"Listing the actions" is also known as reporting. It's a style of journalism — devoid of emotional editorialising and outright fabrication — that remains popular amongst at least some of us liberals.

> He then watched helplessly as the truck rammed into a bus carrying members of the First Baptist Church of New Braunfels. Thirteen people were killed. [some stuff deleted] The accident was one of many that might have been prevented had Governor Perry signed the 2011 texting bill into law.

Suggesting that Perry not signing the bill into law and killed 13 people isn't emotional editorialising?

People who text and drive are bad at risk assessment. People who are bad at risk assessment are more likely to ignore laws like this. So what is the fking point of this paragraph except to create a link in the reader's mind that Rick Perry literally murders people with his veto pen?

Distracted driving was already a crime in Texas. So a texting law is technically redundant. People want feel-good headline friendly laws, not actual enforcement of the laws that already exist.

Really good point. By the same token, someone should let Dan Patrick know that it's already illegal to surveil and harass people in bathrooms.

And the name-calling as evidence and proof of superiority:

> Texas is as politically divided as the rest of the U.S., but a recurrent crop of crackpots and ideologues has fed its reputation for proud know-nothingism and retrograde thinking.

The author is proudly preaching to the liberal New Yorker's choir.

When I see articles discussing how Texas has sizable influence on textbook content and their Board of Education pushing for creationist or anti-evolution content to be taught; or when I hear Alex Jones is promoting some new conspiracy theory; or that the actual Governor of Texas has called out the state troopers to keep an eye on the Army's Jade Helm training exercises...

Look, maybe the sources I rely on are biased, but I never hear about stuff like this from other states. When your governor starts buying into conspiracy theory material, and acting on it, I start to feel that "know-nothingism and retrograde thinking" may actually fall a bit short.

There is one, and you used it: people.

The closest thing minds have to an immune system is disbelieving anything that their enemies want them to think. That's a painful path to start down when you're trying to convince.

Nobody is denying global warming – people are skeptical of the specific causes and suggested remedies. More than that, they are skeptical of the people who propose such remedies and their political motivations. It isn’t about climate – anyone that believes that isn’t paying attention.

There was a lot of “settled science” around eugenics too – so excuse us for being distrustful of economically motivated solutions that feature some form of redistribution at the core. Everyone has an agenda. Suggesting that climate change activists are purely altruistic isn’t supported by fact. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-03/un-official-admits-...

> It isn’t about climate – anyone that believes that isn’t paying attention

What? The science is very clear that it's real and requires drastic action to prevent.

> Suggesting that climate change activists are purely altruistic isn’t supported by fact. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-03/un-official-admits-....

One woman is not the entire global scientific community and environmentalist movement.

Look, I do get disappointed when the far left tries to co-opt the conversation about global warming and shoehorn other issues into the subject. I get that. But it doesn't make it any less real and the changes needed to fight it any less drastic.

One woman as quoted out of context in a conspiracy blog, at that.

If those actions happen to be blatant gerrymandering, it sounds pretty justified to me.

> The eleventh largest is Austin, the capital, where I live.

I think I see the problem...

Do you? Austin is 4th in Texas. It is 11th in the US, as the paragraph makes clear.

I think you're missing the point. He's saying "lol, it's an Austin writer, not a real Texan".

This, 100% this. Austin is seen as some kind of burden to borne by the rest of G-d fearing, gun toting Texas. IE, not a real Texan. The writer actually discusses this, at some length, in the piece. "Do you smell that? Its freedom." Abbott, in the piece, on leaving Travis County.

Austin is known for being different, not just in Texas but nationwide. (e.g. "Keep Austin Weird")

Just because it's critical of a large group of people doesn't mean it's wrong.

Please don't post unsubstantive partisan comments here. They wreak tremendous damage.

Apologies.

It was supposed to be a substantive meta-comment about New Yorker reportage, which I think is on the same level of partisanship as the Huff Post (which I thought was banned here).

Sorry to tire you, snowflake.

We've banned this account for trolling. Please don't create accounts to break HN's guidelines with.

says the guy who posts Infowars "articles" on the reg here. I'd be shocked if you actually read the piece at all since this is such a content free comment on a nearly 20,000 word piece of extensively researched journalism.

The Putinbots - they're HEEEEERE!