The Royal We and Margot

I enjoyed the new Hallmark Channel film about a pair of royals who were pressed together to negotiate a marriage of convenience to bring peace to their kingdoms. She went to America to live a normal life, but her sister married a commoner, and our "spare" had to step in. They turn out to be a good match. 

Hallmark is having a few royal-based films this month. One charm here was that few Hallmark films involving royals focus on female royals. The actress years ago was in a musical medieval t.v. series. 

The actress is Australian, so she has a certain international flavor mixed in with a believable foreign accent. She also has nice hair.

I read a good book on Anne Frank's diary, and it included a reference to her sister's lost diary. I also found a reference to this fictional account of Margot Frank's survival. Good try, but it didn't work for me. 

One problem is that the book has a half-baked explanation of what happened. Margot Frank supposedly jumped off a train to the concentration camp where she died in real life. The plan was for both sisters to jump. Anne, however, did not manage. 

Okay. So, why did people think she died? Did Anne pretend someone else was her sister? Furthermore, why did Margot think her father was dead until the diary came out? She looked at reports to find the others who had died. 

It's okay to suspend belief, but if you go halfway with an explanation, which is not truly necessary given the whole exercise here, go all the way. 

However, there was no report of Otto dying. And, she even stayed for a long time with a friend of her mother's. He had no connections with Otto or his surviving family whom Otto corresponded with? 

(We simply get no sense of what happened when Margot finally told Otto years later.)

If we move past that, the story itself is not too rewarding. First, she finds someone with Peter's name (it turns out "really" she and Peter were an item; apparently, Anne made up her relationship with Peter) in Philadelphia, where she is now living. The book draws out for too long her finding out it isn't Peter.

Plus, a relationship with Peter is not necessary for the plot. Besides that, there's some drama at the law firm she works for (she hides that she is a Jew or a survivor), including a Holocaust survivor who claims discrimination. This provides some dramatic weight but not enough for over three hundred pages.

Again, it's an interesting idea, but it didn't work for me. I do wish to know more about Margot. Each Annex member has a story, including the dentist whose non-Jewish girlfriend and his son from his first marriage both survived the war. 

The book didn't do enough to help us learn about her, and a major thing was unnecessarily made up. 

Western Europe Is Carrying Its Weight in Multiple Ways

One thing that Trump argues is that Europe does not pull its weight, including funding NATO. Do we really want to downgrade our superiority in this area? There is value in being a superpower and having "soft power" by controlling resources and ideas. 

Our military is a major part of our sense of self. Do we want Europe to truly have more power there? Maybe, in some ways, that would be a good idea. Do conservatives really want it? I doubt it.

U.S. and Germany pay the same percentage of the NATO operations budget (under 16% each), with the UK & France combined paying over 20% combined. United States military make up around 38 percent of the 3.4 million combined troops from NATO allied countries. Western Europe is not quite doing nothing.

Europe also gave more aid to Ukraine. Note that U.S. aid will often help the U.S. by involving spending that profits the U.S. If Ukraine relies on the U.S. more for weapons, who obtains the profits for them? 

Europe also hosts a lot of refugees. By the end of 2022, Europe hosted 1 in 3 refugees in the world (36 percent). This often causes difficulties since the U.S. is more of a melting pot. Western Europe is made of individual nations with more ethnic uniformity.

Europe also honors human rights and international law. Finally, Hungary has not done well in avoiding authoritarian leadership lately, but the U.S. twice voted for an incompetent Putin puppet. 

We should have some modesty. Europe will have to step in more now that Trump is in power. Again, there is some value in regional powers having a larger role in regulating their zone of interest. We can say that while respecting what they are doing already. 

The United States has a national interest in playing an important role in international relations, including the use of foreign aid. Let's just say that even if we want Europe to have more of a footprint, Trump doesn't provide the finesse required to balance things out. 

===

Reports are out that Trump will hand down an executive order making English the official language. We shall see what that means. 

Multiple states have made English an official language. Nonetheless, from the very beginning, Congress has not. And, as I have written, that is fine.

Andrew Cuomo: GTFA

We have local elections this year in New York City. 

The first time to regain a Bronx Democratic city council seat (my district). A long time ago, my area had a Republican in the state legislature. As Bronx areas go, we are more conservative. A conservative district office is nearby. Still. This feels wrong. 

