FTC commissioner and overturns major restraint on presidential power" by Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog, writing about yesterday's Trump v. Slaughter.

"In a 36-page opinion... Roberts first emphasized that the Constitution gives the president '[t]he executive Power,' as well as the responsibility to 'take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.' The Framers of the Constitution, Roberts explained, wanted to create a system in which the one person, the president, was in charge of the executive branch. The officials who work for him, Roberts continued, are there to help him, but the president must be able to fire them if they are not performing well – so that he can carry out his own job.

"To feed its millions of troops in World War II, the military turns to food science. Orange juice is reduced to concentrate, potatoes are dried into easily reconstituted flakes..."

"... and Cheddar is dehydrated and pulverized. But the war’s end leaves mountains of surplus cheese powder. Charles Elmer Doolin, riding high on the success of the Fritos he created 16 years earlier, fries extruded puffs of cornmeal and coats them in the powder. Dozens of other food companies take advantage of food technology developed for the war effort, ringing in the heyday of ultraprocessed foods."

That's the NYT, selecting Cheetos to represent the 1940s, in "1776 – 2026/The Pursuit of Hungriness: 250 Years of American Food Innovation" (gift link).

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you like in the comments.

Waiting on the Supreme Court.

Following the live chat at SCOTUSblog: "The cases still to be decided: birthright citizenship; the president’s power to fire the heads of independent agencies; the transgender athletes cases; two election law disputes; and whether a geofence warrant violated the 4th Amendment."

The full text of new opinions will be available here, at the Court's website.

ADDED: We have Watson v. RNC:  "The federal election-day statutes do not prevent Mississippi from counting absentee ballots postmarked by election day but received up to five days thereafter; nothing in the federal election-day statutes requires ballots to be received by election day." That's written by Justice Barrett and joined by the Chief and Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson. Dissenting are Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh.

Next is Chatrie v. United States: "Police officers conducted a Fourth Amendment search when they acquired Chatrie’s location data from Google because an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his cell-phone location information. Justice Kagan writes the majority opinion, joined by the Chief and Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Jackson. Justice Gorsuch writes a concurring opinion, and Justice Alito has a dissent joined by Thomas and Barrett. From the Kagan opinion:

Consider just a few trips that a person is apt to think “indisputably private”: to “the psychiatrist, the plastic surgeon, the abortion clinic, the AIDS treatment center, the strip club, the criminal defense attorney, [or] the by-the-hour motel.” And unlike a GPS device, Location History enables police officers to focus on precisely those sites—to see, in a given time block, who shows up. Similarly, Location History—even two hours of it—allows officers to target one-off events of potential interest: a gun show, say, or a political rally....

From the Gorsuch concurrence:

I might have hoped that the Court would have pursued a more traditional approach to the Fourth Amendment today. But look carefully and you will see hints of it at work even in the Court’s opinion. Why is the Court so protective of Location History data, email, and electronically stored photos and calendars? Because, it turns out, “a user reasonably understands” all those things “as his own.” Put another way, they are his effects. And why does the Court hold Mr. Chatrie’s effects protected by the Fourth Amendment even though a third party stores them? Because, the Court says, those effects remain his “even though [they are] stored on Google’s servers.” Put another way, entrusting your effects to a third party for certain agreed purposes doesn’t mean they are no longer yours....

Now, we get the last opinions of the day, Cook and Slaughter, the cases about the President's power to fire heads of independent agencies. David Lat at SCOTUSblog: "In terms of their bottom lines at least, Slaughter and Cook came out as many expected. 'The Fed is different' carried the day."

"I’m pleased that the D.C. police recognize their part in violating my rights."

Said Sam O’Hara, quote in "Man who played Star Wars music at National Guard members receives settlement/The ACLU announced it had reached a financial agreement with the D.C. government and four of its officers, resolving part of the case" (WaPo)(gift link).

"At a time of fierce debate over how to teach American history, particularly around issues of race, the Freedom Trucks weigh in squarely on one side of the argument..."

"... telling a patriotic, positive story of core American values and exceptionalism. They stand in sharp contrast to liberal efforts in recent years — in classrooms, museums, national parks and media — to lift up discussion of systemic racism and highlight chapters where America has failed to live up to its ideals."

From "Trump-backed ‘Freedom Trucks’ tell a sanitized story of the country’s founding/At a time of fierce debate over how to teach American history, the mobile exhibits weigh in squarely on one side of the argument." (WaPo)(gift link).

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you like in the comments.

"These aren’t like some vague hallucinations, these are like three-dimensionally-rendered, highly-detailed figures inhabiting your exterior world."

"And they’re also interacting with objects in the real world — like crawling up chairs and tables or under doorways.... The little people are said to typically like teasing, playing with or harassing the person seeing them.... Everyone knows that this mushroom has this property and can make you see little people, but they’ll continue to eat it anyway, because they’re just not afraid of that effect."

Said University of Utah researcher Colin Domnauer, quoted in "New magic mushroom makes users see tiny ‘gnome’ people — scientists have no idea how it’s doing that" (NY Post).

The mushroom is L. asiatica.

Would you want to see little people running around everywhere?

I remember hearing Joe Rogan talk about this and speculate that the people are somehow really there....

