I’ve got some new content coming up this week, with a new draft ranking due to run on Thursday and a draft scouting blog probably running Monday or Tuesday.
Over at Paste, I reviewed the collectible card game Star Wars: Unlimited – Spark of Rebellion, which I enjoyed even though I’m not generally a fan of deckbuilders.
I sent out a new edition of my free email newsletter, detailing a rather ridiculous dinner I had at the bar at The Publican, an acclaimed Chicago restaurant where, to say the least, one does not belch as loudly as one can.
I’m going to be on a new TV show, Diamond Dreams starting on Monday, April 15th, on the streaming channel Stadium. The show is a half-hour look at prospects around the minors and for the draft, and will be followed by a show on collectibles where I’ll also offer some comments on the prospects they’re discussing. You can watch via the app on pretty much any platform.
And now, the links…
- Longreads first: How Elon Musk convinced MAGA partisans that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was a treatment for COVID-19 – which it absolutely is not – and set off four years of online misinformation around the pandemic.
- Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote in the New York Times about how “colorblindness” has been hijacked by the white-grievance movement, in direct opposition to the original intent of the term, which meant ending racial discrimination against people of color.
- Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Inquirer wrote about how the Key Bridge disaster demonstrated the importance of immigrants to our society.
- A hardcore conservative group is making it harder for Idaho school districts to renovate or upgrade their facilities.
- There’s a big scam going around that has tricked a number of content creators into ceding control of their Facebook pages. It starts with what seems to be an invitation to appear on a big podcast, which of course is very appealing to most people trying to build their online audience.
- Over half a million Arizonans signed a petition to put codifying abortion rights on the ballot this November. It’s part of a Democratic strategy to drive voters to the polls in purple states – and also, by the way, a basic human right. This comes on the heels of the GOP-packed Arizona Supreme Court reinstating the state’s 1864 abortion ban – yes, a law that predates Arizona’s statehood by almost 50 years.
- The Guardian revealed that Boise State Professor Scott Yenor ran Action Idaho, an extreme right-wing site that attacked LGBTQ+ rights and accused Republicans of being insufficiently conservative. Yenor now also works for the Claremont Institute and just a month ago wrote a piece for the Federalist that said DEI had to die for Western civilization to survive.
- ProPublica explains how authorities are trying to crack down on gift-card crime rings, where consumers often end up buying gift cards that appear new but that have already been drained of value by crooks.
- Maria Bustillos writes in The Nation about the rise of journalist-owned news outlets amidst the ongoing bloodletting in the industry.
- David Chang’s Momofuku company is trying to trademark the generic term “chili crunch” to describe a staple Chinese condiment best known as chili crisp – and they’re suing smaller firms to try to have their way.
- Why is Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (R – and not the former pitcher) doing the bidding of Elon Musk by suing Media Matters for reporting on Twitter’s failure to police hate on their site?
- Voters in Enid, Oklahoma, removed Judd Blevins (R) from the city council after his ties to white supremacist groups were exposed.
- The BBC has a first-person narrative from a woman who found deepfakes of herself online – and eventually learned it was a close friend of hers who made them.
- This Twitter thread has some solid details on the IDF’s attack on the World Central Kitchen convoy in Gaza that killed seven WCK volunteers. I don’t know why those seven deaths should lead to more calls for a cease-fire when the 30,000+ Palestinian deaths before that haven’t … of course I do, let’s not kid ourselves.
- Marisa Kabas of The Handbasket reposted a piece from the Kansas Reflector critical of Meta’s ad policy around climate change, and moments later, Meta removed all links to both sites from Facebook and Threads. After an outcry, Meta reversed the decision and blamed a “security error,” but, come on.
- Landfills emit far more methane than previously believed, more bad news for the planet as methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
- Before voters wisely rejected a stadium tax proposal to replace the two perfectly fine sports facilities outside of Kansas City, the KC Studio had a sensible op ed on what a waste tearing down Kaufmann Stadium would be.
- Former SCOTUS justice Steven Breyer wants everyone to get along, like his former colleagues on the high court, even though some of those colleagues are busy destroying Americans’ basic civil rights, writes Elie Mystal of The Nation.
- The BBC reports on exploitation of workers in Brazil who harvest the common ingredient carnauba wax, bordering on slavery.
- Cleveland Plain-Dealer editor Chris Quinn explains why the paper treats Donald Trump differently from other politicians & candidates. Hint: It’s because he lies.
- The Atlantic’s David Graham describes the “Trump two-step:” say something outrageous, claim that’s not really what he said or meant, and then quietly embrace the original statement.
- The New Republic’s Greg Sargent details just how entrenched election denial, January 6th denialism, and other insane conspiracy theories are within the Republican party right now.
