Martin O’Malley Plans Revolt Over Democratic Debate Rules | TIME

Martin O’Malley can’t catch a break.  Even this piece from TIME leads in with the conceit that anyone not named Hillary Clinton is one of “Hillary Clinton’s challengers.”   Last time I checked, there’s no such thing as an incumbent in an open primary.  “Incumbent frontrunner” doesn’t count.

The degree to which this primary is open, though, is precisely the point.  The DNC sets the rules.  The DNC may as well stand for the Democratic National Clintonites.  Talk about establishment.

Martin O’Malley Plans Revolt Over Democratic Debate Rules | TIME.


A Foxy, Rowdy Republican Debate?

I didn’t watch the entire debate, but this account basically registers true for the parts I did see, including the bits about Kasich’s decency, Carson’s charming final statement and Huckabee’s hilarious conflation.

I disagree, of course, with Kasich on marriage equality.  Carson was getting at something substantive, philosophical, even, about race with the conceit about how he works on the part of the body (the brain, literally) that makes a person who they are, but that still misses the larger and, in 2015, unmissable point about systemic racism.  Huckabee’s sly Clinton jab was precisely that, and, if I do say so, a few beats better than the typical pulpit joke.

I didn’t find the Christie/Paul scuffle very riveting, but when you think about its implications, you understand that this is one of the hardest and most important tensions of our era.

Cruz, it turns out, sounds exactly like the Bobby Moynihan impressions.  It was very hard to take him seriously.

Rubio seemed sincere and earnest when talking about saving the American Dream.  He shared some of the personal narrative that shapes his lens, and he did it well.

Jeb Bush was solid, but has absolutely none of his brother’s charm.  That’s either a good or bad thing.

Walker had some strong answers.

Trump was Trump.  He is Trump.

Graham, by the way, from the JV debate, had some very interesting things to say about boots on the ground in Iraq and elsewhere.

A Foxy, Rowdy Republican Debate – The New York Times.

From the Spam File: How Would a Goose Do in an Agitating Washing Machine?

On a post about Chipotle’s quarterly earnings, someone (or somebot) posted this:

It may seem insignificant but the little drips can actually add up. How would a goose do in an agitating washing machine. These types of washer dryers save lot of energy when compared to other type of dryers.

You know what?  How would a goose do in an agitating washing machine? The world will hopefully never know.

Featured Image -- 19974

Converse just gave Chuck Taylors their first redesign in 98 years

Christopher Cocca:

I had no idea Chuck Taylors were 98 years old.

Originally posted on For The Win:

It took 12 years, but Nike is finally bringing new school technology to Chuck Taylors. On the outside, it’s near impossible to detect any aesthetic changes to the iconic shoe. But on the inside, Chucks are about to get a whole lot more wearable. There’s the Lunarlon sockliner and suede lining making this feel like just about every other Nike basketball and running shoe. That’s a good thing, since walking in Chucks previously felt like strapping cardboard to the soles of your feet.

There’s also the difference in name. These are the Chuck Taylor II’s. And yes, the Chuck II is more expensive (priced at $75). It’s also sold out currently, giving you enough time to save the money from your paper route to buy a pair before school starts.

chucks2 Nike

View original

Man Rescues Old Drone with New Drone

“Make new drones, but keep the old…”

“Meet the new drone, same as the old drone…”

You know I can be found/sitting home all alone/

If you can’t come around, a least please send a drone…”

This reminds me of WALL-E:

more from Christine Linnell.

I know I don’t need to say this, but just a friendly reminder:  recreational drones = awesome.  drones that kill civilians = bad.