You may recognize it from Philip K. Dick's peerless dystopianism, but "pre-crime mapping tools" are here now, prodding police to, ah, expand their notion of probable cause beyond the boundaries we have long accepted. A conservative would remind us that we've accepted such boundaries for so long for good reason, but a "tough-on crime" reactionary wouldn't, despite the vast potential for abusing Software That Tells the Future, which certainly widens the palette of excuses law enforcement could use to detain whomever whenever. And not just because inductive reasoning has its limits -- too often, the data such software uses just isn't very good.
Corey Robin, writing at FAIR, finds a putative liberal declaring that "(s)ome of the most potent threats to free speech these days come not from our government or corporations, but from our citizenry" -- specifically, college kids protesting racism on college campuses. Of course warrantless wiretapping and NSA data vacuuming are more "potent" threats to free speech, but too many folks forget that the First Amendment doesn't run in one direction at a time -- folks who don't like what protestors say can speak out in response. And though I don't think the First Amendment protects you from your employer the way it protects you from your government, corporations are still a bigger threat to free speech than being scolded by a college kid.
Dean Baker catches Tom Friedman bashing one of the few things anyone should like about Donald Trump, his support for taxpayer-funded universal health care. Naturally he doesn't like Mr. Trump, and even more naturally he goes out of his way to mention his health care stance, as if the average of any two opinions equals "the middle." Mr. Friedman also complains that raising the top tax bracket to 50 percent would "only" cover about a quarter of the deficit, which rather inadvertently makes the argument that a 91% tax bracket would wipe out a lot more of the deficit. File under "The Uselessness of Moderates."
The Union of Concerned Scientists treats us to a video (run time: 2 minutes, 18 seconds) countering some of the propaganda against electric vehicles and their advantages in combatting pollution. So when your Tea Party uncle lists the reasons you're stupid for wanting an electric car, you can remind him that, yes, manufacturing batteries is slightly more carbon-intensive than manufacturing internal combustion engines, but using electricity to run your car still pollutes much less than using gasoline -- unless you live in places like West Virginia or Kentucky, which depend almost entirely on coal for their electricity, and guess what? Most people don't, and even fewer people will in the future.
Finally, Pamela Engel at Business Insider catches something you might have missed from the last Republican debate: Donald Trump complaining that "wages are too high." That's the kind of statement that would have finished a campaign back in the day -- and his subtle suggestion that higher wages discourage work wouldn't have played too well with voters, either. Still, while Trump supporters would hate being told they make too much money just as much as anyone else would, they're as likely to presume that their hero was really talking about Those Other People Who Make Too Much Money, not them.