"You know the thing is like is it teaching us something about the human brain or is it allowing you to see something that's actually there all the time?"

"In response to Russia’s war in Ukraine, Central Asian governments have drawn closer together as a bloc, while welcoming Mr. Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy."

"They are seeking opportunities to reduce their reliance on Moscow, even as they tread lightly so as not to cross the Kremlin or antagonize China. 'For the business relationship, it has never been better,' said Jeff Erlich, the president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Kazakhstan, who has worked in and around the region since the late 1990s. 'In my experience, that is clear.'"

From "Kazakhstan’s Leader Deepens U.S. Ties, Saying Trump Was ‘Sent by Heaven’/The Central Asian nation is aggressively courting President Trump’s Washington to counterbalance its powerful neighbors, Russia and China" (NYT)(gift link, so you can try to figure it out for yourself).

That's one of 2 stories about Kazakhstan at the top of the front page of the NYT right now. The other is: "Trump Cut a Billion-Dollar Mining Deal. His Sons Stand to Profit. An agreement between the U.S. and Kazakhstan has given a group of American investors with ties to the president and the commerce secretary access to one of the world’s largest untapped reserves of tungsten."

"Installing AC simply wasn’t the British thing to do. He’d have to break a stiff-upper-lip mentality and make peace with a trade-off..."

".. that Europeans tend to view as taboo: Air-con accelerates global warming. Still, his mind kept wandering back to a Starbucks he had visited in Los Angeles. 'It was so temperate,' he moaned. 'So beautiful.'... In Europe, where homes tend to be older and climes fairer, residents mainly favored cross-ventilation over machines that leaders cast as pricey spewers of greenhouse gas emissions. 'It’s like living in a sealed jar,' one French columnist complained of AC in 1994. 'It’s unbearable.'"

From "European soccer fans enjoy a brief fling with America’s air-conditioned culture/Despite a deadly heat wave at home, many say they won’t permanently embrace Americans’ electricity-guzzling amenity" (WaPo).

Questions: 1. Who says "air-con"? 2. Wasn't that a movie with Nicolas Cage? 3. What would Americans do if they found themselves wrangling with guilt about global warming whenever they indulged in air conditioning.

Answers: 1. The British. 2. No, it was not. 3. Do what half their compatriots have already done and decide global warming is a hoax.

Bonus question: "'Con Air' won a Golden Raspberry Award in what category? Answer: "Worst Reckless Disregard for Human Life and Public Property."

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you want in the comments.

"And the Democrats aren't fighting back.... They didn't beat us, but they'd be victorious against the Communists."

"But they don't have the courage to do so. So, they're turning Communists themselves, becoming a Communist Party. These are not Social Democrats. These are hardcore godless Communists. They're godless Communists. All communists are godless. They don't believe in God. This is the most serious threat to our country since its existence... 250 years ago...."

"A Terrible Thing Happened to My Family," writes Pete Buttigieg.

At Substack.

I don't think he's accusing Child Protective Services or the police of handling the complaint improperly. Should they have done anything differently? Read the essay carefully and tell me what you think. I believe the answer is no.

The police officer, the CPS professional, and the forensic interviewers who spoke to my children were just following procedure and doing their jobs - admirable jobs that must be incredibly difficult every day, protecting the most vulnerable children from the most horrible threats....

The "terrible thing" was not done by the authorities but only by the anonymous person who made a complaint against him. 

Even though the accusation was absurdly and obviously false, and was promptly rejected by law enforcement, I still worry... about how anyone, even in today’s world, could fail to respect the absolutely fundamental principle that whatever you think about someone in politics, you leave people’s kids out of it.

No matter how well-recognized a principle is, there are always transgressors. There's always some outlier person who's going to go ahead and do the forbidden thing. There's some value in expressing outrage, but to express outrage is to tell people how to be outrageous. 

"The connection between narcissistic personality traits and wanting people in the office full time is not coincidental — it’s causal."

"In one experiment, we got leaders to reflect on the role that a bold, assertive ego played in the success of Steve Jobs as Apple’s chief executive and Larry Ellison as Oracle’s. After participating in that exercise, leaders were more likely to oppose remote work.... [I]ndividual leaders who reject remote work are necessarily egomaniacs.... But our data does show that overall, self-centered leaders tend to struggle with the idea of employees making independent choices about where to work.... Remote work also prevents leaders from basking in the glow of employee reverence.... Instead of rapt attention, they’re met online with boredom, fatigue and interruptions from partners, children and pets.... Sycophantic reassurances from employees just don’t have the same effect if they’re on Slack...."

From "The Secret Reason Bosses Want Everyone Back in the Office, Every Day of the Week" (NYT).

Doesn't seem like much of a "secret"!

I see some potential for turning all these criticisms around into attacks on the employees. They are worse when they are working at home. They are beset with boredom, fatigue and interruptions. It's not that the boss wants them in the office to fawn over him but that he wants them on task and working hard. It's not narcissistic of him to want what they're paid to do.

"How the Reflecting Pool Turned Green.... Bulky 'nanobubbler' machines were carted off ahead of a promotional event for President Trump’s Ultimate Fighting Championship birthday party."