- Mehdi Hasan wrote in the Guardian that Justice Sonja Sotomayor needs to retire from the Supreme Court so President Biden can appoint a replacement, avoiding the possibility that Trump would get to appoint a fourth justice and give the court a 7-2 majority that would likely last decades. I’m not sure if I agree, but he at least offers a solid argument.
- Fox News and several right-wing podcasters, including beanie-wearing Tim Pool, are now facing a lawsuit from a man they all falsely identified as a mass shooter. The man’s lawyer previously represented two Sandy Hook parents in their lawsuit against Alex Jones for his false claims that that mass shooting didn’t happen. Fuck ’em up, Socrates.
- The Tampa Bay Times published a rare editorial pointing out that public subsidies for sports stadiums don’t work out for taxpayers, as the Rays try once again to soak Floridians for a new facility.
- Here’s a great summary and index of economic research showing how consistently these sports stadium deals fail to live up to economic promises. If you’re writing about the topic, or know a journalist who is, this is invaluable, because the pro-stadium forces will always trot out fabricated numbers from consultants who give them what they want.
- The PEN America awards are in a bit of a shambles after a number of high-profile authors withdrew their works from consideration or declined prizes in protest of the organization’s perceived bias towards Israel. The authors include Lorrie Moore, who just won the National Book Critics Circle’s Fiction award for I Am Homeless If This Is Not My Home.
- A senior editor at NPR wrote a bad-faith, error-filled critique of the public radio outlet on Bari Weiss’s blog. NPR responded, defending its hiring practices and its philosophy. You can find many takedowns of Uri Berliner’s original piece, but one fact that got me was that he accused NPR of downplaying or ignoring the lab-leak theory behind COVID-19’s origins, even when the evidence in favor of a zoonotic spillover kept mounting.
- WFLA has the story of a young boy with autism who can no longer receive health services because Florida kicked him off Medicaid. We need more stories like this, showing everyday people getting badly hurt by state policies that cut funding for essential services like health care, education, and even school lunches for underprivileged people.
- A former youth minister at a Baptist church in Bixby, Oklahoma, has been charged with sexual exploitation of a minor as well as possession and distribution of child pornography. No drag queens were involved.
- Chicago police killed Dexter Reed during a traffic stop where he fired first, injuring one officer, after which the cops fired 96 rounds in less than a minute. The Sun-Times reports that the five officers involved in the incident have been investigated a total of 41 times since 2019, and that the area where they stopped Reed has a disproportionate number of traffic stops. The cops have said they pulled Reed over because he wasn’t wearing a seat belt.
- The brightest cosmic explosion scientists have ever seen has now led to new questions about how some of the universe’s heaviest metals are formed. The supernova occurred about 2.4 billion years ago in a galaxy far, far away, producing a huge burst of gamma rays but none of the elements like gold or platinum that scientists expected to find.
- Delaware State Senator Sarah McBride is running to be our at-large Representative, vying to become the first trans person elected to Congress. She’s one of at least three Democrats hoping to win the primary, which is tantamount to winning the election in our very blue state. Full disclosure: I’ve met Sen. McBride and we often see each other at our local Brew Haha coffee shop.
- Is social media really driving a surge in mental illness among teenagers, as Jonathan Haidt claims in his new book? The evidence is mixed at best, according to this review in Nature.
- Eric Hovde, who is running for Senate in Wisconsin as a Republican, is now facing backlash over his comments from a previous campaign where he called for cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits, attacked single mothers, said alcohol should never have been legalized, questioned whether farmers work hard, and lots of other great stuff.
Is the part of Hasan’s argument where he implies that Sotomayor’s Type 1 diabetes makes her health a risk to democracy part of his solid argument?
Why risk having a disabled American on the Supreme Court, and one who relies on BigPharma for insulin like all of us Type 1 Diabetics unfortunately do, when Joe, the public health failure, could just replace her with whomever he chooses? It’s for the good of democracy after all!
Hasan’s piece got rightfully drug through the mud as the trash it is in both disability activism and Type 1 communities. Very few people found it to be solid in any way other than solidly and predictably ableist. But that’s the default postion of the Democratic Party.
Sorry, but the most important qualification for a liberal justice at this point in time is being able to stay alive until January 2025. It’s not “ableist” to look at the actuarial tables for a 70 year old with a serious health condition, and draw the conclusion that she does not fit that qualification. More generally, it does not make sense to apply concepts like ableism to people in power…there is an implied power dynamic to such concepts that does not hold in this analysis.
There’s also the fact that the political timing isn’t gonna work. Manchin and Sinema have already said they won’t vote for a SC justice in an election year. If they vote no, Hasan is actually making it more likely that Sotomayor would get replaced by Trump. I get that Dems are jaded over RBG not retiring in 2015. However Hasan is making an ableist and late argument here.
A default ableist Democratic Party would have encouraged a Presidential primary process, or encouraged a challenge to Dianne Feinstein, or found a replacement for the Pennsylvania Senate election. I agree that it’s too late to engage in the process of replacing Sotomayor (and the details the writer provides about Sotomayor’s health do not raise RBG-level alarm bells for me), but after the Garland debacle it would behoove the Dems to be a little more hardheaded and a little less valorizing.
@sansho1 Yeah, Feinstein is a particularly good example of how “ableism” is not a useful frame of analysis for politics. There were multiple pieces of detailed reporting showing that she could not perform the functions of her job, and that unelected staffers were essentially deciding on legislation and committee work. In this way, the idea that there can be no standards for ability to do the job is anathema to democracy itself.
@mike, I don’t care if it’s ableism or not. I like Hasan in general but in this case, he’s dead wrong. We’re past the point of no return given Manchin and Sinema’s positions. The time to have this discussion was May and June of 2023 not March 2024. Again I get that Dems are ultra jittery given how bad RBG botched things when she could’ve resigned in 2015 and guaranteed that Obama would pick a very liberal replacement. However if Sotomayor retires, you need one of Manchin or Sinema to vote yes. The latter probably isn’t doing the Dems a solid on her way out the door. Do you want to gamble on the former helping out Biden on his way out the door?
I would consider Star Wars Unlimited to be more of a deck constructor than a deck builder, in that you put together a deck before you begin play and then play with that deck; deck builder to me implies that you’re building your deck as you play. So MTG and Star Wars Unlimited and Lorcana are deck constructors; Dominion and Clank and Star Realms are deck builders.
Couple of quick things:
-Per Chicago public radio WBEZ’s reporting, a tactical unit like the one that killed Dexter Reed doesn’t really have traffic stops under their purview
-I installed Stadium on my fairly new office smart TV just now but…it crashes every time I try to open it 🙁
I think it’s worth linking to Jon Haidt’s response to the Nature criticism, too:
https://www.afterbabel.com/p/phone-based-childhood-cause-epidemic
As the dad of two soon-to-be teenage girls, I wish that we (as a society) put far more parenting focus on developing independence and responsibility while allowing our kids to play without screens. But seemingly every development of the last 70+ years (from suburbanization to youth sports to technology and media) has worked against that paradigm. It’s not as simple as “don’t let your kids have social media,” but I’m far less convinced that the evidence is “mixed, at best” of social media’s negative impacts.
I read Haidt’s usual stolid defense, as I have multiple similar explanations of his theories over the years. I just don’t see that he really took on some of the foundational critiques Odgers raised about true causality. The link
Is his standard issue “rebuttal,” so no news was made. I do agree with Haidt that Odgers’ alternative root causes aren’t particularly convincing, but her most interesting point — that young people with mental health issues are more likely to be online — is one where his response is least convincing (i.e. there are studies that show everything without speaking to which studies are most useful in addressing the contention).
Mostly, I find his prescriptions unlikely to succeed, and as someone with a Gen Z focus group in easy supply and a daughter with mental health issues, Haidt’s concerns simply don’t jibe with our reality. I can find you a dozen Gen Z kids who will articulately explain what they believe the impact of social media to be on their lives — negative and positive — and to a person they have rolled their eyes when I lay out Haidt’s premise. Completely anecdotal, and a perilously small sample, but it begins my own decades-long study.
I find Haidt’s assertion that Gen Z commentary points only in his direction to be his laziest defense. If you’re going to be the self-appointed savior of the youth, then try talking to them. Just as lazy is the reliance on studies showing that curtailing social media and replacing it with physical activity increases mental well-being. You don’t say…
I appreciate those of you who have explained why my argument is flawed. I’m thankful, as a disabled person, that there are liberals to provide this important service for democracy.
No one is arguing that disabled people cannot or should not hold office! For example, I have never seen anyone say Tammy Duckworth shouldn’t be a senator because of her disability. But there are cases where the specific disability/illness/condition renders the individual unable to execute the political project of the constituency they are in place to represent. The only people who benefit from the argument that Sotomayor has some sort of divine right to hold her seat as long as she wants are Sotomayor herself and possibly the republicans that may get to replace her if Trump is elected.
@ Mike no one is saying she has a divine right to hold the seat. The point is that the time to have this discussion was in 2023 not 2024 when two Dem leaning Senators have said they’re not on board with this sort of timing and knowing you need one. If Sotomayor resigns now and Trump wins, you are guaranteeing a 40 something Federalist Society approved judge replacing her.
Brian, I think that’s a great point, but I viewed Hasan’s point as larger – Democrats need to think more strategically and stop assuming their opponents will do the ‘right’ or ethical thing. We have clear evidence that right now, at least, they won’t.
Keith, I certainly don’t disagree. 2015 should be a lesson for Dems and I’ll argue it was a massive stain on RBG’s legacy.
Matt D, I think it’s a shame that other people having opinions is so upsetting to you. Your arrogant response has done nothing but prove that disabled people can act like jerks sometimes too.
I am confused.
Is Sotomayer terminally ill? Are people concerned she will not live another 4 years? Also, the last time a Supreme Court judge needed to be replaced during an election year, the Republicans just refused to hold a vote.
What would stop them from doing so this time?
Republicans held the senate in 2016 and do not hold it now
Okay, so, the democrats would need 51 votes for confirmation, right?
There are 49 republicans, 48 democrats, and 3 independent. Seems rather risky. And who knows what Manchin is going to do.
The Dems would only need 50 votes to confirm (VP Harris would provide the tie-breaking vote), but you are correct that it would be risky without an assurance from either Manchin or Sinema that they will not obstruct. Both would have to refuse to confirm to defeat a nominee, assuming that the remaining members of the Dem caucus supported confirmation (which they most likely would).
“Eric Hovde, who is running for Senate in Wisconsin as a Republican, is now facing backlash over his comments from a previous campaign where he …said alcohol should never have been legalized, …and lots of other great stuff.”
Although I disagree philosophically with criminalization of alcohol and other substances, is it really such a bad idea to state that alcohol should have remained illegal? I mean, granted, prohibitions do not work, and the failed alcohol prohibition should be referred to more often when examining our absurd war on drugs – but nevertheless, alcohol is a horrible substance, a toxin that provides zero benefits, has no medicinal value, and causes incalculable societal destruction. Society would be better off without it.
That doesn’t mean it should be banned. But I’m not going to lambaste someone for suggesting it. Rather, I would acknowledge the person’s recognition of alcohol as something that we would be better off without, and then I would have a discussion with that person about why prohibitions do not work and why we therefore need better solutions to the problem.
Also, the fact that alcohol is legal and socially acceptable, whereas legitimately therapeutic substances with minimal or non-existent harmful effects are schedule 1, is absolutely absurd.
You just stated why it’s a bad idea to say alcohol should have remained illegal. There’s a difference between advocating for temperence given the negative effects of alcohol and ignoring the real history we have of the coercive power of the state being used to ban it and the power that gave to organized crime.
I believe prohibitions do not work. This applies to other drugs besides alcohol. Yet, suggestions of legalizing “harder” drugs are often still met with outrage and ridicule, whereas someone also gets ridiculed for suggesting that alcohol should have remained criminalized.
I do not understand the why people mocking the criminalization of alcohol are not also mocking the modern-day war on drugs.
@ Frank, I would argue a lot of people mock the war on (some) drugs. Also politically I would argue that Hovde’s view on alcohol is really stupid considering he’s in a state that has been one of the bigger beneficiaries of alcohol being legal. I agree that there’s a lot of logical inconsistency. I’ve smoked pot a few times and drink alcohol on occasion. I know which one I’ve gone longer without by far and it’s the one that arguably has more health benefits.
there have not been 30K+ palestinian deaths, keith – the gaza ministry of health, run by hamas, have themselves admitted that such numbers are not correct and they are regarded by all competent journalists as at best inaccurate and, normally, wholly fabricated. you’re a journalist: do a better job at vetting your sources before proselytizing.
when viewed through almost any intellectualized paradigm, and even if one believes, arguendo, the ministry of health casualty figures are real (they’re not) instead of made up out of whole cloth (they are), the actual ratio of civilians to combatants sadly killed in this war is among the lowest in the history of modern armed warfare, which speaks to the precision of the israeli military and even more so when you rightfully consider hamas’s established practice of sacrificing the gazan population by embedding terrorist infrastructure in civilian zones with population concentrations and using civilians as humans shields, all of which are done so hamas can maximize civilian casualties.
every civilian (on both “sides”) and israeli death in this war is a tragedy. being so willing to lean into anti semitism and anti zionism at the drop of hat that one buys false numbers as a means by which to “blame” israel for a war perpetrated by hamas is also a tragedy.
The Science Is Clear. Over 30,000 People Have Died in Gaza
The lines they are regarded by all competent journalists as at best inaccurate and, normally, wholly fabricated and a war perpetrated by hamas really give you away here. The 30K+ death toll has been printed by “competent journalists” at the AP, NPR, OxFam, Reuters, PBS, the Miami Herald, the New York Times, and more. So either you think they’re all incompetent, or perhaps your bias is driving your commentary here.