Max Fischer

Um, so after the first game the Bills can keep the no-huddle, spread offense a secret for the rest of the season? Gonna bring the Watergate Plumbers to erase each game tape?

How do they measure "POA" stats?

Not to set off a firestorm, but have you tested her for ADD? I'm not one to hand out drugs to every kid who doesn't perform well but we resisted with our intelligent and unfocused second daughter in 6th grade and the results are pretty remarkable. She was a C and C+ student before and A-student now. Same kid, same personality, same kind of craziness but she now focuses in class and on her work. It certainly doesn't work for every kid but I'm glad we tried that before putting her in a very expensive private school.

Good Lord, get over it. Whitner only gets sh*t because he's a first-rounder. He may not be a superstar but he's a very solid player and will start every game he's healthy. Get over your first-round expectations and be thankful we don't have worry about his position.

What does he know? At about 9PM this board declared this the "Worst Draft Ever."

At least that's the way I see it. Yes, rookies all, but why not?

Drafted three upgraded starters. I'd say that's pretty good. B+

Later. People who react like this are pathetic. Most people couldn't even name 75% of the draftees until a few weeks ago. Every frickin' year people go nuts when we don't take so-and-so who usually turns out to be bust anyway. People really need a life. Take a chill and see what happens.

Please read your history before equating the Nazi's with socialism.

I read the book with much anticipation. However, while it was "original" and somewhat thought provoking, I was turned off by its own self-importance. By the end I didn't really care about any of the characters and thought Dr. Manhattan was right - just go ahead and wipe everyone out, what difference does it make? While the movie certainly looks impressive and true to the book, it also seeavyms to have the same heavy dose of self-importance. I get the feeling I'll leave the theater the same way I felt about the book. "Kinda cool, feast for the eyes, large serving of ideas but little pay-off in the end."

Dude, you are deranged. The links say what Wiki says that Steele and the GOP made up the whole "racial" incident. That was my point. What the !@#$ is yours?

Seriously, your source is Wikipedia????? That's awesome. Dude, do you even know how to use the internet? I found these in 30 seconds. Many articles cited here: http://mediamatters.org/items/200511210004 http://www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=11150 http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=428&sid=622881 Clean-up quote noted here: http://www.americablog.com/2005/11/gov-ehr...-steele-in.html You'll also note that the Washington Times and other rags reported the GOP version of events but never ran a correction of the story. I know, weird. Need anything else?

Nice try. There are always idiots on both sides who say dumb things but to characterize Steele as under some kind of organized racial campaign against him is complete BS. Nearly all the criticism had to do with his politics and lack of ideas and the rest of taken out context. To launch racial attacks on him in Maryland makes little political sense. In the end, it was Steele who was unmasked as playing the race card and he paid the price for making up stories. Matter of fact, Steele never "denied" he was "pelted" with oreos -- he made up the story and was caught in a gross lie about the non-incident. On that story alone Steele loses a great deal of credibility. Steele did not succeed in Maryland because he was a black Republican (in a heavily black state), it was because he's a one-note right-wing Republican in a Democratic state. The DSCC thing was not racial -- that was a rouge staffer who did the credit card thing and was justly fired and prosecuted. The New York Sun is a rag -- there was no formal connection the Democrats. Just some random idiot. And Cardin's low-level staffer was a nut-job who deserved to be fired and in no way was indicative of the campaign itself. To do otherwise would be political suicide.

Comrade VABills, how do you prove something didn't happen? How about proving it actually did happen and then posting why you don't hear these "stories" anymore? (You may use "media conspiracy" but that's just another cop out). I'll give you a head-start. Let's try the Steele accusation that a debate audience "pelted him with oreos." (You know, dark on the outside, white on the inside). That was his most famous story of racial hatred. After no one --- that is, nobody, no Republicans, non partisans or any media, left or right -- witnessed this overt and heinous attack -- Steele changed the story to the attackers "rolled oreos at his feet." You see in the original story Steele "slightly" exaggerated when he say dozens of oreos were launched at him -- and since no one saw this hail storm of cookies it was changed to rolled along the floor, so people wouldn't have seen it. Too bad no one saw this either - including the cleaning staff who never saw evidence of cookies. After this simple investigation Steele and his people never brought up the story again. Got any more?