The NYT reports.

The decision to remove the water-treatment systems, which has not previously been reported, was one of several missteps that have plagued Mr. Trump’s $16.4 million renovation of the Reflecting Pool. There have been no-bid contracts, peeling strips of waterproof coating in Mr. Trump’s handpicked shade of “American flag blue,” and even a dead duck floating in the water (though it is not clear if the renovation had anything to do with the duck’s demise). In recent days, the water has become clear again, reflecting the sky and the surrounding monuments. The temporary nanobubblers have been replaced with more discreet, permanent purification systems. Still, the Park Service plans to drain the pool again soon to fix the peeling coating....

A phrase I didn't think I'd ever heard used as a slur turns out to have been slung as slur in the most important movie in the history of this blog.

Remember the post from a few days ago about the lawsuit involving a woman who allegedly bared her chest and said "I bet your little Asian, fish head wife doesn’t have these cannons." I didn't believe anyone would say that, in part because I didn't recognize "fish head" as a standard slur.

But now I see that I had heard it before, because I'd seen the movie "Gran Torino." Twice. In fact, "Gran Torino" is the most important movie in the history of this blog. Click the tag — "Gran Torino" — and start at the bottom, the earliest post, to relive the movie's interweaving with my life story. 

I've updated the old post now, based on this email from a reader: "In the Clint Eastwood Movie Gran Torino, there is a scene where he is invited to party by the girl he has befriended. The party is next door and everyone (except Eastwood) is Hmong. Eastwood makes a reference to them as 'Fish Heads.'"

Here's the scene:

Madonna shows love/"shows love."

Madonna’s jealousy is adorable, she’s basically saying “I’m the queen of pop, but Kylie’s the queen of cute, and I’m just here for the fireworks.” pic.twitter.com/hb9hvRcDUG

— tino.la (@CakeChutikan) June 27, 2026

A quick look.

"Wow"/"And it's great...."

"Justin Franklin and Kevin Akoto do not know exactly how long they have been in the glass box in the middle of Times Square..."

"... surrounded by enormous LED billboards, flashing lights, hotdog stands and flags — and hundreds of faces looking in at them. 'I have no idea what day it is,' says Franklin, 29. 'I stopped counting after ten,' adds Akoto, 26. 'It’s no use trying.' After beating thousands of applicants, Franklin and Akoto were appointed as the television network Fox One’s 'chief World Cup watchers,' each paid $50,000 to watch every single one of the tournament’s 104 matches over 39 days and post social media content about it.... 'It’s a little weird,' says Akoto, turning around on the sofa to look at the crowd of 100 or so people looking back at him. 'But you get used to it. You wave at the crowd, they’ll wave back sometimes. Or they might tell you to sit down because they can’t see the screen. I definitely have more appreciation for zoo and aquarium animals now — why they don’t want to be out all the time.'"

The London Times reports.

JD Vance went on Bill Maher's show, and here's a segment of what was, I think, an excellent interview.

I've watched the whole thing (on HBO), and this isn't the segment I'd choose, but what am I going to do? The show selects the clips to share. Watch this though. JD gets a big laugh. 

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you want in the commetns.

"When he was first indicted, Mr. Bolton sought to frame the case against him as part of a push by the president to misuse the Justice Department to punish his perceived political enemies."

"The case against Mr. Bolton, however, began in the first Trump administration and gained momentum during the Biden administration, as investigators gathered additional evidence. After the guilty plea, Mr. Bolton’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, compared the case to the 2023 indictment of President Trump, which accused him of mishandling classified information by keeping secret documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate after his first term. The judge overseeing the case against Mr. Trump, Aileen M. Cannon, dismissed those charges before it went to trial...."

From "John Bolton, Former Trump Adviser, Pleads Guilty in Classified Information Case/Mr. Bolton admitted to mishandling classified information and could face time in prison, in an inquiry that spanned the Trump and Biden administrations" (NYT).

"If the bare-chested, muscled mixed martial arts fighters of the U.F.C. match that President Trump hosted on Flag Day were the poster guys for MAGA’s image of masculinity..."

"... then the pregnant women of Trump world are one half of their feminine counterparts. Along with the sheath-clad, lip-filled, pageant-haired Mar-a-Lago set, they offer an image of idealized womanhood that gives literal shape to the pronatalist movement. 'It almost feels like a memo went out,' said Jill Filipovic, the host of the 'Week in Women' podcast. 'They have quite intentionally opted to present themselves as, "I am really pregnant, and this is what women were chosen to do," and they are happy to say that both with their looks and their mouths.' If in doubt, simply consider posts on X and Instagram last month from [Katie] Miller, who was then some nine months pregnant. 'In honor of Mother’s Day,' she wrote, 'a reminder that peak feminism is having babies. The most radical thing a woman can do is embrace her biological destiny.' Along with her words came a portrait taken from the side, in which Miller is shown wearing low-slung, unbuttoned jeans and a black sports bra, her dark hair cascading in waves down her back. Like the stretchy and black knit Milly dress with a tulip on the front worn by Usha Vance for a military mothers celebration at the White House, and the form-fitting gowns worn by Leavitt and Miller to the White House Correspondents’ dinner in April, the photograph placed Miller’s rounded stomach front and center, enshrining her pregnancy for all to see...."

