A book club in Montgomery County for right-of-center

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

He actually said they were being jackasses, i.e. behaving like, not calling them personally a jackass. There IS a difference.

I assume that English is not your first language? "Being" is the present participle of "be", to be something.

Who says conservatives lack humor? One calls people "jackasses' in the name of civility and another actually outdoes Clinton defining "is" and tries to redefine "being".

LOL! "Being" doesn't mean "to be". Excellent.

Hi Jeff,

I've already explained that I am not trying to further the civility. I comment on the lack of civility and then comment on the jack-assedness of those who feel the need to insult the OP for no reason. Please stop misrepresenting what I have said. Your sycophants here rely on you to be accurate. Please be so.

Ah, but it is you doing the misrepresenting. The only personal insult in this thread was you calling other posters "jackasses". Nobody insulted the OP. Several people questioned the need for such a group. One person made a joke about whether or not conservatives read. But, there were no personal insults or name-calling until you posted.

You called other posters "jackasses" and then complained that liberals are not civil. You are far less civil than any other poster in this thread.

You cant have a normal conversation can you? Read the posts responding to the OP. They are insulting. Some to the OP, some to conservatives in general. Do they hurl a "personal insult". No. But that is distinction without a difference and you know it. For you to characterize me as the least civil poster in this thread shows how blind you are to those who share your political views.

Do you even want conservatives to be here (not a rhetorical question)? I would think you'd welcome some diversity in the threads. You treat conservatives poorly and you are one of the least caustic people on this discussion board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

Jeff,

I presume you've read all the posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you expect a conservative poster here to be a doormat for the ugliness of the liberal posters. If you trace my IP address, you know that I am a poster from the right who regularly complains about the uncivil tone in political threads.



I don't become uncivil with people I disagree with until they become that way with me. When people become offensive I have no problem in calling them jackasses. You were that way in a thread with me several weeks ago and I stand by the insults I made to you. You started the insulting comments with me in that thread.

Enough with the sanctimony.

So, what you are saying is that you are not opposed to incivility -- indeed, you proudly engage in it yourself. You are simply opposed to incivility directed at you and people you perceive to be like you.

Do you believe that reacting with name-calling to comments you perceive as insulting will lead to greater civility? I don't think so, myself.

I proudly refuse to let people who are uncivil to me treat me as a doormat. I am proud to stand up for myself. I just explained that I don't throw the first punch. You know that is the case.

I did not say that when I insult a liberal who has first insulted me, that I am doing something that leads to greater civility. Don't pretend I said that. Is the guy who beats up a bully "advancing civility"? Of course not, he has another purpose in beating up the bully. One purpose in returning the insult is to call attention to the initial insult. You guys throw them out so loosely that it seems you sometimes are not even aware how insulting you regularly are to conservatives here. (that is the plural "you")

May I be the welcome you to the internet? Please, make yourself at home. You will find a great deal of information. Please note, however, that roughly 270 million people in North America have access to the internet, and it is quite common for people to behave badly in posting. You may be tempted to react in kind, which may lead to a phenomenon known as a "flame war". Alternatively, you could choose to either ignore the posters behaving badly, or call them out, without engaging in the same behavior. Within the limits, if any, imposed by the forum's "administrator", it's really up to you to decide.

Hi friend. Thanks for the condescending note! Thanks for confirming what I've just spent several posts talking about. I had no idea about all of those fascinating pieces of information you provided. Thank you for helping out a stupid ol' conservative!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

He actually said they were being jackasses, i.e. behaving like, not calling them personally a jackass. There IS a difference.

I assume that English is not your first language? "Being" is the present participle of "be", to be something.

Who says conservatives lack humor? One calls people "jackasses' in the name of civility and another actually outdoes Clinton defining "is" and tries to redefine "being".

LOL! "Being" doesn't mean "to be". Excellent.

Hi Jeff,

I've already explained that I am not trying to further the civility. I comment on the lack of civility and then comment on the jack-assedness of those who feel the need to insult the OP for no reason. Please stop misrepresenting what I have said. Your sycophants here rely on you to be accurate. Please be so.

Soooo.... that makes you a hypocrite. OK, go with that!

I am not a hypocrite, if you actually read and understand what I said in several posts. But thanks for the confirmation that you cant really post much without offering an insult. Did you even read the stuff I wrote, or were you in a big hurry to enter the fray and mix it up? I'm a hypocrite?? No...you are a moron. So now add that to this whole convesation. You hurl an insult at me, and you get one back. Thanks for playing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

Jeff,

I presume you've read all the posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you expect a conservative poster here to be a doormat for the ugliness of the liberal posters. If you trace my IP address, you know that I am a poster from the right who regularly complains about the uncivil tone in political threads.



I don't become uncivil with people I disagree with until they become that way with me. When people become offensive I have no problem in calling them jackasses. You were that way in a thread with me several weeks ago and I stand by the insults I made to you. You started the insulting comments with me in that thread.

Enough with the sanctimony.

So, what you are saying is that you are not opposed to incivility -- indeed, you proudly engage in it yourself. You are simply opposed to incivility directed at you and people you perceive to be like you.