More importantly,* a chance to replace Mayor Eric Adams with a better option that is not corrupt and/or a Trump puppet. We are due for a good mayor. There are various good options but no leading option. Mayor Adams is in trouble.

So, in sweeps Andrew fucking Cuomo. My House rep, thanks to a second round of redistricting, is Ritchie Torres. Among other annoyances, he endorsed Cuomo. Torres is a possible challenger to Governor Kathy Hochul, Cuomo's former lieutenant governor. 

Cuomo resigning in disgrace is why we have a somewhat lackluster governor. Torres is not an appealing replacement. He is strongly anti-Trump but has a lot of baggage. Supporting Cuomo doesn't help.

Cuomo resigned in 2021 in the face of multiple scandals. He was accused of mishandling COVID-19 after talking a good game against Trump. His book deal had issues. And, of course:

[He] was accused of sexual harassment and inappropriate sexual contact by multiple women, including state employees. A report by state Attorney General Letitia James found credible claims of harassment from 11 women, and a subsequent report by the Biden Department of Justice found he subjected 13 women who worked for the state to sexual harassment.

Cuomo largely denied any wrongdoing except some bullshit about handling some things badly. A major thing was that he hung around too long and tried to stay on past his sell date. Now, a few years have passed. Will the people accept him again?

He is also talking like a Republican with scare tactics:

"You feel it when you walk down the street and try not to make eye contact with a mentally ill homeless person, or when the anxiety rises up in your chest as you're walking down into the subway,” he said. “You see it in the empty storefronts, the graffiti, the grime, the migrant influx to random violence, the city just feels threatening, out of control and in crisis.

I do not. He also sent a message that he will play nice with Trump:

The former governor also said he was willing to work with President Trump, pointing out he had done so during Trump’s first term, when he was governor, but also said he was willing to push back, both at the president and governor, as well.

The polling is mixed and instant runoff voting helps the concern that opposition will split the anti-Cuomo vote. I fear for the future, though. And, I'm so fucking tired, so fucking tired, of assholes.

I wish they would just go the fuck away. 

===

* I would rather a Democrat hold the seat. 

I also didn't like multiple positions of the incumbent, including a scare tactic regarding a proposed center for former prisoners. And as a Republican, she has positions now that I oppose. 

Republicans have so few seats in the city council, however, that her being there is not too horrible. 

SCOTUS Watch (Link) and Other Things

I will just provide a link to my Substack SCOTUS summary (which provides a form of my Order Watch).

===

Vegans are less upset about the price of eggs. The NY Daily News had a good article on one egg substitute with the fancy name "aquafaba" (literally "bean water"). The substitute is suitable for recipes and cocktails:

A 15-ounce can of garbanzo beans will yield about 5 ounces — give or take — of liquid equivalent to about four eggs. 

For those who like scrambled eggs, there are various products, including Just Egg. Or you can use a type of tofu mixture. People who like sunny side up might have to do some more work, but options are around there too. 

==

I listened (probably re-listened, though I don't recall it) to Bart Ehman's episode on Joseph. He didn't provide a comprehensive discussion, though it was not meant to be. Nonetheless, it is problematic that he didn't reference two things. First, Matthew's birth stories were told from Joseph's point of view.

Second, Mark doesn't reference Joseph. He notes Mark for the fact Mary (and his siblings) reportedly found Jesus's ministry to be off the wall. That would be strange if we follow the assumptions of the two birth narratives. Bart didn't note that Mark calls Jesus the "son of Mary." 

We can't conclude that much via one reference, and this analysis provides multiple possible reasons. It might not have had some ulterior motive (e.g., some implication he had no human father or that he was illegitimate). Still, it is an interesting reference. 

Bart also explains the word, usually translated as "carpenter," had a general meaning as a low-level craftsperson. I recall one scholar arguing it is not necessarily low-level, but that seems to be the general assumption. 

Looking at the word in the Old Testament, there is some cause to limit it to carpenter since mason (stone worker) is labeled using another word. OTOH, Jesus uses references that suggest he is familiar with stonemasonry. By the second century, however, the carpenter side was a common assumption. So, it seems safe to lean that way. 

==

I re-read Lawrence v. Texas and the same sex marriage opinion. They continue to impress, especially the second. The same sex marriage opinion has been subject to various criticisms by supporters of SSM, including Melissa Murray arguing it is too marriage-focused. 

