Welcome to Monday, July 28, 2025, as we inch ever closer to the dreaded month of August. It’s National Milk Chocolate Day, and though as I get older I prefer the darker chocolate (all the way to 90% or higher), I still like this brand of milk chocolate:
It’s also National Hamburger Day (again?), National Soccer Day, and World Nature Conservation Day.
Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the July 28 Wikipedia page.
Da Nooz:
*Obituaries first: Tom Lehrer died. At least he had a good long life:
Tom Lehrer, the Harvard-trained mathematician whose wickedly iconoclastic songs made him a favorite satirist in the 1950s and ’60s on college campuses and in all the Greenwich Villages of the country, died on Saturday at his home in Cambridge, Mass. He was 97.
His death was confirmed by David Herder, a friend.
Mr. Lehrer’s lyrics were nimble, sometimes salacious and almost always sardonic, sung to music that tended to be maddeningly cheerful. Accompanying himself on piano, he performed in nightclubs, in concert and on records that his admirers purchased, originally by mail order only, in the hundreds of thousands.
But his entertainment career ultimately took a back seat to academia. In his heart he never quit his day job; he just took a few sabbaticals.
He stopped performing in 1960 after only a few years, resumed briefly in 1965 and then stopped for good in 1967. His music was ultimately just a momentary detour in an academic career that included teaching posts at Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California, and even a stint with the Atomic Energy Commission.
As popular as his songs were, Mr. Lehrer never felt entirely comfortable performing them. “I don’t feel the need for anonymous affection,” he told The New York Times in 2000. “If they buy my records, I love that. But I don’t think I need people in the dark applauding.”
Mr. Lehrer’s songwriting output was modest, but it was darkly memorable. In the tasteless world he evoked, a seemingly harmless geezer turned out to be “The Old Dope Peddler” and spring was the time for “Poisoning Pigeons in the Park.”
Here’s my favorite Tom Lehrer song (I had no idea he was an academic mathematician!), And see one comment below from a reader tangentially involved with him.
*According to a Wall Street Journal poll, Democrats are getting the lowest rating from voters in 35 years. And this despite the missteps and bully (and often illegal) thing that Trump has done. What is going on? (h/t Luana)
The Democratic Party’s image has eroded to its lowest point in more than three decades, according to a new Wall Street Journal poll, with voters seeing Republicans as better at handling most issues that decide elections.
The new survey finds that 63% of voters hold an unfavorable view of the Democratic Party—the highest share in Journal polls dating to 1990 and 30 percentage points higher than the 33% who hold a favorable view.
That is a far weaker assessment than voters give to either President Trump or the Republican Party, who are viewed more unfavorably than favorably by 7 points and 11 points, respectively. A mere 8% of voters view the Democrats “very favorably,” compared with 19% who show that level of enthusiasm for the GOP.
Here’s a time chart of the parties’ popularity over the last 35 years. Both have gond down, but the Democrats more so:
Democrats have been hoping that a voter backlash against the president will be powerful enough to restore their majority in the House in next year’s midterm elections, much as it did during Trump’s first term. But the Journal poll shows that the party hasn’t yet accomplished a needed first step in that plan: persuading voters they can do a better job than Trump’s party.
On the whole, voters disapprove of the president’s handling of the economy, inflation, tariffs and foreign policy. And yet in each case, the new Journal poll found, voters nonetheless say they trust Republicans rather than Democrats to handle those same issues in Congress.
In some cases, the disparities are striking. Disapproval of Trump’s handling of inflation outweighs approval by 11 points, and yet the GOP is trusted more than Democrats to handle inflation by 10 points. By 17 points, voters disapprove rather than approve of Trump’s handling of tariffs, and yet Republicans are trusted more than Democrats on the issue by 7 points.
The only issues on which voters prefer congressional Democrats to Republicans, among the 10 tested in the Journal survey, are healthcare and vaccine policy.
What do we need? LEADERSHIP! When do we need it? NOW! The article suggests that the Democrats may take the House back in the midterms, but not nearly by as much as they did in Trump’s previous midterms. (And remember, Trump can veto anything coming out of Congress.) If we Democrats have policies to articulate (and if we don’t we shouldn’t be Democrats), then we need a credible spokesperson, and then for the Democrats to get behind him or her. Neither of these seems very plausible at this moment.
