Max Fischer

Not angry, it's a simple question: "who will you vote for?" Unlike, "Red," at least you can answer the question.

Uh, the question was NOT: "who do you think will win." It was who will YOU vote for? You still haven't clearly answered that question. Why is this so hard for you Alaska Darin? Will you answer this simple question?

You said Obamaman but you never make sense so why should that answer? Let's be perfectly clear: are you leaning toward Barack Hussein Obama? If so, why?

Who are you going to vote for? Are you too much of kitty not to stand up for your beliefs? Come on, wuss bag, can't you even say who you're voting for? Why is that so hard?

Who are you going to vote for?

Please tell who you are voting for, Oh! Great Seer.

So the 14K posts is your gift to the world? You're either Messianic, elitist or full of crap. Which one?

Is Obama still a terrorist?

Your'e as clear as mud. You derisively call Obama a "socialist" but may vote for him? If not, who are you seriously considering?

How about narrowing it down? Alaska Party? Constitution? Falangist? Green? American Patriot? Communist? America First? Something even more fringe and irrelevant? Will you give us a hint?

Barack Obama. Your turn.

This will be even funnier when and if he ever stands up to say who he's voting for. My Guess: the anti-American Alaska Party. "Hey Ma! I was gonna go out an vote AP but them black helicopters were a-criclin' so I hid out in the safe room 'til after the election."

Who are you voting for?

Agreed. Why people worry about being in a higher tax bracket is beyond me.

Who are you voting for? The Alaska Party, comrade?

I'm sure that will make him feel better.

Thanks for the update Hannity.

No worse than war hero and true patriot John McCain. From the liberal rag, the Washington Times: McCain also said U.S. troops killed civilians Trail Times (View Blog) POSTED October 07 2008 1:06 PM BY Stephen Dinan John McCain in 2000 said because of tactical decisions U.S. troops were put in the position of killing civilians in Kosovo — something awfully similar to the comments he's now attacking Barack Obama for. During a Republican primary debate in 2000 McCain called the Clinton strategy in Kosovo "obscene" because it forced troops into using tactics that meant civilians were going to get killed. "In the most obscene chapter in recent American history is the conduct of the Kosovo conflict when the president of the United States refused to prepare for ground operations, refused to have air power used effectively because he wanted them flying -- he had them flying at 15,000 feet where they killed innocent civilians because they were dropping bombs from such -- in high altitude." That is almost exactly what Barack Obama said last year about U.S. troops in Afghanistan, when he said the U.S. strategy has led to air strikes rather than controlling the ground — a remark that McCain, in a new ad announced this week, calls "dishonorable."

I think it's going that way but I don't like Rasmussen's robo polls. They may prove right but they seem to swing way too much.

And Sarah Palin is a man, baby.

I'll say again so you can understand: I never implied that. Again, you just make it up to fit your argument. Fact is, you nut-jobs can't accept the fact that this country is rejecting your ideology. I can't reply to every reply made What are you talking about? You continually pull things out of left, uh, right field. It's impossible to have an honest exchange with an extremist. So, liberals don't run businesses? Only a right-wing nut job would believe such a thing. I know you're afraid to take off your ideological, Fox News/Rush-drug induced blinders but the world is much, much different than you want to believe. Moreover, you don't know anything about me, nutjob. I'm quite sure I'm enjoying the capitalist system more than you.

Why do you always insert arguments others never make? Did you learn that from O'Reilly and Hannity? Let's see how many straw men you can pack into this one paragraph: 1. "So the most important say you have in this country should be marginalized because not enough dead people swing an election?" --- I said no such thing nor did I imply it. Why do you need to make up stuff to make a point? 2. "You officially have lost all credibility if you think that's ok." --- Why do you think it's OK to make kindergartners work in sweat shops to pay for their lunch money? Why do you think it's OK to hate America? Do you think it's OK to steal oxygen from people who really deserve it? 3. "Most people have large divergences of opinion in this country, and that's fine, but when you publicly admit the most important right as a citizen to influence policy is something to "get over" you're in the field of jackazzes." -- This is your most grammatically challenging diatribe but I think you are saying that I'm dismissing your right to influence public policy. Sorry, not sure what you mean since I never said anything close to that. I did say these charges are always leveled by the fringy-wing-nuts (like yourself, Wacka, etc) on both sides who claim that elections are going to be stolen. That's BS. It would take a mass conspiracy perpetrated by thousands of people and the other side (& the media) would have to purposely ignore a mountain of evidence. ACORN or any group or individual on either side of who commits illegal acts should be persecuted -- but it is very, very difficult to register a significant enough fraudulent voters to swing an election -- and get away with it. Same for voter machines. Ask elections official in any state or county from either party. The illegal registrations are an administrative inconvenience and if they truly want to help Obama they wouldn't be clogging up the system and casting doubts on the 99%+ of legal registrants that already favor Democrats. On the other hand, it is much, much easier to PREVENT people from voting and that's where you can make a significant impact on the elections process. But that's another story.

I have to say that was a pretty fukkin good prediction. Will the Bills win the Super Bowl in the next 4 years?

Translation: we know the country is repudiating the GOP so we need something to blame for losing. Get over it. This charge is made EVERY election (on both sides) and there is never any evidence that it swings an election. Even this editorial (i.e. it is not an investigative piece), all but says that there may be fraud by registrants but those people will not be enrolled as voters any way.

4.13 Couldn't get Parallelogram under 9