Max Fischer

Um, thanks. I'm choked up . . .

See #3.

I would have assumed that, too - but Fox says: In December 2002, neighbors complained of loud construction work being done at the Naval Observatory, which has been used as a residence by vice presidents since 1974. The upset neighbors were sent a letter by the observatory's superintendent, calling the work "sensitive in nature" and "classified" and that it was urgent it be completed "on a highly accelerated schedule." Residents said they believed workers were digging deep into the ground, which would support Biden's report of a secret bunker, but officials never confirmed the purpose of the work performed.

How sneaky. Cheney would build a bunker at the Observatory . . . where he lives. Brilliant! I would have thought the bunker was under the McDonald's off Connecticut Avenue. Cheney = bunker mastermind.

Couple of questions: 1. What is your definition of tolerance? 2. Why is this quote a favorite of the right-wing? 3. How come extremists on both sides believe quotes as gospel that cannot be credibly verified anywhere? 4. How can we get you to be the face of the Republican Party?

"There is speculation in the intelligence community that a secondary reason for Army Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal being named the next commander in Afghanistan is that he headed JSOC in 2006-08 and is read-in on its contingency missions in Pakistan." That would make sense. Didn't read/hear about anyone upset they removed the last commander.

My belt holds up my pants and my pants have belt loops that hold up the belt. What the !@#$’s really goin on down there? Who is the real hero? I saw a commercial on late night TV, it said,"Forget everything you know about slipcovers." So I did. And it was a load off my mind. Then the commercial tried to sell me slipcovers, and I didn't know what the hell they were. My manager saw me drinking backstage and he said "Mitch, don't use liquor as a crutch." I can't use liquor as a crutch, because a crutch helps me walk. Liquor severely !@#$s up the way I walk. It ain't like a crutch, it's like a step I didn't see. If you drink O'Douls, you don't drink. But if you drink 20 O'Douls in a half hour, then you're a !@#$ing non-alcoholic. Non-alcoholism is a problem too. And there are symptoms, like when you fall down, does it always hurt? In Venice, Italy they don't have streets they have canals. So in Venice, we gotta keep the kids off the canals! In Venice if you're not book smart but you do know what's going on you are canal smart. "I got canal smarts B word!" I can read minds but, it's pointless cause I'm illiterate. I saw a lady on T.V. She was born without arms. Literally, she was born with her hands attached to her shoulders... and that was sad, but then they said, "Lola does not know the meaning of the word 'can't.'" And that to me was kinda worse... in a way... ya know? Not only does she not have arms, but she doesn't understand simple contractions. It's very simple, you just take two words, you put them together, then you take out the middle letter, you put a comma in there and you raise it up!

I'm odd that way.

I don't think I have a "favorite" - it's like asking for your favorite song or book. Depends on the mood. But right now I'll say Mitch Hedberg. His lines are as funny written as spoken (then again, it may be funnier when you picture Mitch delivering the line). Mitch Hedberg quotes BTW, I don't get why Dane Cook is so popular. If I can stand to watch him for 30 minutes I don't think I can recall a single funny bit.

That's true, and besides, who care if he is making money? Is that a bad thing for an owner?

I know dozens of "good Catholics" who are not 100% pro-life -- and in many cases, affirmed pro-choice voters and regular church goers. Is the Catholic religion ONLY about abortion? What other tenets puts Obama on the "other side?" Care of the poor? Death Penalty? He's half-black? Is there a checklist? What makes a good catholic?

They do make at least minimum wage. That's why they call it "minimum wage." Truth is, most people who work at WalMart like working at Walmart.

Look, it's clear you capable of rational thought, so upon reflection, presenting those two "conclusions" is a bit embarrassing and immature, don't you think? Isn't it possible (rational) that the apt conclusion is more in line with the facts from what we have seen from Obama as a candidate and a 4-month president, which suggests he is in fact a "realist" and that when presented with more information and discussion (in this case, the evidence seems to suggest that it was national security team took another run) that Obama concluded that the previous decision was not correct and they should move in a different direction. As someone in and around intense decision-making situations, I see this happen all the time. It's not a character flaw to re-examine the same information and come to a different, and correct, conclusion. Changes in decisions are only "indecisive" or "flip-flopping" when it leads to operational paralysis borne out of confusion, morale issues and structural weakness. Clearly that is not the case here, and in fact, the ultimate decision seems to led to greater clarity, a boost in morale (or at least prevention of decline) and strengthened the country's position on this potentially damaging issue.