The NYT fashion writer Vanessa Friedman inspects the fecund right-wing bodies in "The Politics and Power of the Pregnancy Image/Usha Vance, along with Katie Miller and Karoline Leavitt, shows how much is said by an expectant silhouette, without anyone saying a word" (NYT).

Here's how Katie induced Vanessa to propagate adjectives:

"The group’s musical cocktail of symphonic arrangements blended with horns and pop was met with particular contempt by Rolling Stone magazine..."

"... which tended to look askance at anything but unadulterated rock, the music historian John Covach said. Writing in the magazine in 1969, Jon Landau said, 'The listener responds to the illusion that he is hearing something new when in fact he is hearing mediocre rock, OK jazz, etc., thrown together in a contrived and purposeless way.'"

From "David Clayton-Thomas, Lead Singer of Blood, Sweat & Tears, Dies at 84/He was also the key lyricist of the Grammy-winning, genre-blending band, whose hits included 'Spinning Wheel,' 'And When I Die' and 'You’ve Made Me So Very Happy'" (NYT).

The headline gives the impression that Blood, Sweat & Tears wrote "And When I Die." In the 7th paragraph of the obituary, Laura Nyro is given proper credit. Save your "when I die" bons mots. Laura Nyro died 29 years ago. 

"[H]er husband forgot her 50th birthday.... said Ruchi, who asked to use only her first name because she is in the process of negotiating her divorce."

"'You’ve put all these things aside because you’re a mom and you’re taking care of a family,' she said.... 'Then you think: Is that all I am good for? When did I stop being a person?' Menopause lent a kind of fury to Ruchi’s midlife turmoil. 'I actually thought I was crazy, because I was irritated at everything,' she said.... 'There was a time when I was like, "Oh my gosh. How are we going to do this? How is this going to work? What is my family going to say?"... I am a strong person. I am a capable person. My family is very, very, very important to me, but I am more than my kids and my husband. I think I kind of forgot that.'"

From "Older Adults Are No Longer Staying in ‘Empty Shell’ Marriages/Rates of gray divorce have risen sharply over the past few decades — and experts have a few theories as to why" (NYT). That's a gift link because there are so many interesting comments over there.

1. When her husband forgot her birthday, the wife remembered that she had forgotten that she was a person.

2. Do you get much anonymity by limiting the NYT to using only your first name when your first name is as unusual as Ruchi? (I did look it up, and I can see that in India, it is a very common name.)

3. From the anecdotes in the article, I get the impression that when these long-term marriages dissolve, the man finds another woman (to take care of him?) and the woman embraces independence. 

4. From the comments over there: "This article contains the second reference I’ve seen recently to menopause as the cause of women becoming intolerant. I feel like that’s a slippery slope. I offer for consideration the fact that many, many women in our society are expected to carry loads that are unreasonable. I think that might contribute to 'intolerance' more than any hormonal shifts. And I believe such intolerance is valid."

This morning's highly exalted sunrise.

Those are 2 of my pictures. More to come later. And here's one of Meade's videos:

"Therapy didn’t work for you. But church does," said Usha to JD Vance.

Quoted in JD's new memoir, "Communion" (commission earned).

Did he need therapy and what's the story of its not working on him?

My traumatic childhood had made me resentful and left me with awful conflict management skills. I would overreact or withdraw—fight or flight!—over minor transgressions.... Because of Usha, I attended a few therapy sessions at the Yale student health clinic. The therapist I spoke with was a good guy, but I found therapy too uncomfortable. I didn’t like to talk to my own girlfriend about how crazy my homelife was, so why would I talk to a stranger? But there was a deeper problem with therapy as I encountered it. It was divorced from any sense of responsibility or guilt. In one session, we explored an incident that I’ve since discussed publicly: Driving with my mother on a relatively rural road, she loses her temper. She accelerates the car, threatening to crash and kill both of us.... Experts tend to describe unresolved trauma as when a person experiences “disruptive physical and emotional reactions in the present as their body and mind continue to defend against” threats they faced in the past. The gist is that my fight-or-flight response, my temper, and my general resentment about my feelings of insecurity were consequences of trauma I had experienced and hadn’t properly “processed.” And of course, part of that processing was understanding how trauma across the generations was linked. The trauma I experienced at the hand of my mother was connected to the time my grandfather got drunk and beat her. And of course, my grandfather didn’t have it easy growing up in the deep poverty of Kentucky coal country. I resisted this for a couple of reasons. The first is that the framing turned me into a victim rather than an actor.... The therapist’s framing... removed the moral dimension from human conduct.... I was searching for a more satisfying accounting of wrongdoing and responsibility. Of temptation and willpower. Of virtue and guilt.... [M]ost of all I wanted to be a better person. I wanted to be worthy of this woman I was madly in love with. And I began to fear that the past was a prologue: that whatever happened to my mother, whatever destroyed marriages and friendships in my family, would eventually destroy what I had with Usha....

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you like in the comments.

"In its 6-to-3 ruling, the court said noncitizens must fully cross the border to gain the right to apply for asylum. The court’s conservative majority said migrants standing in Mexico do not 'arrive' by 'attempting, and failing, to set foot in this country.'"