*From Greg via Brian Leiter, we have an article by David Pozen in Balkanization on how colleges are now being governmentally regulated by “The Deal”. Pozen doesn’t like it, and neither do I:
Earlier this evening, Columbia University announced an agreement with the Trump administration in which Columbia makes a host of concessions in order to restore its eligibility for federal funding. The agreement is already being described as “unprecedented,” “the first of its kind.” These descriptions are true but ambiguous, because the agreement breaks new ground on any number of levels.
For instance, the agreement marks the first time that antisemitism and DEI have been invoked as the basis for a government-enforced restructuring of a private university. The agreement was engineered by a novel collaboration among the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, the General Services Administration, and the White House, which pooled their resources to ratchet up the pressure on Columbia (with some help on the side from the Department of Justice). The agreement is also the first to require a university to fork over money to the government as a condition of receiving money from the government, bringing a new brand of pay-to-play into the world of scientific and medical research.
And let’s not forget that the agreement grows out of the executive branch’s first-ever cutoff of congressionally appropriated funds to a university, so as to punish that university and impel it to adopt sweeping reforms, without any pretense of following the congressionally mandated procedures. Lawyers have been debating the exact circumstances under which the executive branch may freeze particular grants and contracts to particular schools. Yet as far as I’m aware, no lawyer outside the government has even attempted to defend the legality of the initial cutoff that brought Columbia to its knees and, thereafter, to the “negotiating” table.
In short, the agreement gives legal form to an extortion scheme—the first of its kind!—that defies the relevant statutes as well as the constitutional separation of powers and the First Amendment.
. . .This emerging model raises profound concerns not just for universities’ budgets and independence but also for the rule of law. By relying on “particular transactions to effectuate government policy,” scholars have observed in other contexts, regulation by deal bypasses all of the “notice, comments, [and] due process standards that we ordinarily expect from public administration.” While guidance documents may share some of these deficits, they are not actually binding on regulated parties and at least aspire to uphold bedrock legal principles of “generality, clarity, publicity, stability, and prospectivity.” The style of regulation reflected in the Columbia deal is at once far more coercive and far more arbitrary—opaque in development, unpredictable in application, deeply susceptible to personalism and corruption, and only contingently connected to the laws Congress has written. As compared to the familiar fare of public administration, “one-off dealmaking is more about back-door terms, forceful results, and unequal application of standards, to the extent standards exist at all.”
. . . The spread of regulation by deal would be worrisome in any period, but it is especially worrisome at this time and in this domain. Authoritarianism feeds on manufactured emergencies and hardball tactics that give the executive leverage to attack political opponents and compel obedience. Basic research, on the other hand, thrives under stable institutional frameworks, reliable funding commitments, and a climate of free inquiry. Deals like Columbia’s enhance the power of presidents and their allies within targeted universities; sideline Congress, the courts, and most faculty; and sow fear and uncertainty throughout civil so
What worries me about this is that although Harvard has taken the government to court over this dealmaking, the courts seem rather unpredictable in their rulings these days, and what if Harvard loses—especially in the Supreme Court. If that were the case, we can kiss colleges and universities as we know them goodbye, for the government (at least ones like Trump’s) can make them do anything it wants simply by threatening to freeze federal grant money. Oy, what a world, what a world!
*Matthew sent in a link to a Guardian article showing the nefarious traits of evangelical Christians: they are surreptitiously broadcasting Jesus messages to Brazilian tribes in the forest which it’s illegal to contact. It’s called “Missionaries using secret audio devices to evangelise Brazil’s isolated peoples.”
Missionary groups are using audio devices in protected territories of the rainforest to attract and evangelise isolated or recently contacted Indigenous people in the Amazon. A joint investigation by the Guardian and Brazilian newspaper O Globo reveals that solar-powered devices reciting biblical messages in Portuguese and Spanish have appeared among members of the Korubo people in the Javari valley, near the Brazil–Peru border.
