“Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Gene Weingarten on the president’s health issues: ‘The president is likely not ill and enfeebled with one foot in the grave. … It is merely that he is old and ugly and flabby and benignly rotting all over.’”
I’ve seen a rash of videos popping up about how Trump is about to die — one can only hope. But I would prefer he end up rotting in a prison cell, where he belongs.
Trump might not have one foot in the grave, but I believe he has health issues that you'll never hear about from the White House. That bruising on the back of his hand is probably the result of an IV, something I have experienced. Makes you wonder what kind of drugs they're pumping into him.
IV Lasix and a vasodilator, I'm betting, as treatment for congestive heart failure (CHF). The swelling in his entire body goes beyond "veinous insufficiency" in the legs (his hands are swollen too) and points to a more serious circulatory issue like CHF. I'm not a doctor but this is how it looks to me.
What baffles me is why he does a piss poor job of makeup to conceal it? Why not hire a professional makeup artist to at least do it once & teach him how to do it correctly?
Except I already know the answer to that question, he thinks he's a genius that know everything & definitely knows more about everything than the all those so-called experts he derides all the time.
nice to see that my PS subscription is like my Chgo Tribune subscription back in the day, in at least one way - delivered promptly by [or shortly after] 6 AM CT [7 AM ET] every issue. ready for my early AM read.
And it arrives at or shortly after 4am here in the PNW, which is when I usually get up, so I enjoy it with my first cup of coffee. I learn so much from all the comments and discussions on this page, and Tuesdays and Thursdays are high points of my week. Many thanks to all of you!
ha ha, VG. next time you're in/near Tacoma, stop in & visit Three Hearts cafe on The Hilltop - my son's restaurant. check out their Instagram - yummy baked goods 😋
I am a progressive who does not like what Trump is doing with the military in our cities. But, I think the mayor of Chicago would be smart to welcome the troops, but only if they are there to really help police the cities worst neighborhood. Putting Humvees in front of the Art Institute or in Lincoln Park makes no sense. Send these troops to the worst neighborhood. Have them help clear the most dangerous buildings. Set up outside the open air drug markets. Back up the police on real raids of drug dealers places of work. Then, like in DC, help actually clean up and fix those neighborhoods. It will only be temporary, for sure. But, for a short time, welcome the help to tackle the worst areas. Make it a reset so the good folks in those areas feel like they have a chance and can make a difference. Heck, maybe a few kids see the good the troops can do and decide to join the Army and not a gang. What does the city have to lose?
If only? As if the mayor will have any say on the deployment. These troops, if they come, will be in Michigan Avenue and in Lincoln Park not in high-crime areas. Just as they are on the Mall and in Dupont Circle in DC. It's all a TV show for the TV-ensorcelled buffoon in the WH.
i'm confident there won't be any guard presence in Englewood, Austin, Lawndale, Garfield Park, West Lawn, South Deering, Roseland, Humboldt Park or South Shore.
My son is moving back to Chicago from DC as we speak and will confirm that nothing is being done about crime. There is window dressing around Dupont Circle and the Mall. Arrests of immigrants and perceived immigrants are on the rise. Meanwhile, Trump is lying about boosting the economy of DC. It is going right down the drain. I am guessing that National Guard on the streets of Chicago will not improve its economy either.
Speaking of which why is the Trib putting a full-color photo of that attention hogging MAGA woman above the fold on the front page? Good grief.
A friend recently took a group of people from Mongolia who had never been to the states before on a tour of DC. They were absolutely horrified at the large number of troops encircling the White House.
The people in the military aren’t trained in law enforcement. That’s why you are seeing cases in DC thrown out left and right for illegal search and seizure. Plus, who wants to live in a police state? It’s a bad idea, and Governor Pritzker’s speech really nailed it.
My understanding is that if police harm someone through negligence or misconduct the police department can be held liable. In the case of using military to function as police, is the DC police department liable for them? Would it be different if the military came into Chicago and acted as law enforcement?
Your understanding is not exactly correct. Police are generally immune from negligence claims if they were enforcing the law at the time of the negligence. Police can be held liable for intentional torts and for intentional conduct which violates a person’s constitutional rights (42 U.S.C. 1983, the principal federal civil rights law used in police misconduct cases) even when acting to enforce the law. There is, however, no respondeat superior liability (employer liability for employee’s acts) under the federal civil rights laws. And the police department is not a sue-able entity separate from the municipality.
The municipality itself is not liable under the federal civil rights laws for a violation of a person’s constitutional rights unless the constitutional violation was a result of an official government policy. (Monell.) Municipalities in Illinois do, however, have a duty to indemnify police officers for compensatory (not punitive) damages for which they are liable for conduct within the scope of their employment.
It’s a fascinating question what would happen if the military used excessive force against a citizen in enforcing the law in Illinois. 42 U.SC. 1983 does not apply to federal law enforcement officers. There is separate case law, a case called Bivens and its progeny, which covers federal law enforcement officers. And Bivens liability is much more limited than liability under 42 U.S.C. 1983. I once had a case where a Chicago police officer was on loan to the federal Great Lakes Fugitive Task Force. The federal court in Chicago held that since the officer was working for the federal task force, the case was controlled by Bivens rather than 42 U.S.C. 1983. You could argue that these federal military officers were on loan to the Chicago Police Department so liability should be under 42 U.S.C. 1983. I suspect that the court would not approve that argument and would hold that the case was covered by Bivens.