You're not lying you just want to believe information that fits your narrow world view. We don't expect you to be swayed by the facts of the case you cite or accept that the "stories" are written by Republican party insiders. Look, as a GOP backer I can understand that you're uncomfortable with race -- but guess what? Steele is a black man in a party that is, statistically, almost unanimously white (not one congressional member, governor, or major statewide elected official -- not one). By the simple nature of that fact wouldn't that lead to questions about minority attitudes toward Republicans and vice-versa? Are you seriously suggesting that Steele's election to one of the two major political parties following Obama's election shouldn't/doesn't logically lead to an examination of the impact of his race? Why can't you accept the notion that the GOP will almost certainly ask itself the basic question: can our party survive without some significant "minority" (aka black and latino) support and how Steele may do that? Did it occur to you why Steele may have been elected despite not having sufficient conservative credentials and not exactly the traditional face of his Party? My issue with Steele is not that he's black (good for him), it's that he doesn't have a second gear - there's no there there. He makes a great first impression, he's a good communicator but anyone who knows his history will tell you that he lacks vision and leadership skills. In other words, what you see is what you get - there is nothing below the surface, there's never a Second Act. I do think he's the best choice of the lot - and the GOP averted disaster by electing the SC guy. Moreover, I think Steele will do well for the next few months (First Act) but don't expect much else in the Second Round of interviews. In other words, he's a great salesman but can't deliver the product.

No, its that, ironically, the GOP and backers like you use racial politics as weapon as often as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. If you were dull witted and really believed that charge then fine, but are you really chargin Dems of racism for criticizing a black Republican? Oh my God. Democrats criticizing a Republican!!!! When will the racism end? Steele tried this thinly-veiled strategy in Maryland and he got laughed at and soundly defeated. Dude, you are using partisan hack racial politics tactics: Dems elected Obama because he's black, criticize Steele because he's black? Get a grip. You can just hear it: those who voted for Obama are only trying to disguise the fact they are guilt-ridden passive-aggressive racists. Ingenious. Who would really think that he was best candidate for president?

You may agree with him but it doesn't make it true. 95% of the charges were fabricated by the GOP and Steele himself. Media outlets, even Fox, do not mention these "charges" anymore because even Steele and his people know its unsupportable. This was the GOP STRATEGY, make up racial attacks against Steele and play the victim of a conspiracy. Its was comical and dismissed as a fraud. Someone did say something incredibly stupid but both sides have idiots on both sides. Don't let your partisanship blind you to even most amateurish party propaganda.

The response was clear, you are hiding your beliefs behind racial codes. You said Democrats would have given a white 'empty suit" Republican Chairman a pass while would attack a qualified black republican (Steele). But on the other hand, would elevate an "empty suit" black Democrat (aka Obama) to higher office. Pretty standard racist allegation. Unless you actually want to be honest and say what you think. It's all complete BS and entirely unsupportable but then again it's easier for people like you to hide behind those words. There. Is that clear enough for you? Why is it Republicans are always talking about race instead of character and ability? Why do you have to tear down Obama by saying Democrats elevated him because he's black? Why is it so hard for you accept that people voted for him because he was a great candidate and superior to all others? Come on man, say what you really think.

Try being honest with yourself, funny guy.

There is no response when people like you talk in code instead of having the courage to say what you think. So, in that sense, you're right. At least Rush is more up front about his prejudices.

What the !@#$ are you talking about? Is that what Rush is telling you to think? Why do you feel it necessary to talk in code?

Uh, right. So if he was an empty suit Dems would hold there opinion? So you're criticizing Obama because he's right? Nice logic, genius.

You're a moronic partisan hack. All those stories are partisan pieces written by GOP backers. It's ALL completely and utterly untrue. In fact, Steele made up stories about racial insults and got caught in the lies. Afterward he got pummeled in his senate race. And Party DOES trump race. In other words, in case you missed the clear point, that Black voters chose the DEMOCRAT because he represented their views and didn't vote for Steele only because he was the same race. What part of that don't you agree with? You frickin' party hack. And can the moral, racial outrage. It doesn't suit you. For once try to find out the facts before grandstanding.

Where do you get your information? You're not even close. "Hate black race?" Are your frickin' kidding me? Get a clue. Steele is an empty suit. Fortunately for the GOP he was the best of a bad lot. As LG for Ehrlich (who is was Bush without the brains), he had no constitutional responsibilities, ran against a weak campaign for senate and got waxed. Partially due to a D state in a Dem year but mostly due to an inept campaign and candidate. Steele went from GOP darling to embarrassment in a few short weeks. Steele will make a good first impression but he's got only one gear and its likely his welcome will soon wear out.

Rush and Coulter are the Democrat's best friends. Makes almost any Dem look mainstream and coherent. Please keep buying their books and praising their viewpoints. If they remain the face of the Republican Party then they can forget about mid-term gains and pray they don't fall further behind. Some criticized Obama for addressing Rush on the presumption that it gave him credibility and put him on par with the President. In fact, it elevates Rush as the Republican spokesman and tars any other GOP candidate or politician with his face and viewpoints -- which are deadly in a contested race. While Rush/Coulter play to the base they are not winning any additional converts. Some on the Right will welcome this cleansing and so will the Democratic Party. Party on guys.