Drones have also been spotted by Brazilian state agents in charge of protecting the areas. The gadgets have raised concerns about illegal missionary activities, despite strict government measures designed to safeguard isolated Indigenous groups
This is not thought to be the first recent attempt by missionary groups to reach isolated and uncontacted communities in the Javari valley. Shortly before the pandemic, a group of US and Brazilian citizens affiliated to evangelical churches were allegedly reported to be planning to contact the Korubo people. It was claimed they had used seaplanes to map trails and locate longhouses.
Three missionaries were identified as planning these alleged contact efforts: Thomas Andrew Tonkin, Josiah McIntyre and Wilson de Benjamin Kannenberg, linked to the Missão Novas Tribos do Brasil (New Tribes Mission of Brazil – MNTB) and a humanitarian group known as Asas de Socorro – or Wings of Relief. They were prohibited from entering Indigenous territory by court order during the Covid crisis.
Now it has emerged that missionaries have returned to the Javari valley and surrounding towns, such as Atalaia do Norte, with a new tool.
The first device uncovered, a yellow and grey mobile phone-sized unit, mysteriously appeared in a Korubo village in the Javari valley recently. The gadget, which recites the Bible and inspirational talks by an American Baptist, can do so indefinitely, even off-grid, thanks to a solar panel. Up to seven of the units were reported by local people, but photo and video evidence were obtained for just one.
A message on the device located by the Guardian states: “Let’s see what Paul says as he considers his own life in Philippians chapter 3, verse 4: ‘If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more’.”
The Brazilian government does not permit proselytising in the Korubo’s territory. Its policy, dating from 1987, stipulates that isolated groups must initiate any contact, a stance that made Brazil a pioneer in respecting Indigenous self-determination.
The state also strictly controls access, to protect the Korubo and other uncontacted peoples in the region from common diseases to which they have little or no immunity.
I have just four words for these misguided and criminal Jesus-lovers: LEAVE THOSE PEOPLE ALONE!
*In an article in the that tries to understand why minority voters largely deserted the Democrats in the last election, a NYT analysis seems to avoid blaming the Democrats.
In many ways, the story of Milwaukee’s disillusioned Black voters encapsulates the tectonic shifts in American society that voters of color have faced in recent years. Like many other distressed cities, Milwaukee continues to reel from the foreclosure crisis, the opioid epidemic and chronic funding shortfalls. Together, these problems have created cracks in the bedrock of Democratic support in these communities.
That bedrock was formed over the last 70 years. In the 1960s, as the civil rights movement pressed for governmental action to address longstanding patterns of discrimination and inequality, the national Democratic Party slowly aligned itself with this vision. Landmark legislation on issues like segregation and equal opportunity employment established Democrats as the party that could deliver for nonwhite voters. The party formed alliances with the places and institutions that were pillars of these communities: churches and places of worship, community newspapers, labor unions and other civic organizations where voters of color congregated.
But the America that this version of the Democratic Party emerged from has changed drastically. The restructuring of the U.S. economy over the last 40 years, along with the yawning inequality it has spurred, has disproportionately hurt communities of color. The Democratic-championed civil rights protections and social welfare programs that have defined the party’s appeal to nonwhite voters have proved inadequate in the face of the interconnected crises that define America now. Policies to address residential segregation some 70 years ago can do little to ease the housing shortages plaguing many communities today. The 1965 Immigration Act was not designed to manage the migration driven by economic downturns, military strife and climate catastrophes unfolding around the globe.
And yet, Democrats have largely doubled down on promising relatively modest policy reforms meant to speak to the interests of voters of color. Shana Gray, a cafe owner in Milwaukee, told me how frustrated she had become with Democrats in her community. “‘Oh, just give us your vote.’ That’s all we heard,” she told me. “There was no action behind that. Maybe they were speaking the language of reform for themselves, but the people who had mattered were not feeling that.”
Disappointed in the party that they saw as presiding over these profound economic shifts, nonwhite voters found that the institutions where many of them found their political identities — churches, unions, clubs — have been in decline.