What's ticked me off the most about this plan to send troops into Chicago is that not one single media outlet or reporter has bothered to ask WHERE IN CHICAGO will the troops be stationed? Give me a neighborhood, police district, cross streets, or parish and then I'll know whether Trump cares about crime or this is just an extremely wasteful performative show. We all know it's the latter and a simple tweet from Mayor Johnson to Trump asking, "Have you consulted with our Chief of Police for which neighborhoods CPD would appreciate assistance to have National Guard be stationed there?" would be better than speechifying, especially since the media is too cowardly to ask.
"Federal immigration agents and possibly National Guard troops would operate out of a suburban naval base for much of next month as part of President Donald Trump’s plan to target Chicago, officials have been told."
If troops are stationed at Great Lakes (which is about 70-90 minutes from downtown, they'll have a long commute to get to the City every AM. But I think they are being stationed there so as not to have actual places for the troops to sleep, etc., as the Administration will want to avoid additional video/photos of troops on hard floors in federal buildings downtown, etc.
What's the point? Will the troops be here permanently? What happens after they leave? Are the troops going to fix the issues that help create crime, such as lack of income, poor housing, substandard schools and feelings of homelessness? Because of family connections, I sometimes read the Orange County Register from southern California. The presence of the Gestapo doesn't seem to have ended crime and violence in the Los Angeles area. I'll be interested to see what happens in Washington after the troops are gone. This is a pure shit show by the orange stain to look more like a man to his idiot base. I hope MAGA taxpayers realize what they are paying for the show when I thought the whole DOGE show was about reducing government spending and federal control. I also have another thought. What do most MAGAs care about poor people in cities killing each other? Did they care before the orange stain got lippy? Most of them have never been to a big city, have no business there, and have never been there. Even when they do, how many visit areas of cities where the serious crime is happening? Answer? They care about what the evil demon in DC tells them to care about.
Auto typing strikes again! Let's try hopelessness, not homelessness. Unlike many, I don't need AI to think for me although I'm sure at my age that my brain is probably turning to mush.
The biggest menace to public health is the HHS Secretary, the steroidal crank who, according to the immunization experts (actual doctors) in the CDC, has not consulted them once and is attempting to fire the head of the CDC because of his ignorant opposition to vaccines. I knew two apparently healthy men way below 65 who died of COVID for lack of the then non-existent vaccines that this malignant fool is now withholding from the likes of them.
Join my campaign of writing letters to Sen. Bill Cassidy MD (R, La) who asked the right questions, got lied to, and believed the lies. He needs to be shamed into doing something about RFK, Jr.
A yellow light for “Mulholland Drive,” a 2001 movie that can be rented on Amazon Prime.
And that is what is wrong with streaming services. I already pay for the membership...why do I have to pay to rent (or buy) a movie from 20+ years ago!
David Lynch is an acquired taste, definitely not everyone's cup of tea. I can appreciate that his movies are serious art and there are moments in them that are striking, but I'll readily admit to not really "getting" them completely.
If you don’t try to make sense of “Mulholland Drive” and just kind of ride along with it as a sort of transcribed dream, you might find it more enjoyable, as I did.
The first David Lynch movie I saw was Blue Velvet. I had not even heard of David Lynch at the time. That movie worked for me. I saw Mulholland Drive when it came out, and didn't appreciate it. I have been thinking of giving it another shot. At the time I was not laid back enough to follow Steven K's suggestion.
On the other hand, The Straight Story is very accessible and enjoyable!
By the way, thanks for the Murderbot recommendation. It was on my radar and then I forgot about it. Apple TV has a disproportionate number of great Sci Fi shows, Silo, Severance, Dark Matter, I think there's more I'm forgetting.
I am so glad you are enjoying it. We rewatched the first episode with our older son, and he definitely could identify with Murderbot in the scene where the people wanted him to stay with him.
I have not heard of Silo and Dark Matter. We will check them out.
Also, lots of scenes in Dark Matter are filmed here in Chicago - the stunt teams and film crews have been rented apartments in my building. Good folks, all.
Yes, “The Straight Story” is great! A total anomaly in the Lynch canon, it’s an innocent, wholesome, family film that is completely captivating from start to finish, despite its molasses oozing pace. It’s almost as if Lynch was saying to his critics, “So you think all I can do is lurid, disturbing, shocking and profane? Try THIS on for size!”
Another reason for me to resist adapting to the streaming medium. As long as DVDs and their players exist, that will be my method of consumption. My public library (which is part of the SWAN network) has a cornucopia of just about every imaginable movie title available and they’ll transfer them right to my library for no charge. Even the most up to date digital remasters and Blu-rays are available for most titles, so you don’t have to worry about the inferior picture quality of earlier releases. I haven’t paid for a home viewed movie in thirteen years.
I'd love to hear more about how that works, especially the transfering to your library. I take it the trade off is in exchange for not getting something at the push of a button, you don't have the overhead of storing DVDs you may only watch once or twice in a lifetime?
