Max Fischer

Seriously, are you joking or are you really that ignorant? I make no apologies for the whack-jobs on the left (including a few on this board), but do you EVER do any of your own research or is there a one-stop center for daily right-wing stupidity? Are you just a "little" embarrassed you're parroting Tancredo's nutball rants?

The only thing "partisan" is that you took this GOP rant hook, line and sinker without verifying any facts. We'll help you out with this newest candidate for Snopes. Here's the link b/c I can't copy the graphs: Look before you jump News Flash: Car Dealers are Republicans (It's Called a Control Group, People) by Nate Silver @ 6:50 PM A meme that is currently picking up traction in the conservative blogosphere is that the list of dealerships to be shuttered as a result of Chrysler's bankruptcy contains a disproportionate number donors to Republican candidates. There have been furious efforts to prove this contention by looking up campaign contributor lists at the Huffington Post, Open Secrets, and other places. There is just one problem with this theory. Nobody has bothered to look up data for the control group: the list of dealerships which aren't being closed. It turns out that all car dealers are, in fact, overwhelmingly more likely to donate to Republicans than to Democrats -- not just those who are having their doors closed. Here, for instance, is what Huffington Post's Fundrace site turns up for those who list their occupation as "auto dealer": Republican donations outstrip Democratic ones by about 8.6:1. Next, let's try "car dealer": For some reason, those persons who describe themselves as "car dealers" are just slightly more likely to donate to Democrats than those who call themselves "auto dealers". Nevertheless, the list of contributions tilts Republican by better than a 3:1 margin. Next up, "automobile dealer": Roughly a 10:1 advantage for Republicans. Finally, we'll look at the slightly more obscure formation of "automotive dealer": Big Republican edge here too. Combining the data: Overall, 88 percent of the contributions from car dealers went to Republican candidates and just 12 percent to Democratic candidates. By comparison, the list of dealers on Doug Ross's list (which I haven't vetted, but I assume is fine) gave 92 percent of their money to Republicans -- not really a significant difference. There's no conspiracy here, folks -- just some bad math. It shouldn't be any surprise, by the way, that car dealers tend to vote -- and donate -- Republican. They are usually male, they are usually older (you don't own an auto dealership in your 20s), and they have obvious reasons to be pro-business, pro-tax cut, anti-green energy and anti-labor. Car dealerships need quite a bit of space and will tend to be located in suburban or rural areas. I can't think of too many other occupations that are more natural fits for the Republican Party. Unfortunately, while we are still a nation of drivers, we are not a nation of dealers.

Your whining is kinda pathetic. I agree she should be properly grilled but you may want to read what she wrote and said since your "brown people can make decisions better" nonsense is not a good start to dispell charges of knee-jerk racism. Perhaps use your own brain before blindly accepting the talking points. You don't have to like that she isn't a conservative but you may want to think over your position if you don't want to appear to be another partisan extremist who uses easy labels to unfairly (and classlessly) define others.

A right-wing conservative trashing Obama and his SCOTUS pick. Enlightening. Queston: do you truly believe that ajudge's background and life experiences play NO part in how they rule? Tha's insane, ignorant or at least disingenuous. Then why do justices disagree? Why aren't all opinons unananimous? I find one of the most facinating things about the SCOTUS is the human side. The history is littered with great stories of what influences judicial thinking and how one's life story can explain a viewpoint. The best example (off the top of my head) is Justice Black.

So? Can you tell if that's good or bad? Why?

You poor bastard, you must be severely conflicted on this case. Or do you even realize that? Judicially speaking, "real" conservatives would praise the court for not legislating from the bench.

So . . . what the WSJ is saying is that Sotomayor is a judicial moderate. Interesting.

You do realize that Meg White has serious anxiety issues that forced them to suspend their tour schedule? Despite that fact, I really don't understand your hangup. Many musicians have more than one project and I'm not sure why exploring your range of talents would be considered a negative. A rose by any other name . . . Let's hope he stops acting and for God-sake let's pray he doesn't have literary talent.

I seriously can't tell if you're joking. Hope not.

Link please. More than one would be nice.

I'm fairly convinced that Owens is a fraud. If not, he's just more evidence that the Republican Party really is in deep trouble.

"Strawman?" So I guess jumping all over his sh-- without an once of substance is a productive? Thanks for the enlightening policy debate.

Just as many academics thought Sotomayor was as qualified or more qualified. But that's like fighting about who's a better painter: Van Gough, Monet or Rembrandt? If picking a name out of a hat made no difference, why not have ethnicity play a part in the decision making process? You have a low shock threshold to think Obama, or any president, is "very conscience" of their decision making isn't the norm. I'm sure Reagan picked O'Conner and Bush I picked Thomas because they were far and away the most "qualified."

Please provide us your course of public and private action over the past two days and go forward for the next six months, year, etc. I'm sure we'd all be interested.

Can you please explain the context of the speech? I wouldn't think you like to simply give the impression that Sotomayor was suggesting that Latina women are right and white males are wrong but that this statement, like most plucked out of a long speech, is a bit more nuanced.

Don't get me wrong, I think Jay was brilliant but that was a far as they were going with him and needed to move in a different direction. The post-Bennett stuff is different, which was not bad thing or disparaging of AM, Summerteeth and the awesome HYF. We'll just have to disagree that A Ghost is Born or Sky Blue Sky are a "bore," especially if you haven't seen them in concert lately - or listened to the ripping Kicking Television.