From "Supreme Court Allows Trump to Block Asylum Seekers at Border/A policy of turning back asylum seekers at the border was rescinded in 2021, but the Trump administration wants the flexibility to reinstate it as a tool for border control" (NYT).

Here's the full opinion: Mullin v. El Otro Lado. Excerpt from the majority opinion, written by Justice Alito:

This case presents a straightforward question: whether an alien1 who seeks to enter the United States from Mexico “arrives in the United States” when he or she is still in Mexico. In the decision below, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit answered “yes.” That is wrong. In ordinary speech, no one would say that a person “arrives in” a place—for example, a house, a city, or a country—before the person enters that place. The context in which the phrase “arrives in the United States” is used in the immigration statutes at issue here supports an ordinary-meaning reading. So does the presumption against extraterritoriality. We therefore reverse.

 From Justice Sotomayor's dissenting opinion (joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson):

The Court’s illogical interpretation is driven almost entirely by a fixation on a single word: “in.” Words, however, must be read in context and with attention to how they fit into the statute as a whole. The majority ignores the statutory context and history, not to mention the longstanding position of the Executive Branch, all of which show that any noncitizen arriving at our doorstep and seeking admission must be inspected and allowed to apply for asylum, regardless of whether her foot has crossed the threshold....

"The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the Trump administration to end humanitarian protections that have permitted hundreds of thousands of people from Haiti and Syria..."

"... to live and work legally in the United States. President Trump has pushed to terminate the program, known as Temporary Protected Status, as part of his broader crack down on immigration. The program was created by Congress with bipartisan support in 1990 to provide temporary legal status to people whose home countries were deemed unsafe because of war, natural disasters or other crises."

The NYT reports in "Supreme Court Lets Trump End Deportation Protection for Haitians and Syrians/President Trump has pushed to rescind Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands of people from countries convulsed by humanitarian crises."

Here's the full opinion: Mullin v. Doe. Excerpt from the majority opinion, written by Justice Alito:

None of the cited statements by either the President or the Secretary was overtly racial, and in substance all expressed policy views that could rest on race-neutral justifications. For example, one may oppose TPS and favor tighter restrictions on immigration for economic or other reasons that have nothing to do with race. And a person without racial bias can provide a harshly unfavorable description of living conditions in some of the countries with TPS designations....Political discourse by prominent public figures is increasingly couched in terms that would have scandalized the public just a short time ago.... But whatever one may think of the cited statements, they are insufficient to show that the termination of Haiti’s TPS designation was based on the race of the Haitian people....

From the dissenting opinion by Justice Kagan:

The evidence [the Haiti plaintiffs] have offered includes statements by the President so repellent and racially inflected that the majority declines to put them in print....

"These people are not Democrats.... I’m not in that f*cking political party."

"I am totally comfortable in a political party that spends time questioning the policies of the government of Israel. In fact, I’m enthusiastic about that. I don’t want to be in a political party that denies the right of the state of Israel to exist. That’s just not– I just can’t do that."

Said James Carville, quoted in "'I’m Done, I’m Not in That F*cking Political Party': James Carville Freaks Out After Progressives Win Big in Democratic Primaries" (Mediaite).

I think Carville is copying Carlson. See "'I'm out': Tucker Carlson says he's done with the GOP" (Axios).

Madonna has a plan to make you watch this video more than once.

Madonna, 67, turning heads as she steps out in a blue dress in Paris pic.twitter.com/gamqCWmx8m

— TaraBull (@TaraBull) June 24, 2026

"He's completely uncomfortable with this thing being about him. He was just telling me, I think there should be a little less of me here."

Michelle Obama says of Barack and his library:

"He's completely uncomfortable with this thing being about him."

"He was just telling me, I think there should be a little less of me here."

Lmaoooooo pic.twitter.com/8FLeg3XoDm

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) June 24, 2026

Pick the most true statement:

Barack Obama is genuinely embarrassed by the new monument to himself.

Michelle Obama thinks she's a comedian.

These two are so sweet and fun. I love it!

Ugh! I'm embarrassed. America is embarrassed. Terrible!

 

pollcode.com free polls

"The movie, in effect, resurrects [Michael] Jackson, only to remind viewers that he’s gone, fans say...."

"Awa Cham, 28, a content creator in London, agreed, saying via video chat, 'I feel like I went through this whole grieving process again. I was, like, this is not fair, he should be here.' JaRed Cameron, a musician from the Bronx, said by email, 'I cried, laughed, and I cried some more throughout the whole film.' He added, 'It took me about a week to shake off the rain cloud of "Michael" "withdrawal" since watching the movie.' For others, Jackson’s lifelong loneliness and the abuse he endured as a child added a dimension to their sadness. 'Watching young Michael cry alone in the corner of the bathroom made me so sad,' Victoria Tappa, a physician assistant student in Davenport, Iowa, said via email. 'Even writing this, I have tears in my eyes.'"

From "Feeling Mournful After 'Michael'? It Might Be 'Michosis.' Some Michael Jackson fans are experiencing deep, lingering grief after watching the biopic — a potent reminder that he is gone, they say" (NYT).