We borrow DVDs and Blu-Rays from our library regularly. It's FREE. Just like borrowing a book. Heck, you can even borrow a DVD or Blu-Ray player from the library. We don't subscribe to every streaming service and don't have cable so borrowing is the way to go for films/tv series not on the services to which we do subscribe.
Transferring is easy-peasy. You log into your library account and search for the movie you want. If you local library doesn't have it available, you request it and a library that does have it transfers it to your library (interlibrary loan) and your library notifies you when it is ready for pick up. You watch it and return it back to your local library which uses the interlibrary system to send it back to the other library. Good for books and movies and similar materials only. The "library of things" is usually just local to your own library or ones you go to physically - they don't transfer those items through the interlibrary system. Library of things at most libraries includes laptops, wifi hot spots, movie projectors, hand and power tools, Crock Pots and Instant Pots, sous vide devices, pickleball kits (rackets and balls), DVD players, and more. Libraries today are freaking awesome.
I recommend (for anyone with HBO Max) the two part documentary on Billy Joel. I learned a lot. They talk to Joel, his 4 wives, his sister, step brother, and daughter, among others. It’s a good example of why it is hard to be a family man and the top of your industry. I went the other route and am a family man. (Although I used to have to remind my wife of that when she’d talk about how successful someone else’s husband was - I’d point out that the other guy was not at the soccer game or school assembly while I was.)
In the Mincing Rascals it mentions that Parasite was one of the best movies of this century. I don’t even think it was the best Asian movie of 2019. I recommend’The Farewell’ which was truly great (and overlooked at awards time)
"who but a child on their first flight needs to look out the window?"
I'm decades removed from being a child, but I much prefer the window seat. I love staring out at the clouds from the other side, getting the bird's eye view of landscapes and towns, especially of downtown Chicago approaching from the lake. I'm still hanging on to the child-like wonder that we're able to do this - get these huge metal machines 30,000 feet up in the air and shoot them at 500 mph across the country or across oceans. It's not long since we've had this ability. For thousands of years people could only dream of being able to do this. Also, it's better to just hold it, but I'd rather be the climber-over than climbee-over when it comes to bathroom trips.
I get claustrophobic at times and having a window to look out helps me not feel so cramped in an overcrowded tin tube. I try to always pee before boarding and hold it so as to not inconvenience others. Doesn't work on an overseas flight, of course.
So eloquently put, much more profound than my limited capabilities would permit.
I guess I too, am a perpetual child on my first flight whenever I fly, for all of the reasons that you so poetically elucidate here (I have also, at age 54, never outgrown my love of theme parks either). Besides, what am I supposed to stare at when I’m on a flight, my phone? Ugh!
Let’s also remember that these airlines were charging more for window seats. I would certainly pay more to have a window seat, and while I generally don’t support frivolous lawsuits, if I paid more to have a window seat and then didn’t get one, I’d be pretty pissed.
You beat me to it. It's a rare occasion when I disagree with EZ. But airlines are now dinging us to death on fees so that they can pretend they are offering us deals on fares. They shouldn't be allowed to charge for something they don't actually offer.
I always try to get the window seat, in order to look out the window. Nowadays, however, with everyone looking at screens for amusement, I feel compelled to pull down the shade to benefit my fellow passengers -- including the ones also sitting at window seats (and looking at a screen).
Agreed! Sorry, Eric, but you couldn't be more wrong on this one. Getting to see a sunset over a city from a plane is amazing, as is watching flat farmland change to mountains, or just being able to daydream by looking at the clouds. I once got to watch a thunderstorm from above it and see lightning skittering across a plane of clouds that was absolutely mesmerizing . (And I have a strong bladder so rarely inconvenience seat mates.)
Yes! A window seat is what a flight is all about for me! I was once on a spectacular flight over the Rocky Mountains when a passenger across the aisle insisted I close the window as the light was interfering with her screen watching. I refused, and she called the flight attendant. She was so angry at me. I closed the shade. I could see we were headed for one of those confrontations that people record with their cell phones!
My high school in the 80s removed the outer doors AND the stall doors to try to stop kids smoking in the bathrooms (we did have a designated outdoor smoking area that students could use at lunch hour; a different time for sure). As if teen girls aren't weird enough about their bodies, imagine having to change a tampon or pad with no door on the stall. It was awful. The only bathrooms with stall doors were in the lockers rooms but it turns out periods don't wait until gym class to need attention.
I can’t imagine the no stall doors today with everyone having a cell phone camera. At least we didn’t have to worry about anyone who wasn’t in the John with us.
I would like to have water composting as an option in IL. Maryland has this and there have already been families having their loved ones' bodies taken to Maryland for this process. WaPo gift link: https://wapo.st/4n0rwLw
To add the the list of "culture-war battles" that are being brought back, he wants the NFL's Washington Commanders to change back to their former team name. If that's not red meat for the MAGA base I don't know what is. And for me, I would prefer to watch "Mulholland Falls" rather than "Mulholland Drive".
I'll teĺ you what else you left out. He defends inane actions by claiming there is a flood of people demanding them. Now he might have a point on the Redskins thing. Many racist Washington fans, obviously not Native American, are still upset about the name change. But I got news for the orange stain. Almost no one in the city, including the most crime ridden neighborhoods is demanding the troops. He talks about beautiful black women begging for troops. The woman featured is the leader of a group of EIGHT women. Just how how many black women does Dumbo think there are in Chicago? And one idiot pastor said they might be welcome if sent to the right areas. So there are a few- in a city of two and a half million people.