Yes, I suppose your own characterization of events would make you feel better. It must be confusing for you to have a president who has the capacity to make the right decision based on the information at their disposal. Who knows?, someday you may actually agree with most Americans that that is a pretty good thing to have in a leader.

Ahhhhhh! Victimhood! It's not fair! The media is out to get us!

Does putting on all your posts mean that you have more sense than everyone else? (Do you use these cute little symbols when you make an oral argument as well?) If so, why would someone as smart as you say "he made the first decision WITHOUT reviewing the evidence and arguments"? Which is clearly not the case.

Start building your bunkers, Boys! (Do you take medication for your paranoia or do you just let it ride? Is it a soft, warm psychosis that blocks out reality or is a painful, burning sensation? I know Rush takes Oxycontin, does that help?)

This is thread is good evidence why the GOP is where is today. It's just SHOCKING that a president could take a second look at a decision, review the evidence and arguments and move in a different direction. I sympathize that you are smothered in rigid orthodoxy (as are those on the fringe left) and understand that you are afraid great majority Americans (made up of right and left leaning moderates) will support Obama's thoughtful pragmatic decisions, but you may want to take a good look around and ask yourself, "Am I simply being a hopeless, ideological penis?"

Oh, yeah, that's so much different . . .

Don't you all realize this is because America hates white guys? I mean, who is looking out for them? It's important to have someone to blame for (place your problem/issue here).

Damn you, President Obama! Damn you for keeping your promise to act pragmatically! Only a true leader will do on Thursday what they said they would do on Tuesday, no matter what happens on Wednesday! Oh, how will America survive a leader who uses pragmatism to arrive at a correct decision?

In every battle there comes a time when both sides consider themselves beaten, then he who continues the attack wins. -- Ulysses S. Grant

Why thank you. So, who DID you vote for in 2008?

The problem is that three of the scenarios don't call for the GOP to do anything but wait for the Democrats to screw up. There is no call to arms, a policy or GOP platform based on an idea or principle. All may lead to a "comeback" that may prove temporary at best. 1) Overreach: I think this the most likely scenario, that is why, as a Democrat, I like to see Obama put the brakes on the twin morons: Reid and Pelosi. See: Obama's attempt to defuse the torture issue (and Pelosi's inability to do/say anything right). As a Dem, I hope the Warner part of the Party in Congress start to step up more to manage the economy and foreign policy. 2) Checks and balances: this is basically the same as #1. Unfortunately for the GOP, it is much more likely the Democrats increase their Senate majority in 2010 and the 2012 prospects don't look much better. The GOP is more likely to win a few seats in the House but unless the GOP starts taking state legislatures and state houses (not all that likely) the 2012 redistricting process may solidify 2008 Dem gains. Ironically, the best shot for Checks & Balances may be to take our Obama in 2012. 3) Crisis breeds renewal: this is unfortunate wishful thinking, but more important, something the GOP cannot control. 4) Talent senses opportunity: Unfortunately for the GOP most of the "talent" he describes are much more moderate and pragmatic than Rush, Cheney and base want as leaders. Ridge didn't run because chances are he would not win the primary (sad), Cantor is getting drilled for not talking about social conservative issues, Jeb has an unfortunate last name and Jack Kemp just died. The other irony is that most of the "good opportunities" in 2010 are led by moderate Republicans. Hmmmmm. 5) The Republican Party is the de facto Libertarian Party. He may say but that doesn't mean that people think this is so. Republicans may THINK their libertarians but libertarians don't necessarily think their Republicans. This is a "Sit back and wait for Democrats to screw up plan," not a plan to deal with taxes, immigration, abortion, foreign policy, the budget, social security, medicare and a host of issues that a majority of public doesn't agree with GOP.

You guys are funny. Pathetic, but funny.