Sunrise.

It was raining this morning, and I stayed in, but Meade went out. Those are his photos and video.

Write about whatever you want in the comments.

"I was drowning, while all the other moms I interacted with seemed to be blissfully skipping through motherhood."

"'It must be me, I thought — I’m just not a natural mother.' She realized she was anything but alone after receiving her 'first random comment,' she said. 'That comment led me to that reader’s blog,' she added, 'and from there I discovered a whole world of moms. And these moms, unlike any I’d met before, actually understood me! They struggled and shared the same frustrations.' In addition to doing her own venting, Ms. Smokler provided those mothers a forum to anonymously confess their taboo thoughts and experiences...."

From "Jill Smokler, Who Blogged as Scary Mommy, Dies at 48/A mother of three, she turned a whim into an online powerhouse, sharing a warts-and-all look at parenting that attracted millions of readers" (NYT). (Smokler died of glioblastoma.)

"The reason why it took so long was because I was trying to bite through it. My teeth were not letting me get through it. It was like a brand new lollipop."

"So, I was trying to bite, bite, bite. By the time I got to bite it off, it was too late. It was already on TV. I normally cut off the stem. I need something to distract me a bit. I'm playing a kids game and having fun. So, I don’t think it’s a bad look."

Said Yankees second baseman Jazz Chisholm Jr., quoted in "[Yankees manager Aaron] Boone's message to Jazz about lollipops: 'Keep having fun, but be safe" (MLB.com).

Jazz Chisholm Jr. is playing second base with a blow pop in his mouth pic.twitter.com/sJo7B2ZAzq

— Talkin' Yanks (@TalkinYanks) June 22, 2026

ADDED: I'm so pleased to have had a "lollipop" tag already up and going. There are lots of lollipop posts in the archive, e.g....

AND: I think Chisholm's wordy explanation is quite funny and I'm trying to imagine him going on about running with scissors....

Pick one.

The Buddha vs. Albert Camus:

"A woman caught on video emptying a public trash can on the street then stealing it during New York City’s Knicks championship parade was a director at JPMorgan Chase who was fired Tuesday over the incident...."

The NY Post reports.

Angie Báez, 40, was promoted to Executive Director of Community and Industry Engagement for Card and Connected Commerce at JPMorgan Chase more than a year ago, according to her LinkedIn profile. She previously served as Executive Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at New York-based review website The Infatuation, which Chase acquired as part of its broader push into lifestyle and experiential content...

What's "experiential content" and why am I "experiencing" that as bullshit?

Here's the viral video:

@mel_aston Those trash cans didn’t stand a chance 😭😭 I don’t condone the bullying of this woman. I’m not going for it!! #knicks #knicksparade #knicksin5 #nyc #fyp ♬ original sound - Melrose Aston

"What's 'experiential content' and why am I 'experiencing' that as bullshit?" is the one question I took to Grok. If I understand it correctly, instead of marketing the product itself, consumers are invited to picture themselves living some kind of life that somehow relates to the product. The honest restaurant content will, supposedly, be woven together with references to Chase cards. Even though Grok told me "It's not 'bullshit' as a pure concept" — because it can work as a marketing technique — it's obviously a bullshit expression designed to elevate a practice that deserves ridicule.

But you would probably prefer to ridicule this lady who did something stupid and who, you may think, doesn't deserve her job, and you probably think it's her job, her erstwhile job, that sounds like bullshit.

"Schlossberg’s Defeat Dampens Dream of a Renewed Camelot."

That's one of the NYT's front-page headlines about yesterday's primaries. Dream of a Renewed Camelot... Who was still dreaming that dream? 

Here's The Washington Post's front-page coverage of the action in yesterday's primaries:

I'll have to search beyond the front page to see if there's a tear shed for Schlossberg.

Ah, here: "A Kennedy scion loses in a crowded, pricey New York City congressional primary/The Kennedy dynasty won’t be returning to Congress next year." They don't trust readers to recognize the name Schlossberg. 

From the NYT article: "Once considered a favorite, Mr. Schlossberg, 33, landed in third place in a Democratic primary in one of the nation’s most liberal districts, now held by Representative Jerrold Nadler, the veteran Democrat, who is retiring. Micah Lasher, an assemblyman who had been endorsed by Mr. Nadler, won the primary.... Schlossberg poured at least $1 million of his own into the campaign, and had tried to press his case in its closing weeks, including in a lengthy interview with The New Yorker.... “I’m running because I want to pass laws,” he told David Remnick, the magazine’s editor. “I want to pass laws that help the people in this district and in our country.”

Pass laws that help the people... Ever since Ted Kennedy's famous screwup, everyone running for office has known that the one thing you've got to have ready to go is an answer to the question why are you running. And that's his answer, a child's answer: I want to pass laws that help the people.

The London Times stresses the Texan in Elon Musk as it reports the news/"news" that he's not a trillionaire at this precise moment.

Link.

Sunrise.

Write about whatever you like in the comments.

"When asked if Trump was the 79-year-old man in question, White House spokesperson Kush Desai did not say no...."

From TNR.

