What to wear when it's 8°.

It’s 8 degrees outside, BUT AJ DILLON ISN’T COLD 🚫🥶@Packers RB @AJDillon7 just joined Peacock Sunday Night Football Final. pic.twitter.com/O2T2MwHXIk

— Peacock (@peacockTV) January 3, 2022

"[T]o argue, as Liz Cheney and Nancy Pelosi do, that Trump didn’t have a right to contest the election is to replace the rule of law with the rule of intimidation."

"The Democrats and their partners in the media have used all their assembled might to coerce Trump and his allies into silence. His only crime is that he won’t shut up about the election being stolen. Nor for that matter is he the only one who thinks that the election was fraudulent. Millions of us independently reached the same conclusion. If any of those supporters had turned to violence at the Capitol, they should be appropriately tried, convicted and punished for their misdeeds, but that’s not on Trump any more than it is on the rest of us who encouraged our fellow citizens to work to prevent the installation of Joe Biden as president as long as doubts persisted about his legitimacy."

From "The Big Lie and the Elastic Truth: How to Invent a Coup" by Frank Miele (Real Clear Politics).

ADDED: By "to work to prevent the installation," I believe he means to argue for and pursue legal processes, not to physically obstruct others who are ostensibly pursuing their legal role. If he means more than that, I disagree. As for the idea of keeping going "as long as doubts persisted," there will always be some doubt, as there has been in many past elections. At some point, you need to stand down and allow the new administration to go forward. But, obviously, you can continue to believe that the person installed in power did not really win. You have freedom of thought and freedom of speech. I certainly remember many Democrats believing that George W. Bush did not really win in 2000. And did JFK really win in 1960? We're skeptical! But it's not treason!

"Creasey was in between shifts on Thursday, away from the [dog] day-care and boarding site, when she heard that flames were nearing the facility."

"She tried to get back, driving from her home in Boulder, but roads were closed. She said her boss, the owner of Dog Tag, loaded up a dozen dogs into her car but didn’t have space for any more. Creasey said the owner opened the kennels and all the doors at the facility to ensure no pet would be trapped. Unable to get into Superior, Creasey got to work from her home, calling and updating dog owners, checking in with nearby shelters and mobilizing community members through social media pages to look out for dogs that may have run from the boarding site. In the aftermath of the devastating blaze, desperate pet owners have flooded social media with photos and descriptions of dozens of missing animals, while people from elsewhere in Colorado have driven into the area to help search on foot — eager to find the beloved cats and dogs of families that may have lost everything."

From "Frantic search for pets underway as Colorado takes stock of fire devastation/After a half-day search effort, 40 dogs that were staying at a boarding facility in Superior, Colo., when the flames erupted were accounted for" (WaPo). To underscore what's in the headline: All the dogs were found.

Imagine having responsibility for so many animals and attempting to get as many as possible into your car — in some way that would make it possible to undertake a stressful drive — and deciding that's all you're going to put in the car and that the best you can do for the rest is to leave their cages open. There were 40 dogs, and the owner got 12 of them into her car, so 28 dogs were left to fend for themselves as the fire blew in. They all survived.

ADDED: If you had 40 dogs, 1 car, and only a few minutes to load dogs into your car, how would you choose which dogs to go in first and at what point would you stop loading based on the situation in the car? Let's presume the fire isn't so close that you have to stop what you're doing and drive because of imminent burning and smoke.

"The moral price of life in a fallen world was not a thought exercise for Simmons [DMX], who died this past April of a cocaine-induced heart attack."

"Born in Mount Vernon, N.Y., in 1970, he was the only son of Arnett Simmons and Joe Barker. Barker left, leaving Simmons — a teenager — to raise her child alone in Yonkers. She struggled with how to raise a Black son amid the poverty of the School Street projects, and subjected him to outrageous abuse. In a 2019 interview with GQ, Simmons recounted being beaten so badly by Arnett that she knocked his teeth out; he was 6 years old. The mistreatment cloaked his life in almost total, grinding fear.... The abuse begot criminal and antisocial behavior — Simmons once stabbed another kid in the face with a pencil — which in turn triggered more abuse. One summer, trying to discipline Simmons, Arnett locked him in his bedroom for months. He was allowed to leave only for bathroom breaks. In 1983, Arnett effectively severed their relationship when she took him to the Children’s Village group home on the pretense that they were just visiting. It was a trick: She left him there. 'Right then and there... I learned to just put away, conceal, bury whatever bothered me. End of story. I think another side of me was born right there, that enabled me to protect myself.'"

From "DMX/His music seethed with aggression and the kind of pain Black men rarely get to air in public" in "The Lives They Lived" — the NYT collection of essays about people who died last year.

"In 2016, on his way to California for a series of concerts, [Arlo] Guthrie had a stroke. Ms. Ladd flew to San Jose, into grateful arms."