A week ago I downloaded the Substack app. Ever since then I no longer receive the Picayune Sentinel via email. I used your check email advice earlier, and it worked. I do get PS on my Substack app, but I liked getting the email version so I could read it on my browser. I can only conclude that somehow Substack has figured out how to eliminate sending emails to those that have their app.
Ken, If you open your Substack app, and click on the photo or icon on the upper right of your phone’s screen, you should see a gear on the lower right of the screen. Click on that, and then click on Notifications. Then click on Preferences. Then click on Newsletter Delivery. There you can click on how you want things delivered to you. I think.
The window lawsuit is pretty silly. My husband likes to look out the window, but we usually pay up for premium economy. Those seats are usually over the wings. So far he has not asked the airlines to remove them.
The Murderbot show is great. The books are awesome. I've read them all twice; they are not long. The Weitz brothers also adapted one of my favorite novels, Nick Hornsby's About a Boy. It is possible in this case that the movie is even better than the book.
I read your college tips with a slight chuckle. They seem aspirational. Did you follow all the tips when you went to college? I'm pretty sure my twins' eyes' would have rolled so hard I could hear them, if I gave that speech.
Regarding the high school removing external doors from bathrooms, when I went to CPS in the 70s we often had no doors ON THE STALLS because of smoking concerns. (Boys swam nude too).
They didn't have stall doors in the 50s or 60s & it wasn't due to smoking. And the boys having to swim nude was part of some weird psychobabble bullshit from 19th Century German lunacy that was brought here. When I went to that four letter word massive place at Addison/Western, the last swim of the season was done with just the underwater lights on & the overhead ones off. My assumption now is that it was their sick way to discover any gays!
Not quite, Garry. The reason given was sanitation from dirty swimsuits. To this day, I haven't figured out what was sanitary about dirty bodies all joining in the water though we were supposed to take showers before getting in. Or why not just take a shower with a swimsuit on?
same at fenwick in oak park - no doors, no swimsuits - in the late '60s. i've told people, probably mostly educated at suburban public schools, about those in yrs thence, and they are don't believe it, or find it quite weird.
I initially admired that the Tribune had allotted Michael Phillips a sayonara column. I always considered him to be an excellent critic, able to dissect and analyze films from myriad angles, shedding light and providing the kinds of perspectives that you only get from a professional film critic, as opposed to those of the elevated movie buffs that comprise most of what’s left of that trade today.
David complained the other day that Phillips allowed his politics to influence his criticism, but I don’t agree with that. It’s true that he would wade a bit too much into identity politics, and his complaints about the movie industry “fetishizing” guns seemed utterly pointless (kind of like criticizing the porn industry for fetishizing casual sex). Also, I found Phillips’s purity test laden pledges that he “believed” Dylan Farrow’s long discredited child abuse allegation against her father to be a pathetic act of cowardice, disguised as courage (accusing people of being child molesters when they’re not is not cool). But I generally found that he was able to set aside his personal political prejudices when it came to doing his actual job, which was evaluating movies on their merits. For just one example, I remember his review of Clint Eastwood’s 2019 film “Richard Jewell”, a movie which was a scathing indictment of the media and their occasional willingness to distort facts in pursuit of all out character assassination. In his review, Phillips was clearly irked by the film’s agenda, but he was completely professional in his evaluation of it, surmising that it was one of Eastwood’s best films, which it was.
Having said all this, I must say that after reading his valedictory piece, I kind of wish that the Tribune hadn’t given it to him. His tiresome “too many white guys” whine is the sort of thing that makes one just a little bit less sad to see him go, and proves that even thoughtful, intelligent people who are great at their jobs can sometimes not contain the urge to make themselves look like complete idiots.
“Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Gene Weingarten on the president’s health issues: ‘The president is likely not ill and enfeebled with one foot in the grave. … It is merely that he is old and ugly and flabby and benignly rotting all over.’”
I’ve seen a rash of videos popping up about how Trump is about to die — one can only hope. But I would prefer he end up rotting in a prison cell, where he belongs.
Trump might not have one foot in the grave, but I believe he has health issues that you'll never hear about from the White House. That bruising on the back of his hand is probably the result of an IV, something I have experienced. Makes you wonder what kind of drugs they're pumping into him.
IV Lasix and a vasodilator, I'm betting, as treatment for congestive heart failure (CHF). The swelling in his entire body goes beyond "veinous insufficiency" in the legs (his hands are swollen too) and points to a more serious circulatory issue like CHF. I'm not a doctor but this is how it looks to me.
What baffles me is why he does a piss poor job of makeup to conceal it? Why not hire a professional makeup artist to at least do it once & teach him how to do it correctly?
Except I already know the answer to that question, he thinks he's a genius that know everything & definitely knows more about everything than the all those so-called experts he derides all the time.
And his application of orange make up speaks to another of his genius talents.
nice to see that my PS subscription is like my Chgo Tribune subscription back in the day, in at least one way - delivered promptly by [or shortly after] 6 AM CT [7 AM ET] every issue. ready for my early AM read.