"He was much less stoked to be assigned by Tina Brown, then editor of The New Yorker, to profile Mr. Trump in 1997."

"Observing him over several months on construction sites, in his Trump Tower office and on a private plane, Mr. Singer concluded that Mr. Trump, in the period before he became a reality TV star, was a man 'who had aspired to and achieved the ultimate luxury, an existence unmolested by the rumbling of a soul.' 'That profile,' [said David Remnick, editor of The New Yorker], 'got everything about Trump 20 years before he ran for president: the vanity, the casual cruelty, the outsized selfishness. It was all there.'... [After a NYT piece mentioned it], Mr. Trump wrote a letter to the editor attacking Mr. Singer as 'not born with great writing ability.' Mr. Singer sent a mock thank you to Mr. Trump for the publicity, which apparently bumped his book higher on the Amazon book charts. He also enclosed a check for $37.82, 'a small token of my enormous gratitude,' he wrote. Mr. Trump returned the letter with an all-caps note at the bottom, reading, in part, 'MARK — YOU ARE A TOTAL LOSER.' Mr. Trump also cashed the $37.82 check, Mr. Singer later said. Mr. Singer framed a photocopy of it for his apartment."

From "Mark Singer, Longtime Writer for The New Yorker, Dies at 75/He joined the magazine’s staff at 23. Among the subjects of his profiles were the magician Ricky Jay and a pre-politics Donald Trump" (NYT).

I'm sorry to hear that Mark Singer has died. You can click on my tag "Mark Singer" to see how he's come up here over the years. What a distinction to have Trump's "YOU ARE A TOTAL LOSER" in your NYT obituary. To continue the all-caps — RIP.

UPDATE: Upon publishing, I clicked my tag. I'm sorry to say that Trump is in every post.

"Supreme Court says Rastafarian can’t sue prison officials over shorn dreadlocks."

WaPo reports. 

This is a complicated case, written by Justice Gorsuch, for a 6-person majority, in Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety. It's about limits on Congress's power to impose conditions as it exercises its Spending Power. The statute is the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, and I assume most of us feel empathy for a Rastafarian prisoner who experiences a routine prison haircutting. The federal statute is designed to relieve prisoners of substantial burdens on their religion (unless the strict scrutiny standard is met). The problem is the scope of Congress's power.

Let's look at the Gorsuch opinion:

"What is clear is that the majority today forecloses future reliance on Sosa and shuts the courthouse doors to almost any claimed violation of international law under the [Alien Tort Statute]."

"That includes torture. See, e.g., Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F. 2d 876, 878 (CA2 1980) (ATS suit brought by plaintiff alleging that his son had been kidnapped and tortured to death in retaliation for the plaintiff’s political beliefs). It includes forced labor. See, e.g., Licea v. Curacao Drydock Co., 584 F. Supp. 2d 1355, 1359 (SD Fla. 2008) (ATS suit alleging that the defendant trafficked Cubans to Curacao, held them in captivity, and forced them to work repairing ships and oil platforms). It also includes perhaps the most universally condemned crime in the modern era: genocide. See, e.g., Kadic v. Karadzic, 70 F. 3d 232, 236–237 (CA2 1995) (ATS suit alleging 'brutal acts of rape, forced prostitution, forced impregnation, torture, and summary execution, carried out by Bosnian-Serb military forces as part of a genocidal campaign'). 'Like the pirates of the 18th century,' whose conduct so concerned Blackstone and the First Congress, 'today’s torturers, slave traders, and perpetrators of genocide are "hostis humani generis, an enemy of all mankind."' Nestlé, 593 U. S., at 647 (opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J.). As to each of these offenses, as to each of these enemies of mankind, the majority decides that there is simply no way that a suit could possibly proceed without offending Congress. Noticeably absent from the majority’s analysis is any evidence that Congress would be offended by these suits. Of course, there may be reasons why allowing an individual ATS suit to proceed would be unwise. That possibility, however, should be addressed on a case-by-case basis...."

Writes Justice Ketanji-Brown Jackson, dissenting in Cisco Systems v. Doe, announced this morning.

"Readin' the classics and pickin' up plastics: Litterature."

I'm a big fan of volunteer litter picker uppers, and why wouldn't it entail reading the classics? 12 more episodes: here.

"In the lawsuit... Rana claimed he was drugged and made a sex slave by Hajdini, who also allegedly made racist claims about him and his wife."

"The most infamous line from the suit was Rana’s claim that Hajdini stripped off her top and said, 'I bet your little Asian, fish head wife doesn’t have these cannons.' JPMorgan and Hajdini have said from that jump that Rana’s allegations are entirely made up. Both defendants argue that Rana should be forced to either stay in state court — or that the suit be dismissed for good, and that he pay legal fees. Hajdini, who has filed a counterclaim alleging Rana defamed her, said her defamation allegation should be argued out before Rana is allowed to file in any new court."

From "The surprising reason JPMorgan lawyers don’t want Chirayu Rana to drop his bombshell ‘sex slave’ lawsuit" (NY Post).

How does that quote even exist? No one would say that, but no one making up a quote should make up something that no one would say. "Fishwife" is a standard expression, but "fish head wife" isn't. And I'll just stop there. It's so ludicrous that it's incomprehensible as a made up quote.