"'He said, "I not only want you in my life, I need you in my life." To me, that was when we made a real commitment to each other.'... He had been performing the 18-minute monologue at Carnegie Hall every Thanksgiving for 49 years when he had another stroke days before the 50th anniversary show in 2019. This time, he was hospitalized. But he defied doctor’s orders and played anyway. 'Even if I died onstage, I was going to be there,' he said. A few days later, he woke up at his home in Sebastian, Fla., and had a third stroke. Ms. Ladd... nursed him through his recovery. By the end of the year, he was back on tour. Then came Covid.... Ms. Ladd and Mr. Guthrie were... quarantining in Massachusetts when Ms. Ladd had a stroke on Oct. 3, 2021.

At the 2022 Café...

 ... you can talk about whatever you want.

No photograph, because I avoided the sunrise run today. The "feels like" temperature was below zero.

"These male activists have targeted anything that smacks of feminism, forcing a university to cancel a lecture by a woman they accused of spreading misandry...."

"They have threatened businesses with boycotts... And they have taken aim at the government for promoting a feminist agenda, eliciting promises from rival presidential candidates to reform the country’s 20-year-old Ministry of Gender Equality and Family....

The top 10 posts of 2021 here on the Althouse blog.

This is purely based on traffic, not my opinion of the quality of the post. I'll just observe that a lot of these are about women.

"It is a disgrace that so many women can have been assaulted by so many men, and yet it turns out the only person who will go to jail is a woman."

"Where are the people — sorry, men — who flocked to 'Paedophile Island' and flew on the 'Lolita Express'? The grotty liggers who turned up because they knew he had an unquenchable supply of young, willing women? The pervert bankers who took holidays in his waterfront mansion? The celebs who partied with underage models but 'saw nothing'? The most any single man except Epstein himself has suffered in connection with this case is the mild embarrassment of being snapped with him or, as in the case of Donald Trump, once making the mistake of saying he was a 'terrific guy.' And what will Maxwell get? She could get 65 years. We know, obviously, about Prince Andrew, a terminally fat-fingered chaffering drongo who is slowly being comically lost in the snaky coils of Epstein’s former towel girl Virginia Roberts Giuffre. Will he ever end up in court? Who cares?"

From "Epstein is dead, Maxwell is guilty. Now let’s talk about the men who escaped" by Camilla Long (London Times).

I agree with the substance of this piece. That's why I'm quoting it. That said, I'd like to talk about grotty liggers and chaffering drongo. Those are 4 great words, and I only know "grotty" — short for "grotesque." So let's research. 

It turns out that "liggers" are people who "lig," and "to lig" — which is a dialect variant of "to lie" — means "To idle or lie about (colloquial); also (slang), to sponge, to ‘freeload’; to gatecrash or attend parties." That's according to the OED, which gives us the quotes "It's a time for ligging in the streets and doing your thing, man" (1969) and "The Feelgoods, now ligging and gigging around America" (1976).

So, yes, obviously, these were grotty liggers.

By the way, the OED cites "A Hard Day's Night" as the first recorded use of "grotty": "'I wouldn't be seen dead in them. They're dead grotty.’ Marshall stared. ‘Grotty?’ ‘Yeah—grotesque.’"

On to chaffering drongo. To "chaffer" is to bargain or haggle. And to call someone a "drongo" — originally a type of bird — is to say they are a stupid fool. Fine to say that about Andrew, but it's a bit unfair to disparage the bird, which seems rather smart:

"Sweats were Out! Dresses and heels were In! The notion of 'revenge dressing' — dressing up to make up for lost time, and to spite a virus that has no feelings — took hold."

"But then: delta. And after that: omicron.... So now the question is no longer what we will wear post-pandemic, but whether there will be a post-pandemic at all. We seem doomed to exist somewhere in the murky middle for at least another season, and hybrid work arrangements may keep us in the soft-pants space even longer. Rather than whiplashing back to expensive and impractical clothes, forecasters are seeing people dressing more for the version of themselves that they’ve discovered over the last 22 months... Key phrases are 'elevated loungewear' (coordinated sets in luxe fabrics) or 'relaxed suiting' (slightly oversize and slouchy suits with forgiving, four-way-stretch fabrics) or 'workleisure' (bike shorts paired with button-downs; nap dresses; house shoes).... Among those pandemic discoveries is mortality: Life’s too short to wear uncomfortable clothes, but it’s also too short to wear boring clothes. That might mean playing with gender norms, or wearing brighter colors to signal hopefulness, or deciding to never again press our toes into stilettoes. As for that 'revenge' attire, remember the timeworn breakup advice: Living well is the best revenge."

From "The ideas and arguments that will define the next 12 months" (WaPo).

As noted, the virus has no feelings, so "revenge" is misplaced... unless you're talking about revenge against the people who are imposing limitations and requirements on you. But these people don't care if your waistband binds or your shoes pinch. You're only hurting — or soothing — yourself.

I considered going on about "revenge," but I've been blogging daily for 18 years — as of 12 days from now — and I'm sure I've already done that. Yes. Here. Quoting Wikipedia:

"I literally have no friends. I wanted to go out today and i wanted to text someone if they’re down to do something fun. BUT then i realized i have no one to ask."

Says someone in the subreddit r/offmychest. 