And it arrives at or shortly after 4am here in the PNW, which is when I usually get up, so I enjoy it with my first cup of coffee. I learn so much from all the comments and discussions on this page, and Tuesdays and Thursdays are high points of my week. Many thanks to all of you!
ha ha, VG. next time you're in/near Tacoma, stop in & visit Three Hearts cafe on The Hilltop - my son's restaurant. check out their Instagram - yummy baked goods 😋
Good to know! We live in Gig Harbor, just across the Narrows from Tacoma.
I am a progressive who does not like what Trump is doing with the military in our cities. But, I think the mayor of Chicago would be smart to welcome the troops, but only if they are there to really help police the cities worst neighborhood. Putting Humvees in front of the Art Institute or in Lincoln Park makes no sense. Send these troops to the worst neighborhood. Have them help clear the most dangerous buildings. Set up outside the open air drug markets. Back up the police on real raids of drug dealers places of work. Then, like in DC, help actually clean up and fix those neighborhoods. It will only be temporary, for sure. But, for a short time, welcome the help to tackle the worst areas. Make it a reset so the good folks in those areas feel like they have a chance and can make a difference. Heck, maybe a few kids see the good the troops can do and decide to join the Army and not a gang. What does the city have to lose?
If only? As if the mayor will have any say on the deployment. These troops, if they come, will be in Michigan Avenue and in Lincoln Park not in high-crime areas. Just as they are on the Mall and in Dupont Circle in DC. It's all a TV show for the TV-ensorcelled buffoon in the WH.
Great comment. Seen the pictures of the Gestapo guarding Union Station in DC? Is that a high crime area?
i'm confident there won't be any guard presence in Englewood, Austin, Lawndale, Garfield Park, West Lawn, South Deering, Roseland, Humboldt Park or South Shore.
My son is moving back to Chicago from DC as we speak and will confirm that nothing is being done about crime. There is window dressing around Dupont Circle and the Mall. Arrests of immigrants and perceived immigrants are on the rise. Meanwhile, Trump is lying about boosting the economy of DC. It is going right down the drain. I am guessing that National Guard on the streets of Chicago will not improve its economy either.
Speaking of which why is the Trib putting a full-color photo of that attention hogging MAGA woman above the fold on the front page? Good grief.
Agree that giving this very marginal group front-page play was not called for and showed very questionable news judgment.
A friend recently took a group of people from Mongolia who had never been to the states before on a tour of DC. They were absolutely horrified at the large number of troops encircling the White House.
The people in the military aren’t trained in law enforcement. That’s why you are seeing cases in DC thrown out left and right for illegal search and seizure. Plus, who wants to live in a police state? It’s a bad idea, and Governor Pritzker’s speech really nailed it.
My understanding is that if police harm someone through negligence or misconduct the police department can be held liable. In the case of using military to function as police, is the DC police department liable for them? Would it be different if the military came into Chicago and acted as law enforcement?
Your understanding is not exactly correct. Police are generally immune from negligence claims if they were enforcing the law at the time of the negligence. Police can be held liable for intentional torts and for intentional conduct which violates a person’s constitutional rights (42 U.S.C. 1983, the principal federal civil rights law used in police misconduct cases) even when acting to enforce the law. There is, however, no respondeat superior liability (employer liability for employee’s acts) under the federal civil rights laws. And the police department is not a sue-able entity separate from the municipality.
The municipality itself is not liable under the federal civil rights laws for a violation of a person’s constitutional rights unless the constitutional violation was a result of an official government policy. (Monell.) Municipalities in Illinois do, however, have a duty to indemnify police officers for compensatory (not punitive) damages for which they are liable for conduct within the scope of their employment.
It’s a fascinating question what would happen if the military used excessive force against a citizen in enforcing the law in Illinois. 42 U.SC. 1983 does not apply to federal law enforcement officers. There is separate case law, a case called Bivens and its progeny, which covers federal law enforcement officers. And Bivens liability is much more limited than liability under 42 U.S.C. 1983. I once had a case where a Chicago police officer was on loan to the federal Great Lakes Fugitive Task Force. The federal court in Chicago held that since the officer was working for the federal task force, the case was controlled by Bivens rather than 42 U.S.C. 1983. You could argue that these federal military officers were on loan to the Chicago Police Department so liability should be under 42 U.S.C. 1983. I suspect that the court would not approve that argument and would hold that the case was covered by Bivens.
What's ticked me off the most about this plan to send troops into Chicago is that not one single media outlet or reporter has bothered to ask WHERE IN CHICAGO will the troops be stationed? Give me a neighborhood, police district, cross streets, or parish and then I'll know whether Trump cares about crime or this is just an extremely wasteful performative show. We all know it's the latter and a simple tweet from Mayor Johnson to Trump asking, "Have you consulted with our Chief of Police for which neighborhoods CPD would appreciate assistance to have National Guard be stationed there?" would be better than speechifying, especially since the media is too cowardly to ask.
From the SunTimes:
"Federal immigration agents and possibly National Guard troops would operate out of a suburban naval base for much of next month as part of President Donald Trump’s plan to target Chicago, officials have been told."
Remember, this is not about crime.