I know, I know, it's Wikipedia but the thoughts of other drummers is a start. It's harder to find evidence to the contrary: Drumming ability and appreciation Lennon said of Starr: “ Ringo was a star in his own right in Liverpool before we even met. Ringo was a professional drummer who sang and performed and was in one of the top groups in Britain [Rory Storm and the Hurricanes] but especially in Liverpool. ... Ringo's a damn good drummer.[24] ” Drummer Steve Smith said: “ Before Ringo, drum stars were measured by their soloing ability and virtuosity. Ringo's popularity brought forth a new paradigm in how the public saw drummers. We started to see the drummer as an equal participant in the compositional aspect. One of Ringo's great qualities was that he composed unique, stylistic drum parts for The Beatles songs. His parts are so signature to the songs that you can listen to a Ringo drum part without the rest of the music and still identify the song.[25] ” Many drummers list Starr as an influence, including Dave Grohl of Nirvana/Foo Fighters, Orri Páll Dýrason of Sigur Rós,[26] Max Weinberg of the E Street Band, Danny Carey of Tool, Liberty DeVitto of Billy Joel's band, Nicko McBrain of Iron Maiden, Eric Carr of Kiss, Phil Rudd of AC/DC, Phil Collins, Mike Portnoy from Dream Theater, Pedro Andreu of Heroes del Silencio and others.[27] According to Collins, "Starr is vastly underrated. The drum fills on the song "A Day in the Life" are very complex things. You could take a great drummer today and say, 'I want it like that.' He wouldn't know what to do."[28] In his extensive survey of The Beatles' recording sessions, Mark Lewisohn confirmed that Starr was both proficient and remarkably reliable and consistent. According to Lewisohn, there were fewer than a dozen occasions in The Beatles' eight-year recording career where session 'breakdowns' were caused by Starr making a mistake, while the vast majority of takes were stopped owing to mistakes by the other three members.[27] Starr is considered to have advanced various modern drumming techniques, such as the matched grip, placing the drums on high risers for visibility as part of the band, tuning the drums lower, and using muffling devices on tonal rings, along with his general contributions to The Beatles as a whole.[25] Specific drum parts executed by Starr in notably signature fashion include the fill that brings the drums and bass guitar into "Hey Jude", the steady rock beats in "Please Please Me" and other early Beatles recordings, the drum kit pattern through the bridge of "Hello Goodbye", the drums and hi-hat rolls on "Come Together", and the driving bass drum notes found in "Lady Madonna", underlying the more intricate, double-tracked snare drum. His use of a 'sizzle' cymbal (a cymbal incorporated with rivets that vibrate) would bring a much fuller sound than standard 'ride' cymbals. Starr comments that his best drumming is on the 1966 single B-side "Rain". McCartney sent Starr a postcard on 31 January 1969 (the day after the band's performance on the roof of Apple Studios) stating: 'You are the greatest drummer in the world. Really.' This postcard is included in Starr's book Postcards From The Boys.[29] There are five occasions on which the drummer on a Beatles track is someone other than Starr. For the band's second recording session with Starr as a member on 11 September 1962, producer George Martin replaced the studio-inexperienced Starr with session drummer Andy White to record takes for what would be the two sides of The Beatles' first single, "Love Me Do" backed with "P.S. I Love You". Starr played tambourine on "Love Me Do" and maracas on "P.S. I Love You" for this date.[30] Initial pressings of the single used the 4 September recording with Starr on drums; subsequent pressings and the Please Please Me LP used the White sessions. McCartney took over the drums on "Back in the U.S.S.R." and "Dear Prudence" from the White Album (1968) after Starr had walked out. McCartney also played the drums on "Ballad of John and Yoko", recorded on 14 April 1969, since only Lennon and McCartney were immediately available to record the song.[31] Starr commented that he was lucky in being 'surrounded by three frustrated drummers' who could only drum in one style.[32]

Good trivia, but I don't think many professional drummers would agree with your friend. Starr was/is revered by many "superstar" drummers who followed. As a matter of fact, Starr may be the first true superstar drummer.

Outstanding musician. Radioactive personality.

Outstanding musician. Radioactive personality.

Look, I know your completely mental and I will kick myself for responding to your immaturity, but what part of not agreeing with the other schools don't you understand? Sorry if I missed those stories but I have not read them and don't know the circumstances. I'm sure you'll kindly link credible sources like NewsMax.

Read it again, genius.

Behold the logic of an extremist. You erect straw-men faster than you can rip up the Constitution. 1. I am not for "banning" any group, religious, political or military. As long as everyone follows the same pragmatic rules then they should all have the opportunity to peaceably assembly. 2. Why do they call it "Liberty University" when they are afraid of free speech, the right to assembly and equal protection? Pretty Ironic. 3. You are right, they CAN ban the group, not recognize it or cut off it's funding. The question is: should they? 4. If you believe that what other institutions allegedly did is wrong (and after umpteen thousand posts you have established a poor record of credibility), why would you endorse "Liberty" for, in your words, "infringing public rights?" That's a good definition of selective outrage. I guess your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Bottomline: even McDonnell disagrees with school's decision. They have the "right" to do it, but perhaps they should finally change the name to more appropriately reflect its beliefs - VA Bills University?

Ironically named university deletes a few Constitutional Amendments Discuss.

Thanks, Rush.