Unmoored from these places and groups, voters of color today are shaped by many new forces, including right-wing podcasts, influencers and social media — some of it specific to individual ethnic and linguistic groups — that have atomized people even within their own community.
. . . . Democrats and progressive advocacy groups remain mired in a debate about whether they need to tack right to stem the hemorrhaging of voters of color to the G.O.P., or double down on the agenda of racial and economic liberalism that originally built the party’s base among minorities. What I’ve found in my conversations is that the forces moving multiracial voters rightward are more often rooted in economic vulnerabilities.
Well, Carville said that years ago: “It’s the economy, stupid.” Yes, the article does say that the Democrats didn’t do enough, but doesn’t say what more they could have done. And it doesn’t blame the Democrats for pushing policies on immigration, women’s rights, and use of language, that were performative but without effect.
Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, things get more and more mysterious. I’m not even sure that Hili is doing the talking here, though there is a photo of her.
There’s no new material today. I don’t know if there will be tomorrow. Sunday revolved around Saturday, Monday stretches out its arms to Tuesday. Dobrzyń is whispering about a reward, or “people are talking.” The editorial team is preparing for a month-long break. Work on the book needs to be accelerated. It’s not yet known whether this will be a full break, or whether dialogue will appear every day as usual. We don’t know anything yet.
Oy!
In Polish:
Nie ma dziś nowych materiałów. Nie wiem, czy będą jutro. Niedziela kręciła się wokół soboty, poniedziałek wyciąga ręce do wtorku. Dobrzyń szepcze o nagrodzie, czyli „ludzie mówią”. Redakcja przygotowuje się do miesięcznej przerwy. Trzeba przyspieszyć prace nad książką. Jeszcze nie wiadomo, czy to będzie pełna przerwa, czy jednak dialogi będą pojawiać się każdego dnia jak zawsze. Jeszcze nic nie wiemy.
*******************
From Stacy:
From America’s Cultural Decline Into Idiocy:
From the Smithsonian Natural History Museum:
From Masih: a woman finds out that her father was executed
heartbreaking! Imagine this: You wake up before sunrise to the sound of the morning prayer call… and learn the Islamic Republic just executed your father.
This is happening every morning in Iran and today happened to this woman, daughter of Mehdi Hassani, a political prisoner… pic.twitter.com/oOt6YyRmlV
— Masih Alinejad 🏳️ (@AlinejadMasih) July 27, 2025
I found this one on Twitter:
Sad but true. pic.twitter.com/8O8Co5sPt1
— Ricky Young (@rickyyo2010) March 12, 2024
From Malcolm: Ozzy Osborne loses his cat:
my fav ozzy clip every cat owner knows this feeling
rip legend pic.twitter.com/MgcToLks0z
— MJ 𖦹 Thrawn’s PR manager (@chimaera_chat) July 22, 2025
From Barry: a turtle becomes all powerful:
Please enjoy this turtle being given the gift of speed, and immediately using it to chase a kitty
— Ben Kahn (also Bee) (@benkahncomics.bsky.social) 2025-07-20T02:32:16.484Z
From Simon: a post by Larry the Cat of 10 Downing Street:
What do you mean the nearest McDonald’s is 20 miles away?! Isn’t Scotland the home of McDonald’s?!”
— Larry the Cat (@number10cat.bsky.social) 2025-07-26T21:48:58.181Z
One that I reposted from the Auschwitz Memorial:
This Polish Jew would be 99 today had he survived. But he was murdered in Auschwitz at about age sixteen.
— Jerry Coyne (@evolutionistrue.bsky.social) 2025-07-28T10:24:45.835Z
From Dr. Cobb. Jeremy Berg, once editor of Science, pondered what to do with the arsenic-life paper, considering whether to retract it (it’s been retracted by Holden Thorp the current editor). But after consideration Berg decided (and I agree) that the paper should NOT have been retracted.
Why I didn’t retract this paper when I was Editor-in-Chief at Science (THREAD 🧵)
— Jeremy Berg (@jeremymberg.bsky.social) 2025-07-27T11:48:13.584Z
Some other posts in Berg’s thread:
