Real Benisons
@realbenisons.bsky.social
reading the morning newspaper is a realistic benediction of the day--Hegel
Bovino now claiming Real ID not good enough
December 12, 2025 at 4:16 PM
Bovino now claiming Real ID not good enough
Why does chyron say “crackdown“?
if @zohrankmamdani.bsky.social called what the federal government is doing a crackdown the headline would be accurate—did he? I didn’t hear that word
Crackdown implies a legitimate use of authority
That’s what is in question, isn’t it @jacobsoboroff.bsky.social?
if @zohrankmamdani.bsky.social called what the federal government is doing a crackdown the headline would be accurate—did he? I didn’t hear that word
Crackdown implies a legitimate use of authority
That’s what is in question, isn’t it @jacobsoboroff.bsky.social?
December 11, 2025 at 7:35 PM
Why does chyron say “crackdown“?
if @zohrankmamdani.bsky.social called what the federal government is doing a crackdown the headline would be accurate—did he? I didn’t hear that word
Crackdown implies a legitimate use of authority
That’s what is in question, isn’t it @jacobsoboroff.bsky.social?
if @zohrankmamdani.bsky.social called what the federal government is doing a crackdown the headline would be accurate—did he? I didn’t hear that word
Crackdown implies a legitimate use of authority
That’s what is in question, isn’t it @jacobsoboroff.bsky.social?
yes
I suppose intent matters
And that Bezos intends to put reducing compliance costs above mere legislation
I do not see Bondi’s memo as a model for repealing parts of the US Code
But maybe I don’t understand will, force, and judgment as well as the post editorial board
I suppose intent matters
And that Bezos intends to put reducing compliance costs above mere legislation
I do not see Bondi’s memo as a model for repealing parts of the US Code
But maybe I don’t understand will, force, and judgment as well as the post editorial board
December 11, 2025 at 4:42 AM
yes
I suppose intent matters
And that Bezos intends to put reducing compliance costs above mere legislation
I do not see Bondi’s memo as a model for repealing parts of the US Code
But maybe I don’t understand will, force, and judgment as well as the post editorial board
I suppose intent matters
And that Bezos intends to put reducing compliance costs above mere legislation
I do not see Bondi’s memo as a model for repealing parts of the US Code
But maybe I don’t understand will, force, and judgment as well as the post editorial board
The way for the Washington Post to stop misinterpreting the civil rights act is simply for the Washington Post to stop misinterpreting the civil rights act
December 11, 2025 at 4:32 AM
The way for the Washington Post to stop misinterpreting the civil rights act is simply for the Washington Post to stop misinterpreting the civil rights act
The way to stop misinterpreting what the civil rights act says about disparate impact is simply to stop misinterpreting what the civil rights act says about disparate impact
December 11, 2025 at 4:28 AM
The way to stop misinterpreting what the civil rights act says about disparate impact is simply to stop misinterpreting what the civil rights act says about disparate impact
Also, looking over the Houston speech, you could say JFK didn’t necessarily separate his faith from his politics
If conscience is part of faith
JFK said he would not separate his conscience from politics
And *outside* religious pressures is a qualification imo
www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-...
If conscience is part of faith
JFK said he would not separate his conscience from politics
And *outside* religious pressures is a qualification imo
www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-...
December 9, 2025 at 10:20 PM
Also, looking over the Houston speech, you could say JFK didn’t necessarily separate his faith from his politics
If conscience is part of faith
JFK said he would not separate his conscience from politics
And *outside* religious pressures is a qualification imo
www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-...
If conscience is part of faith
JFK said he would not separate his conscience from politics
And *outside* religious pressures is a qualification imo
www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-...
He is a Columbia law professor too
With many bad ideas
With many bad ideas
December 9, 2025 at 9:15 PM
He is a Columbia law professor too
With many bad ideas
With many bad ideas
WSJ used “Democrat” correctly
@nytimes.com meanwhile unaware of proper usage or embracing the rightwing troll
@nytimes.com meanwhile unaware of proper usage or embracing the rightwing troll
December 8, 2025 at 1:04 AM
WSJ used “Democrat” correctly
@nytimes.com meanwhile unaware of proper usage or embracing the rightwing troll
@nytimes.com meanwhile unaware of proper usage or embracing the rightwing troll
It’s all about God’s happiness with Trump
On left, “unconditional“
on right, “god was very happy with me that day”
And then trump messes up his chances with god by admitting that he tried to fool god into believing trump had done something pure of heart
On left, “unconditional“
on right, “god was very happy with me that day”
And then trump messes up his chances with god by admitting that he tried to fool god into believing trump had done something pure of heart
December 7, 2025 at 7:08 PM
It’s all about God’s happiness with Trump
On left, “unconditional“
on right, “god was very happy with me that day”
And then trump messes up his chances with god by admitting that he tried to fool god into believing trump had done something pure of heart
On left, “unconditional“
on right, “god was very happy with me that day”
And then trump messes up his chances with god by admitting that he tried to fool god into believing trump had done something pure of heart
On the left, Trump says he gave Henry Cuellar an unconditional pardon
On the right Trump claims “G-d was very happy with me“ but then pivots to admitting that he very much had conditions in mind
Is Trump admitting that he had tried to deceive G-d? And managed to hide his secret motives from G-d?
On the right Trump claims “G-d was very happy with me“ but then pivots to admitting that he very much had conditions in mind
Is Trump admitting that he had tried to deceive G-d? And managed to hide his secret motives from G-d?
December 7, 2025 at 6:54 PM
On the left, Trump says he gave Henry Cuellar an unconditional pardon
On the right Trump claims “G-d was very happy with me“ but then pivots to admitting that he very much had conditions in mind
Is Trump admitting that he had tried to deceive G-d? And managed to hide his secret motives from G-d?
On the right Trump claims “G-d was very happy with me“ but then pivots to admitting that he very much had conditions in mind
Is Trump admitting that he had tried to deceive G-d? And managed to hide his secret motives from G-d?
what Michael Leavitt texted to you looks like a narrow denial about one day
maybe he said other things that amount to a broader denial about trying to deport Ferreira?
but what I read in your article doesn’t say much beyond the particular day Ferreira was grabbed by ICE
maybe he said other things that amount to a broader denial about trying to deport Ferreira?
but what I read in your article doesn’t say much beyond the particular day Ferreira was grabbed by ICE
December 7, 2025 at 4:36 PM
what Michael Leavitt texted to you looks like a narrow denial about one day
maybe he said other things that amount to a broader denial about trying to deport Ferreira?
but what I read in your article doesn’t say much beyond the particular day Ferreira was grabbed by ICE
maybe he said other things that amount to a broader denial about trying to deport Ferreira?
but what I read in your article doesn’t say much beyond the particular day Ferreira was grabbed by ICE
And per Washington Post, Michael Leavitt denied trying to get Ferreira deported
But the text message @mariasacchetti.bsky.social gives looks like a narrow claim about what Leavitt did or didn’t do on the particular day ICE grabbed her, not a broad denial
But the text message @mariasacchetti.bsky.social gives looks like a narrow claim about what Leavitt did or didn’t do on the particular day ICE grabbed her, not a broad denial
December 7, 2025 at 4:31 PM
And per Washington Post, Michael Leavitt denied trying to get Ferreira deported
But the text message @mariasacchetti.bsky.social gives looks like a narrow claim about what Leavitt did or didn’t do on the particular day ICE grabbed her, not a broad denial
But the text message @mariasacchetti.bsky.social gives looks like a narrow claim about what Leavitt did or didn’t do on the particular day ICE grabbed her, not a broad denial
I am tempted to feel a little sympathy for Malone but am resisting
The former FDA commissioners got at the central problem with RFK Jr and his appointees
They are refusing to accept well-founded inferences
Almost to point of rejecting inference as such
That's not good diligent skepticism
The former FDA commissioners got at the central problem with RFK Jr and his appointees
They are refusing to accept well-founded inferences
Almost to point of rejecting inference as such
That's not good diligent skepticism
December 5, 2025 at 4:15 PM
I am tempted to feel a little sympathy for Malone but am resisting
The former FDA commissioners got at the central problem with RFK Jr and his appointees
They are refusing to accept well-founded inferences
Almost to point of rejecting inference as such
That's not good diligent skepticism
The former FDA commissioners got at the central problem with RFK Jr and his appointees
They are refusing to accept well-founded inferences
Almost to point of rejecting inference as such
That's not good diligent skepticism
Counterpoint
Tulip Shop Tavern
Tulip Shop Tavern
December 4, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Counterpoint
Tulip Shop Tavern
Tulip Shop Tavern
Prasad and RFK Jr are trying to undermine scientific inference as such
That's not a good kind of "skepticism"
It's a refusal to accept diligence and attention to detail
That's not a good kind of "skepticism"
It's a refusal to accept diligence and attention to detail
December 4, 2025 at 6:56 PM
Prasad and RFK Jr are trying to undermine scientific inference as such
That's not a good kind of "skepticism"
It's a refusal to accept diligence and attention to detail
That's not a good kind of "skepticism"
It's a refusal to accept diligence and attention to detail
because the neutral to positive meanings of “skepticism“ do properly apply to them
otoh today’s meeting and Prasad’s memo and several of your details re RFK show anti-skepticism
via intransigent refusals to accept sensible inferences >>>
otoh today’s meeting and Prasad’s memo and several of your details re RFK show anti-skepticism
via intransigent refusals to accept sensible inferences >>>
December 4, 2025 at 6:31 PM
because the neutral to positive meanings of “skepticism“ do properly apply to them
otoh today’s meeting and Prasad’s memo and several of your details re RFK show anti-skepticism
via intransigent refusals to accept sensible inferences >>>
otoh today’s meeting and Prasad’s memo and several of your details re RFK show anti-skepticism
via intransigent refusals to accept sensible inferences >>>
many fascinating and terrifying details here
My takeaway is RFK Jr and his appointees are seeking to undermine scientific inference as such—all while insisting they’re letting the science speak
e.g. the new statement by former FDA commissioners calls out Prasad’s memo for refusing inferences
My takeaway is RFK Jr and his appointees are seeking to undermine scientific inference as such—all while insisting they’re letting the science speak
e.g. the new statement by former FDA commissioners calls out Prasad’s memo for refusing inferences
December 4, 2025 at 6:23 PM
many fascinating and terrifying details here
My takeaway is RFK Jr and his appointees are seeking to undermine scientific inference as such—all while insisting they’re letting the science speak
e.g. the new statement by former FDA commissioners calls out Prasad’s memo for refusing inferences
My takeaway is RFK Jr and his appointees are seeking to undermine scientific inference as such—all while insisting they’re letting the science speak
e.g. the new statement by former FDA commissioners calls out Prasad’s memo for refusing inferences
the former FDA commissioners are saying that Prasad’s memo is attacking the process of scientific inference as such
Note to journalists: Prasad does not deserve the neutral-to-positive connotations of the word “skeptic”
Note to journalists: Prasad does not deserve the neutral-to-positive connotations of the word “skeptic”
December 4, 2025 at 5:41 PM
the former FDA commissioners are saying that Prasad’s memo is attacking the process of scientific inference as such
Note to journalists: Prasad does not deserve the neutral-to-positive connotations of the word “skeptic”
Note to journalists: Prasad does not deserve the neutral-to-positive connotations of the word “skeptic”
Skeptic? I don’t think RFK Jr deserves the positive connotations that the word skeptic has had for many decades
skeptic implies diligence and attention to detail imo
btw NYT February 2025 uses “skeptic“ over and over
Not so much now, which is a good thing
skeptic implies diligence and attention to detail imo
btw NYT February 2025 uses “skeptic“ over and over
Not so much now, which is a good thing
December 4, 2025 at 5:35 PM
Skeptic? I don’t think RFK Jr deserves the positive connotations that the word skeptic has had for many decades
skeptic implies diligence and attention to detail imo
btw NYT February 2025 uses “skeptic“ over and over
Not so much now, which is a good thing
skeptic implies diligence and attention to detail imo
btw NYT February 2025 uses “skeptic“ over and over
Not so much now, which is a good thing
“Critics say” is cowardly
It’s not exactly a lie but it is fear and favor
Almost as bad and closer to a lie imo is incessant use of “crackdown“ and “clampdown”
Crackdown conveys legitimate use of authority to me
Federal judges have ruled several times against Trump administration
It’s not exactly a lie but it is fear and favor
Almost as bad and closer to a lie imo is incessant use of “crackdown“ and “clampdown”
Crackdown conveys legitimate use of authority to me
Federal judges have ruled several times against Trump administration
December 3, 2025 at 5:40 PM
“Critics say” is cowardly
It’s not exactly a lie but it is fear and favor
Almost as bad and closer to a lie imo is incessant use of “crackdown“ and “clampdown”
Crackdown conveys legitimate use of authority to me
Federal judges have ruled several times against Trump administration
It’s not exactly a lie but it is fear and favor
Almost as bad and closer to a lie imo is incessant use of “crackdown“ and “clampdown”
Crackdown conveys legitimate use of authority to me
Federal judges have ruled several times against Trump administration
Executive editor Joe Kahn: no labels!
NYT headlines nevertheless call RFK a “skeptic” and describe actions that judges have ruled illegal as a “crackdown“
Stories claim anonymous officials have “clarified“ or “confirmed“ events
That’s all labeling @nytimes.com whether you admit it or not
NYT headlines nevertheless call RFK a “skeptic” and describe actions that judges have ruled illegal as a “crackdown“
Stories claim anonymous officials have “clarified“ or “confirmed“ events
That’s all labeling @nytimes.com whether you admit it or not
December 2, 2025 at 8:54 PM
Executive editor Joe Kahn: no labels!
NYT headlines nevertheless call RFK a “skeptic” and describe actions that judges have ruled illegal as a “crackdown“
Stories claim anonymous officials have “clarified“ or “confirmed“ events
That’s all labeling @nytimes.com whether you admit it or not
NYT headlines nevertheless call RFK a “skeptic” and describe actions that judges have ruled illegal as a “crackdown“
Stories claim anonymous officials have “clarified“ or “confirmed“ events
That’s all labeling @nytimes.com whether you admit it or not
Joe Kahn: we don’t do labels
Meanwhile the NYT calls Trump’s racist rant about Ilhan Omar and Somalis “exclusionary“ and “xenophobic“
And still calls RFK Jr a “skeptic“
And uses “crackdown“ to describe actions that judges have ruled illegal
The NYT is applying labels and trying to be referee
Meanwhile the NYT calls Trump’s racist rant about Ilhan Omar and Somalis “exclusionary“ and “xenophobic“
And still calls RFK Jr a “skeptic“
And uses “crackdown“ to describe actions that judges have ruled illegal
The NYT is applying labels and trying to be referee
December 2, 2025 at 8:49 PM
Joe Kahn: we don’t do labels
Meanwhile the NYT calls Trump’s racist rant about Ilhan Omar and Somalis “exclusionary“ and “xenophobic“
And still calls RFK Jr a “skeptic“
And uses “crackdown“ to describe actions that judges have ruled illegal
The NYT is applying labels and trying to be referee
Meanwhile the NYT calls Trump’s racist rant about Ilhan Omar and Somalis “exclusionary“ and “xenophobic“
And still calls RFK Jr a “skeptic“
And uses “crackdown“ to describe actions that judges have ruled illegal
The NYT is applying labels and trying to be referee
A G Sulzberger>>>
Kahn seems obsessed with rejecting "partisanship"
Sulzberger is not directly at odds with Kahn but is promoting a kind of partisan journalism--partisan for the survival of our democratic republic
Kahn seems obsessed with rejecting "partisanship"
Sulzberger is not directly at odds with Kahn but is promoting a kind of partisan journalism--partisan for the survival of our democratic republic
December 2, 2025 at 7:04 PM
A G Sulzberger>>>
Kahn seems obsessed with rejecting "partisanship"
Sulzberger is not directly at odds with Kahn but is promoting a kind of partisan journalism--partisan for the survival of our democratic republic
Kahn seems obsessed with rejecting "partisanship"
Sulzberger is not directly at odds with Kahn but is promoting a kind of partisan journalism--partisan for the survival of our democratic republic