Why wouldn't an opinion establishing a right to same sex marriage not be marriage-focused? Likewise, it is curious to call out the author of an opinion protecting same sex intimacy without marriage as too marriage-focused. And it isn't that bad even in that sense. 

The opinion has a lot of good aspects, including a discussion of coverture to show how marriage changed. Also, for those who wanted the opinion to be based on equal protection, there is a section covering that. It summarizes the aspects of marriage and has a generally respectful tone (contra the dissents). 

I wish there was more notice that same sex couples were in marriage-like relationships for quite some time. Nonetheless, when examining the many amicus briefs provided at the time, I could not find a single one that covered that angle. 

People have covered that ground. 

==

Finally, Trump and Vance's attack on Zelenskyy (he seems to prefer the double "y") was rather unsurprising. It is obviously horrible and disgusting. 

I am simply appalled we are stuck with this f-ing asshole and his back-up asshole while Republicans enable him like f-ing eunuchs. Are we really going to be stuck with them for four years? 

The purity of the shame we should feel is a stark reminder of where we are as a country. We might want to grin and bear it since we have to live day by day. Sometimes, however, we should firmly admit just how fucked up we are now. 

ETA: I saw one of her Hallmark films and saw that she's a director now. Both films were well-reviewed. 

Talk about surprise directors, check this guy. 

"Gabbard Says More Than 100 Intelligence Officers Fired for Chat Messages"

The coverage of this issue, including the quoted NYT article, is suspect. 

The chat program was administered by the National Security Agency and intended for discussions of sensitive security matters. But a group of employees used it for discussions that contained sexual themes, intelligence officials said this week. The chats also included explicit discussion of gender transition surgery, officials said.

The whole thing comes off as an official take without any input from the other side. Why did over 100 intelligence officers feel comfortable doing this? 

That isn't one or two. These aren't from what I can tell just a few low-level types. Why would they risk their jobs? Why doesn't the article tell their side? 

Transcripts of the chat were first disclosed Monday by Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist who writes for City Journal.

Christopher Rufo is an anti-LGBTQ conservative troll. He latched on to this since trans people talking about themselves is "icky" to some people. 

Furthermore, if you read past the clickbait language, his own coverage says that they didn't break the rules. He used this to attack DEI policies.  

Erin Reed, who talks about these issues intelligently, noted such chats "are commonplace in workplaces across the United States, including within federal agencies." What is the big deal? The implication is that it is akin to watching porn or something. 

From another angle, a Fox News article explains the chats were related to DEI policies. So, what exactly did these people do wrong? I wouldn't take Tulsi Gabbard's comments at face value.

Furthermore, my wider concerns are twofold. 

(1) What amount of knowledge and know-how is being lost here? It's asinine to fire these people. They could pass new rules regarding the usage of chats and it still would be stupid to fire skilled people unless they continuously broke the rules. 

(2) Is there going to be a general firing of people who use it for "sexual themes"? What about racist conversations? Other non-work related conversations? This comes off as an anti-trans measure.

I did a quick article search to learn about this story and the articles regularly did not tell me all the details. They did not tell both sides of the story though ironically some conservative-leaning ones did ultimately suggest there was not an actual vioation.

Which underlines the point: firing them is stupid. 

===

Michelle Trachtenberg died at 39. I see a lot of news alerts and only some make me go "Oh!" 

She was on Buffy and Gossip Girl. I saw her in Ice Princess, which also co-starred Kim Cattrall in a somewhat atypical role. I enjoyed it. 

MT had health problems so her death was not totally surprising for those in the know. For instance, coverage noted recent online photos concerned people. People under 40 dying is still more sad.

Reprise: Reading and Viewing Once More

I watched a couple movies (well, parts) and re-read (the whole thing) a book for a second time the last few days. They were enjoyable comfort food.

[Yes, the book was on a serious topic, but it still was comfort food as supportive with a good ending.]

Major League, the classic sports comedy with an excellent cast including the announcer Bob Uecker (he did Brewers games but moonlit here as the accouncer for the Indians) on IFC. IFC was on the television I was watching among basic cable channels. So, it was a bit of a surprise to hear cursing. 

TV Tropes notes there was some dramatic license with one goof flagged about them skipping a line-up spot in the final scene. The person who did their homework on that said the film was pretty realistic overall.  