ADDED: "Fishwife" is a standard expression... it has a Wikipedia article:  "A fishwife, fish-fag or fishlass is a woman who sells fish. She is typically the wife of a fisherman, selling her husband's catch.... Some wives and daughters of fishermen were notoriously loud and foul-mouthed, as noted in the expression to swear like a fishwife, as they sold fish in the marketplace. Among the reasons for their outspokenness were that their wares were highly perishable and lost value if not sold quickly, and the similarity of their product to that of others selling the same thing, with volume of voice or colourful language drawing customer attention. Also, managing alone while their menfolk were away fishing for extended periods made them strong and self-sufficient...."

BUT: A reader emails: "In the Clint Eastwood Movie Gran Torino, there is a scene where he is invited to party by the girl he has befriended. The party is next door and everyone (except Eastwood) is Hmong. Eastwood makes a reference to them as 'Fish Heads.'"

Ah! Gran Torino! The most important movie in the history of this blog.

The quote is: "What?! What the hell are all you fish heads looking at?!" Here's the scene:

"I want to acknowledge that the conversation that RFK is trying to have and that we’re having here is not theoretical for me, anyway. And here I’m going to shake my Lexapro."

Says the host of the NYT "Daily" podcast, Michael Barbaro, in yesterday's episode, "R.F.K. Jr.’s Newest Mission: Getting Us Off Antidepressants/The process of 'deprescribing,' in which a doctor helps a patient taper off a psychiatric medication, is now being considered in the development of federal health policy."

I’ve been on Lexapro, an anti-anxiety medication, for at least a decade. It was prescribed by a psychiatrist, but then just became part of my relationship with my general practitioner. I just get it renewed. And I’ve not really been asked to think about how long I should be on it. And now suddenly having this conversation with you is making me ask that question. How long am I supposed to be on it? What would happen if I stopped taking it? Would all the white noise of anxiety that made me want to go on Lexapro, would that return? Or 10 years later, have I outgrown that and I just don’t it because I’ve never tried to taper myself off this to find out who I would be if I weren’t me on Lexapro?...

The guest on the episode, Ellen Barry, asks Barbaro, "what did you conclude about stopping?"

Michael Barbaro: "Me? I don’t that I’ve ever gotten far enough along in the conversation with myself to stop.... It was just an accepted fact in my conversation with the doctor that I was on it, and then I’d probably still be on it for as long as I’m going to be on it.... But now I’m asking myself the question of, are we all infantilizing ourselves in the face of medicine? Should I be asking this question myself? Why should I be waiting for a doctor to ask it? It’s getting a little existential now."

If Michael Barbaro, a man whose whole career is about being thoughtful about miscellaneous things, is only thinking of these questions as he's in the middle of doing his podcast on the subject, what hope is there for the millions of Americans who take these medications as a matter of endless routine?

"Sex’s history, its forms, and its uses all turn out to be far stranger and more various than biologists had imagined...."

"Lixing Sun... a biologist at Central Washington University, begins his story with a protozoan called Tetrahymena thermophila. T. thermophila are tiny—just a twentieth of a millimetre long—yet can reproduce two different ways: by splitting themselves in half or, when they’re starving, by engaging in a kind of proto-sex called conjugation, in which two cells briefly fuse and swap genetic material. The protozoa come in seven distinct 'mating types,' which means that there are twenty-one possible pairings... The common white-button mushroom... comes in eighteen mating types, the fairy inkcap mushroom a hundred and forty-three, and the split-gill mushroom an astonishing twenty-three thousand three hundred and twenty-eight. In organisms that reproduce via the union of types—this group also includes yeasts and slime molds—partners are functionally equivalent and the exchange of genetic material is symmetrical, an arrangement called isogamy. The way Sun tells it, the shift from isogamy to sex as we know it began with a cheat. Some 'crafty' creature figured out a way to game the system by skimping on its reproductive contribution. A two-sided scramble ensued. On the one hand, an edge could be gained by pumping out ever smaller, nimbler gametes; on the other, there was an advantage to be had in manufacturing fewer, larger gametes for the small fry to vie for. Eventually, Sun writes, 'a minor size gap' turned into an 'uncrossable divide.' The 'go-smallers' evolved into sperm-makers; the 'go-largers' into egg-bearers...."

From "What’s the Point of Sex, Anyway? The world’s life-forms reproduce sexually in a bewildering variety of ways, even though scientists still aren’t sure why they bother" (The New Yorker).

"As a Frida Kahlo portrait glared protectively at me over Madonna’s shoulder, we talked past, present, future, prayer, dicks, nutritional yeast, and more…"

Writes Mel Ottenberg, introducing "The Madonna Interview" in Interview Magazine.

EXCERPT:

OTTENBERG: When was the last time you confessed?

MADONNA: Well, every song on this record is—not every song. Some are just joy. “Love Sensation” is just joy. But a lot of the songs here are confessional.

OTTENBERG: What about the last time you confessed in a church?

MADONNA: Oh, that’s been a while.

OTTENBERG: Do you have a relationship with organized religion?

MADONNA: Well, I was raised a Catholic and I’m a cultural Catholic.