If troops are stationed at Great Lakes (which is about 70-90 minutes from downtown, they'll have a long commute to get to the City every AM. But I think they are being stationed there so as not to have actual places for the troops to sleep, etc., as the Administration will want to avoid additional video/photos of troops on hard floors in federal buildings downtown, etc.
Is there really any uncertainty on "whether Trump cares about crime" or wants "an extremely wasteful performative show."?
Not in my mind.
What's the point? Will the troops be here permanently? What happens after they leave? Are the troops going to fix the issues that help create crime, such as lack of income, poor housing, substandard schools and feelings of homelessness? Because of family connections, I sometimes read the Orange County Register from southern California. The presence of the Gestapo doesn't seem to have ended crime and violence in the Los Angeles area. I'll be interested to see what happens in Washington after the troops are gone. This is a pure shit show by the orange stain to look more like a man to his idiot base. I hope MAGA taxpayers realize what they are paying for the show when I thought the whole DOGE show was about reducing government spending and federal control. I also have another thought. What do most MAGAs care about poor people in cities killing each other? Did they care before the orange stain got lippy? Most of them have never been to a big city, have no business there, and have never been there. Even when they do, how many visit areas of cities where the serious crime is happening? Answer? They care about what the evil demon in DC tells them to care about.
Auto typing strikes again! Let's try hopelessness, not homelessness. Unlike many, I don't need AI to think for me although I'm sure at my age that my brain is probably turning to mush.
The biggest menace to public health is the HHS Secretary, the steroidal crank who, according to the immunization experts (actual doctors) in the CDC, has not consulted them once and is attempting to fire the head of the CDC because of his ignorant opposition to vaccines. I knew two apparently healthy men way below 65 who died of COVID for lack of the then non-existent vaccines that this malignant fool is now withholding from the likes of them.
And shame on the Republican Senators who confirmed him
Join my campaign of writing letters to Sen. Bill Cassidy MD (R, La) who asked the right questions, got lied to, and believed the lies. He needs to be shamed into doing something about RFK, Jr.
Steroidal isn't the half of it, why leave out a couple of decades of heroin abuse?
A yellow light for “Mulholland Drive,” a 2001 movie that can be rented on Amazon Prime.
And that is what is wrong with streaming services. I already pay for the membership...why do I have to pay to rent (or buy) a movie from 20+ years ago!
David Lynch is an acquired taste, definitely not everyone's cup of tea. I can appreciate that his movies are serious art and there are moments in them that are striking, but I'll readily admit to not really "getting" them completely.
If you don’t try to make sense of “Mulholland Drive” and just kind of ride along with it as a sort of transcribed dream, you might find it more enjoyable, as I did.
The first David Lynch movie I saw was Blue Velvet. I had not even heard of David Lynch at the time. That movie worked for me. I saw Mulholland Drive when it came out, and didn't appreciate it. I have been thinking of giving it another shot. At the time I was not laid back enough to follow Steven K's suggestion.
On the other hand, The Straight Story is very accessible and enjoyable!
By the way, thanks for the Murderbot recommendation. It was on my radar and then I forgot about it. Apple TV has a disproportionate number of great Sci Fi shows, Silo, Severance, Dark Matter, I think there's more I'm forgetting.
I am so glad you are enjoying it. We rewatched the first episode with our older son, and he definitely could identify with Murderbot in the scene where the people wanted him to stay with him.
I have not heard of Silo and Dark Matter. We will check them out.
Also, lots of scenes in Dark Matter are filmed here in Chicago - the stunt teams and film crews have been rented apartments in my building. Good folks, all.
Yes, “The Straight Story” is great! A total anomaly in the Lynch canon, it’s an innocent, wholesome, family film that is completely captivating from start to finish, despite its molasses oozing pace. It’s almost as if Lynch was saying to his critics, “So you think all I can do is lurid, disturbing, shocking and profane? Try THIS on for size!”
Another reason for me to resist adapting to the streaming medium. As long as DVDs and their players exist, that will be my method of consumption. My public library (which is part of the SWAN network) has a cornucopia of just about every imaginable movie title available and they’ll transfer them right to my library for no charge. Even the most up to date digital remasters and Blu-rays are available for most titles, so you don’t have to worry about the inferior picture quality of earlier releases. I haven’t paid for a home viewed movie in thirteen years.
I'd love to hear more about how that works, especially the transfering to your library. I take it the trade off is in exchange for not getting something at the push of a button, you don't have the overhead of storing DVDs you may only watch once or twice in a lifetime?
We borrow DVDs and Blu-Rays from our library regularly. It's FREE. Just like borrowing a book. Heck, you can even borrow a DVD or Blu-Ray player from the library. We don't subscribe to every streaming service and don't have cable so borrowing is the way to go for films/tv series not on the services to which we do subscribe.
Correct, right now I have The Brutalist from the library to watch. At 3 & 1/2 hours long, I'll watch it over the weekend.
Transferring is easy-peasy. You log into your library account and search for the movie you want. If you local library doesn't have it available, you request it and a library that does have it transfers it to your library (interlibrary loan) and your library notifies you when it is ready for pick up. You watch it and return it back to your local library which uses the interlibrary system to send it back to the other library. Good for books and movies and similar materials only. The "library of things" is usually just local to your own library or ones you go to physically - they don't transfer those items through the interlibrary system. Library of things at most libraries includes laptops, wifi hot spots, movie projectors, hand and power tools, Crock Pots and Instant Pots, sous vide devices, pickleball kits (rackets and balls), DVD players, and more. Libraries today are freaking awesome.