There are 374 comments there right now, and nearly every one is "same" or a variation on "same." Some of the "same"s add that they have a spouse who is their best friend, but other than that, absolutely no friends. 

There's also the variation that sounds like a line from the Police song "Message in a Bottle": Seems I'm not alone at being alone.

500 years of hair.

Relying on artwork — historical portraits — and her own very long hair, Morgan Donner takes us on a 500-year journey:

 

The level of commitment here is impressive — as vividly demonstrated at 6:38! And 12:10! And 17:40!

AND: The end is truly nervy — beginning at 41:38.

"Beijing’s commitment to step up purchases of U.S. goods and services under a 2020 trade pact expires Friday with China expected to miss its targets by a wide margin..."

"... creating a dilemma for the Biden administration as it calibrates a response. The White House could potentially reinstate certain tariffs that were cut as part of the trade deal, but that could backfire if China cut back U.S. purchases or took measures against American companies doing business there. Alternatively, the U.S. could ignore the shortfall, which could send a signal to Beijing that it won’t face consequences.... 'The Biden administration is tied in knots by their own lack of clarity about how they evaluate the problem and the potential solutions,' said Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies."

From "Beijing Fell Short on Trade Deal Promises, Creating Dilemma for Biden/China missed targets for buying U.S. goods, but retaliating could come at a cost to American companies and consumers" (Wall Street Journal).

Do you think the Biden administration is tied in knots by lack of clarity?

I've admitted that I myself would have been a Loyalist in the Revolution, but it's interesting to see how much company I have from my fellow Americans.

From "Republicans and Democrats divided over Jan. 6 insurrection and Trump’s culpability, Post-UMD poll finds" (WaPo).

I'm always inclined to say the government is doing well enough, and you shouldn't underestimate the downside of change and the relative value of working within the system, even if it's time-consuming and onerous. 

Here's my post from July 4, 2016, "In the American Revolution, would you have been a Loyalist?" 

The second commenter asked me to answer the question, and I said: "Isn't it obvious? Why do you think I put up this post. I've admitted it many times. Perhaps not on this blog, but Meade knows." Was that enigmatic?! I know I'd be cutting the king a lot of slack. He's doing well enough, and the alternative is chaos!

It's January 6th Week on The Althouse Blog.

A horror show of an idea for this blog, but it could be easily done, following my usual approach to blogging, because there are so many articles jamming up mainstream media this week. 

What do you think of a week of all Jan. 6 blogging on the Althouse blog?

Do it! You'd do it well, and it would really amount something!

It might be good, but too much of a sacrifice of all the other stuff.

I doubt that you could maintain sufficient variety and substance to make it worthwhile.

You said it yourself, it would be a horror show, but I love horror shows.

To have said it is enough, it would be a horror show. To do it is nuts, and would only encourage the madness of mainstream media.

 

pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE at 12:29 p.m.: You can see that I didn't do it, but let me preserve the voting results. Thanks to the 23% who showed confidence in my ability to pull it off. My own opinion is the second option.

The entire week — month? (year?!) — will be dedicated to the commemoration of last year's January 6th incident.

Get ready. 

In the New York Times, the entire editorial board signs on to something titled "Every Day Is Jan. 6 Now." 

I guess a week/month/year is not enough. January 6th is forever: It's every day from now on. I'm all for examining what really happened and remembering that and going forward in a way that minimizes the chances that people will feel as aggrieved and alienated and that a large gathering can devolve into the chaotic breaking and entering of government buildings. But I'm also wary of the exaggerations, misstatements, and ginning up of grievance and alienation.

I'm saying that having only read the first sentence of the editorial:

One year after from [sic] the smoke and broken glass, the mock gallows and the very real bloodshed of that awful day, it is tempting to look back and imagine that we can, in fact, simply look back. 

Actually, I hadn't read the whole first paragraph. I'd stopped at the word "bloodshed." What bloodshed? I search the page for "Ashli Babbitt," because that's the only bloodshed I remember. No mention of Babbitt. I finish the sentence and move on:

To imagine that what happened on Jan. 6, 2021 — a deadly riot at the seat of American government...

A deadly riot? This exaggeration loses me. You had a huge crowd — supposedly crazed, presumably gun owners — and the violence was breaking into the building. I'm willing to count that as bad, but I cannot tolerate the exaggeration. 

I will push on:

... incited by a defeated president amid a last-ditch effort to thwart the transfer of power to his successor — was horrifying but that it is in the past and that we as a nation have moved on.

You're accusing us of leaving the story in the past and want us to remember, but you're reminding us with exaggeration — I could say lies. So I cannot accept your telling me what to remember — my information is more accurate than yours — and I'm immune to your incitements about what I ought to be doing about it.

This is an understandable impulse....

You know what's an impulse I understand, an impulse I'll attribute to you, since you're attributing an "impulse" to us? You want to help the Democrats win the elections that are coming up later this year. You have a plan to jack up anger and horror and anxiety and you're going to do it all year long.

... rampant lies and limitless resentments... twisted version of reality... existential threat... openly contemptuous of democracy.... the terror of that day... visible and visceral....

This emotive style leaves me cold.