1/ Reading this piece was a total waste of time, except that it prompted me to try to check out something I've been curious about: are there, in fact, a substantial number of progressives who say that we should believe ALL women?

https://twitter.com/zackbeauchamp/status/1047136370404335617

2/ My normal operating assumption is that there is not view so stupid that you can't find SOMEONE who holds it, so I assume that there are people who believe this one. But *lots* of them?

Dear God.

1/ If you want to understand why liberals are so upset, read this and marvel at the assumption that Kavanaugh is an example of someone who is just "seeking to do right." An assumption made in the face of his abundant lies on a variety of topics ...

https://twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield/status/1045519733297049600

2/ the contrast between his obvious motive for lying and Prof. Blasey Ford's lack of one, the Republicans' absolute refusal to have an investigation or to subpoena witnesses (e.g. Mark Judge) whose testimony is obviously relevant, etc., etc.

Media tidbit: I was driving home today when the NPR segment linked below came on. At 2:30 on the linked audio file, @bdomenech says (about the indictment):

"Much of it is taken up by the numbers of times that people were posting memes on the internet."

npr.org/2018/07/13/628… @bdomenech 2/ Now: I rad the indictment. How much of it concerns memes? None, as far as I can recall. It's about Russians first hacking computers and then disseminating what they found. Not about memes.

I suspect @bdomenech got punked by this:

https://twitter.com/drewtoothpaste/status/1017810938991448064

This is a genuinely fascinating question. Some people are saying: Fox News. That (and talk radio) are obviously crucial, but it's worth asking why crazy media people got so big on the right rather than the left.

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1013236016059158528

As of, say, 1970, I think there were more crazy people on the left than on the right. (This stuff is cyclical.) So I don't think there's some sort of special conservative susceptibility to strange cult-like thinking.

Thread. -- A couple of predictions, which I really, really hope are wrong.

(1) Some kids are going to get very sick. They might die. Even with good medical care, some of them will already have medical conditions. Their parents know about them. ICE does not.

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @ZackBergerMDPhD view original on Twitter

2/ Their parents would know what to look for, what their medical history is like, etc. Whoever is looking after them now will not. Even leaving aside the heat, crowding, etc., they would be at risk even given good medical care. Which I would not bet on their getting.

1/ Let's think about this passage a bit. The most obvious point: "the authorities over us" include the First Amendment, which forbids the establishment of religion. So this passage, by its own lights, tells our leaders not to justify their conduct solely by appeal to the Bible.

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @TheBrodyFile view original on Twitter

2/ ("Solely" means: when the Bible says something that most people believe in any case, e.g. that murder is wrong, one can cite the Bible in support of that view. But one should not try to enact policies for which the Bible is the only justification, e.g. mandatory baptism.)

1/ I've read @imillhiser 's thread (advocating serious/extreme procedural measures) and this thread, and I am torn.

If @BrendanNyhan knew me, that should give him pause. I am as procedural and institutionalist a person as one is likely to find outside SCOTUS.

But I am torn.

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @BrendanNyhan view original on Twitter

2/ Moreover, I've spent significant chunks of time in countries without entrenched norms of conduct. And I am torn.

Some of what @imillhiser suggests I favor without qualms. DC/PR statehood is right on the merits.