I recommend (for anyone with HBO Max) the two part documentary on Billy Joel. I learned a lot. They talk to Joel, his 4 wives, his sister, step brother, and daughter, among others. It’s a good example of why it is hard to be a family man and the top of your industry. I went the other route and am a family man. (Although I used to have to remind my wife of that when she’d talk about how successful someone else’s husband was - I’d point out that the other guy was not at the soccer game or school assembly while I was.)
AND we got to see that fabulous Uptown Girl video one more time!
In the Mincing Rascals it mentions that Parasite was one of the best movies of this century. I don’t even think it was the best Asian movie of 2019. I recommend’The Farewell’ which was truly great (and overlooked at awards time)
"who but a child on their first flight needs to look out the window?"
I'm decades removed from being a child, but I much prefer the window seat. I love staring out at the clouds from the other side, getting the bird's eye view of landscapes and towns, especially of downtown Chicago approaching from the lake. I'm still hanging on to the child-like wonder that we're able to do this - get these huge metal machines 30,000 feet up in the air and shoot them at 500 mph across the country or across oceans. It's not long since we've had this ability. For thousands of years people could only dream of being able to do this. Also, it's better to just hold it, but I'd rather be the climber-over than climbee-over when it comes to bathroom trips.
I get claustrophobic at times and having a window to look out helps me not feel so cramped in an overcrowded tin tube. I try to always pee before boarding and hold it so as to not inconvenience others. Doesn't work on an overseas flight, of course.
So eloquently put, much more profound than my limited capabilities would permit.
I guess I too, am a perpetual child on my first flight whenever I fly, for all of the reasons that you so poetically elucidate here (I have also, at age 54, never outgrown my love of theme parks either). Besides, what am I supposed to stare at when I’m on a flight, my phone? Ugh!
Thank you, that's very kind
You could peruse back issues of the Picayune Sentinel!
Yes, that would certainly be as fulfilling as staring out the window, but I have a limited data plan, so that might get costly.
Hmm, well I suggest printing them out in advance and then having them bound -- preferably in soft leather.
Don't forget the acid-free paper stock...
Let’s also remember that these airlines were charging more for window seats. I would certainly pay more to have a window seat, and while I generally don’t support frivolous lawsuits, if I paid more to have a window seat and then didn’t get one, I’d be pretty pissed.
I agree. I might compare it to the lawsuit regarding a place that sold boneless chicken wings that were not wings.
You beat me to it. It's a rare occasion when I disagree with EZ. But airlines are now dinging us to death on fees so that they can pretend they are offering us deals on fares. They shouldn't be allowed to charge for something they don't actually offer.
I always try to get the window seat, in order to look out the window. Nowadays, however, with everyone looking at screens for amusement, I feel compelled to pull down the shade to benefit my fellow passengers -- including the ones also sitting at window seats (and looking at a screen).
Agreed! Sorry, Eric, but you couldn't be more wrong on this one. Getting to see a sunset over a city from a plane is amazing, as is watching flat farmland change to mountains, or just being able to daydream by looking at the clouds. I once got to watch a thunderstorm from above it and see lightning skittering across a plane of clouds that was absolutely mesmerizing . (And I have a strong bladder so rarely inconvenience seat mates.)
My best flight was on thr 4th of July. Seeing fireworks spread out in all directions, endlessly, was surreal
Yes! A window seat is what a flight is all about for me! I was once on a spectacular flight over the Rocky Mountains when a passenger across the aisle insisted I close the window as the light was interfering with her screen watching. I refused, and she called the flight attendant. She was so angry at me. I closed the shade. I could see we were headed for one of those confrontations that people record with their cell phones!
You’re way too kind. I would have told her to shove her phone up her ass.
My high school in the 80s removed the outer doors AND the stall doors to try to stop kids smoking in the bathrooms (we did have a designated outdoor smoking area that students could use at lunch hour; a different time for sure). As if teen girls aren't weird enough about their bodies, imagine having to change a tampon or pad with no door on the stall. It was awful. The only bathrooms with stall doors were in the lockers rooms but it turns out periods don't wait until gym class to need attention.
Chicago Public Schools never had any stall doors in the boys toilets.
You are definitely a kid of the 80's if you went to HS and they had a smoking area. Just imagine the outcry today.
I remember hanging out in the "smoking lounge" (it was an outdoor area in a back corner), not smoking, because my friends were there. Fun times.
I can’t imagine the no stall doors today with everyone having a cell phone camera. At least we didn’t have to worry about anyone who wasn’t in the John with us.
I would like to have water composting as an option in IL. Maryland has this and there have already been families having their loved ones' bodies taken to Maryland for this process. WaPo gift link: https://wapo.st/4n0rwLw
I’ve been using Trump Delusion Syndrome for years in response to those that have accused me of TDS.
To add the the list of "culture-war battles" that are being brought back, he wants the NFL's Washington Commanders to change back to their former team name. If that's not red meat for the MAGA base I don't know what is. And for me, I would prefer to watch "Mulholland Falls" rather than "Mulholland Drive".