Meanwhile, in the real world of baseball, not only did Montas (sort of a Mr. Q fill-in with Severino replaced by Senga scheduled to be here for the whole year and Clay filling the fifth slot originally assigned to Houser and company) get injured, but now Sean M. (with all the vowels) is due to be out for a month. 

[I saw late April and early May in different articles so let's say the thing is somewhat in flux.]

It makes sense for them to re-sign Mr. Q., who I'm surprised no team signed already. He's a prime back-of-the-rotation guy who will give you many good starts. Who are you going to replace him with? Blackburn or Megill? Come on. Yeah, the Dodgers exposed him, but HE didn't lose Game 6. 

I already noted that I read the new autobiography (Part I?) of Nicole Maines, the trans actress. I read this book back when it came out. Its "won't go back" optimism about trans rights is a bit off around nine years later.

The book remains a good read about the experience of a family with a trans daughter. She is a twin and her father dreamed of two boys. Not to worry -- Wayne Maines outgrew his doubts and is now a major trans rights advocate. The twins biologically are the children of a cousin of Kelly Maines, the mother, though I think Nicole looks like her adopted father.  

I originally noted a desire to get a bit more of the school's perspective, that is, the middle school they sued and won a major bathroom rights victory. The counselor is early on a major advocate and later it is noted she still occasionally kept in touch. 

Nonetheless, after problems occur with a boy, suddenly the counselor locks out the family and she basically disappears from the story.  We later even get a final update about the boy but no input from the school's point of view. I felt that was a lack.

Nicole's autobiography touches upon various things covered. The book ends with her surgery which Nicole says was botched. She got a redo by another surgeon and says she is quite satisfied now.   

Both twins went into acting. The parents moved west.

I enjoyed this Up TV film when I saw it a few years ago. Marla Sokoloff wrote and directed the film. She also can briefly be seen as the mom in the opening scene. Sokoloff has directed a few films. I know her from a few more snarky performances when she was younger, including Sugar & Spice. 

The film is my ideal for a UP TV film -- a bit less polished than Hallmark, including the acting, but nicely paced and overall comfort food television. When the co-star here is a cook, well that fits. 

Here's a story on the film with an interview. 

Bonus: I later saw Love, Classified (a not very descriptive title) again. Good comfort food. The mom years earlier played the main character in a short-lived television version of Dirty Dancing. On YouTube.

Supreme Court Watch: Order List

The Supreme Court is back. It handed down an Order List that has multiple dissents from denial of cert along with a couple of statements about them. They also added another opinion day for Wednesday. 

They hear oral arguments today through Wednesday and have another conference to discuss cases on Friday. The statements/dissents today were from cases "relisted" multiple times. 

The cases (not counting the last) are discussed here. The order list was otherwise as normal mostly "ho hum." Alito didn't take part in one case without saying while Kagan noted previous government service.

Sotomayor and Jackson without comment publicly announced they would have granted cert in a case to examine whether a precedent clearly established that officers violate the Fourth Amendment when they search the wrong house without checking the address or conspicuous features of the house to be searched.

Thomas continued his campaign against a precedent that limited tort claims brought by service members alleging medical malpractice. Thomas and Alito wanted to reexamine a precedent allowing regulations limiting abortion protests. 

Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented from denials involving various criminal justice issues. Sotomayor (joined by Gorsuch in one case) did not dissent but provided concerned statements regarding two other criminal cases. The order list was 58 pages long. 

One case involved arresting someone for a misdemeanor without a warrant.  She noted various procedural problems with taking the case and the value of allowing the lower courts to continue to examine the issue.  An informative discussion. 

Other News 

While speaking Saturday at an event for Princeton University alumni, Kagan said the public’s entitled to express views about whether the court “is doing its job properly, no matter how hard we’re working and seriously we’re taking things.”

Meanwhile, Kagan reaffirmed the right of the public to criticize Supreme Court actions. This might seem obvious but the tenor of Roberts' end-of-the-year report might lead some to doubt it. 

Amy Howe's blog is back up. SCOTUSblog also has returned to Twitter since mid-2023 (except for a December 2024 notice that they were on Bluesky).  They don't say WHY they returned.

One thing reported: SCOTUS has posted its April argument schedule. The final orals for the term.