Oh, dang, of course! I forgot the Commanders/Redskins thing.
Or his over the top obsession with a few schools on Long island changing their former Indian mascots to something else.
I keep waiting for someone to name a team Indians, and claim that it is Asian Indians with a different mascot.
I'll teĺ you what else you left out. He defends inane actions by claiming there is a flood of people demanding them. Now he might have a point on the Redskins thing. Many racist Washington fans, obviously not Native American, are still upset about the name change. But I got news for the orange stain. Almost no one in the city, including the most crime ridden neighborhoods is demanding the troops. He talks about beautiful black women begging for troops. The woman featured is the leader of a group of EIGHT women. Just how how many black women does Dumbo think there are in Chicago? And one idiot pastor said they might be welcome if sent to the right areas. So there are a few- in a city of two and a half million people.
They could go back to Redskins, but change the logo to a bowl of those redskin peanuts.
A week ago I downloaded the Substack app. Ever since then I no longer receive the Picayune Sentinel via email. I used your check email advice earlier, and it worked. I do get PS on my Substack app, but I liked getting the email version so I could read it on my browser. I can only conclude that somehow Substack has figured out how to eliminate sending emails to those that have their app.
I have the app, still get the emails.
Well, that blows my theory. I’ve checked all the trash and junk folders to no avail. Eric - it’s in your hands!
Ken, If you open your Substack app, and click on the photo or icon on the upper right of your phone’s screen, you should see a gear on the lower right of the screen. Click on that, and then click on Notifications. Then click on Preferences. Then click on Newsletter Delivery. There you can click on how you want things delivered to you. I think.
The window lawsuit is pretty silly. My husband likes to look out the window, but we usually pay up for premium economy. Those seats are usually over the wings. So far he has not asked the airlines to remove them.
The Murderbot show is great. The books are awesome. I've read them all twice; they are not long. The Weitz brothers also adapted one of my favorite novels, Nick Hornsby's About a Boy. It is possible in this case that the movie is even better than the book.
I read your college tips with a slight chuckle. They seem aspirational. Did you follow all the tips when you went to college? I'm pretty sure my twins' eyes' would have rolled so hard I could hear them, if I gave that speech.
Regarding the high school removing external doors from bathrooms, when I went to CPS in the 70s we often had no doors ON THE STALLS because of smoking concerns. (Boys swam nude too).
They didn't have stall doors in the 50s or 60s & it wasn't due to smoking. And the boys having to swim nude was part of some weird psychobabble bullshit from 19th Century German lunacy that was brought here. When I went to that four letter word massive place at Addison/Western, the last swim of the season was done with just the underwater lights on & the overhead ones off. My assumption now is that it was their sick way to discover any gays!
My daughter is a proud Lane Tech alum. Class of 2015. I can assure you that tradition has lapsed.
Not quite, Garry. The reason given was sanitation from dirty swimsuits. To this day, I haven't figured out what was sanitary about dirty bodies all joining in the water though we were supposed to take showers before getting in. Or why not just take a shower with a swimsuit on?
100% bullshit reason, as the girls had bizarre woolen tank suits they wore which were owned by the schools!
same at fenwick in oak park - no doors, no swimsuits - in the late '60s. i've told people, probably mostly educated at suburban public schools, about those in yrs thence, and they are don't believe it, or find it quite weird.
I initially admired that the Tribune had allotted Michael Phillips a sayonara column. I always considered him to be an excellent critic, able to dissect and analyze films from myriad angles, shedding light and providing the kinds of perspectives that you only get from a professional film critic, as opposed to those of the elevated movie buffs that comprise most of what’s left of that trade today.
David complained the other day that Phillips allowed his politics to influence his criticism, but I don’t agree with that. It’s true that he would wade a bit too much into identity politics, and his complaints about the movie industry “fetishizing” guns seemed utterly pointless (kind of like criticizing the porn industry for fetishizing casual sex). Also, I found Phillips’s purity test laden pledges that he “believed” Dylan Farrow’s long discredited child abuse allegation against her father to be a pathetic act of cowardice, disguised as courage (accusing people of being child molesters when they’re not is not cool). But I generally found that he was able to set aside his personal political prejudices when it came to doing his actual job, which was evaluating movies on their merits. For just one example, I remember his review of Clint Eastwood’s 2019 film “Richard Jewell”, a movie which was a scathing indictment of the media and their occasional willingness to distort facts in pursuit of all out character assassination. In his review, Phillips was clearly irked by the film’s agenda, but he was completely professional in his evaluation of it, surmising that it was one of Eastwood’s best films, which it was.
Having said all this, I must say that after reading his valedictory piece, I kind of wish that the Tribune hadn’t given it to him. His tiresome “too many white guys” whine is the sort of thing that makes one just a little bit less sad to see him go, and proves that even thoughtful, intelligent people who are great at their jobs can sometimes not contain the urge to make themselves look like complete idiots.
Thanks for the John Oliver link. Hysterically funny takedown of that crook & clown Lindell.
You "owned Northwestern University law professor Stephen Presser"??
Oh, did I. Read that debate and you'll agree https://ericzorn.com/rhubarb-patch-flag-burning/