Do you believe that reacting with name-calling to comments you perceive as insulting will lead to greater civility? I don't think so, myself.

I proudly refuse to let people who are uncivil to me treat me as a doormat. I am proud to stand up for myself. I just explained that I don't throw the first punch. You know that is the case.

I did not say that when I insult a liberal who has first insulted me, that I am doing something that leads to greater civility. Don't pretend I said that. Is the guy who beats up a bully "advancing civility"? Of course not, he has another purpose in beating up the bully. One purpose in returning the insult is to call attention to the initial insult. You guys throw them out so loosely that it seems you sometimes are not even aware how insulting you regularly are to conservatives here. (that is the plural "you")

May I be the welcome you to the internet? Please, make yourself at home. You will find a great deal of information. Please note, however, that roughly 270 million people in North America have access to the internet, and it is quite common for people to behave badly in posting. You may be tempted to react in kind, which may lead to a phenomenon known as a "flame war". Alternatively, you could choose to either ignore the posters behaving badly, or call them out, without engaging in the same behavior. Within the limits, if any, imposed by the forum's "administrator", it's really up to you to decide.

Hi friend. Thanks for the condescending note! Thanks for confirming what I've just spent several posts talking about. I had no idea about all of those fascinating pieces of information you provided. Thank you for helping out a stupid ol' conservative!

That post does not call you stupid. You seem to have an extremely thin skin for someone hanging out on an anonymous message board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

Jeff,

I presume you've read all the posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you expect a conservative poster here to be a doormat for the ugliness of the liberal posters. If you trace my IP address, you know that I am a poster from the right who regularly complains about the uncivil tone in political threads.



I don't become uncivil with people I disagree with until they become that way with me. When people become offensive I have no problem in calling them jackasses. You were that way in a thread with me several weeks ago and I stand by the insults I made to you. You started the insulting comments with me in that thread.

Enough with the sanctimony.

So, what you are saying is that you are not opposed to incivility -- indeed, you proudly engage in it yourself. You are simply opposed to incivility directed at you and people you perceive to be like you.

Do you believe that reacting with name-calling to comments you perceive as insulting will lead to greater civility? I don't think so, myself.

I proudly refuse to let people who are uncivil to me treat me as a doormat. I am proud to stand up for myself. I just explained that I don't throw the first punch. You know that is the case.

I did not say that when I insult a liberal who has first insulted me, that I am doing something that leads to greater civility. Don't pretend I said that. Is the guy who beats up a bully "advancing civility"? Of course not, he has another purpose in beating up the bully. One purpose in returning the insult is to call attention to the initial insult. You guys throw them out so loosely that it seems you sometimes are not even aware how insulting you regularly are to conservatives here. (that is the plural "you")

May I be the welcome you to the internet? Please, make yourself at home. You will find a great deal of information. Please note, however, that roughly 270 million people in North America have access to the internet, and it is quite common for people to behave badly in posting. You may be tempted to react in kind, which may lead to a phenomenon known as a "flame war". Alternatively, you could choose to either ignore the posters behaving badly, or call them out, without engaging in the same behavior. Within the limits, if any, imposed by the forum's "administrator", it's really up to you to decide.

Hi friend. Thanks for the condescending note! Thanks for confirming what I've just spent several posts talking about. I had no idea about all of those fascinating pieces of information you provided. Thank you for helping out a stupid ol' conservative!

That post does not call you stupid. You seem to have an extremely thin skin for someone hanging out on an anonymous message board.

See...this is what you guys have done multiple times in this thread (and many others). You post this paragraph that obviously implies that I am totally ignorant about message boards. It implies I don't have a clue about things such as flame wars. It does so in a condescending way. That is undeniable.

Then when I point out that you implied these things by referring to "a stupid ol' conservative" you say..but I didn't call you stupid. I can read, pal. I know what you did and did not actually write. I can also comprehend the impications beyond the words themselves. That is my whole point in this thread. You guys inuslt conservatives, explicitly and often implicitly. When you are called on the implicit insults, you revert to the words themselves, abandoning what you actually meant.

It is ridiculous.

I'm not thin skinned. I simply wish these threads were not as full of reflexive insults. If I moderated, I would delete stuff that was insulting and not on topic, but I don't moderate here. I just post stuff once in a while.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

Jeff,

I presume you've read all the posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you expect a conservative poster here to be a doormat for the ugliness of the liberal posters. If you trace my IP address, you know that I am a poster from the right who regularly complains about the uncivil tone in political threads.



I don't become uncivil with people I disagree with until they become that way with me. When people become offensive I have no problem in calling them jackasses. You were that way in a thread with me several weeks ago and I stand by the insults I made to you. You started the insulting comments with me in that thread.

Enough with the sanctimony.

So, what you are saying is that you are not opposed to incivility -- indeed, you proudly engage in it yourself. You are simply opposed to incivility directed at you and people you perceive to be like you.

Do you believe that reacting with name-calling to comments you perceive as insulting will lead to greater civility? I don't think so, myself.

I proudly refuse to let people who are uncivil to me treat me as a doormat. I am proud to stand up for myself. I just explained that I don't throw the first punch. You know that is the case.

I did not say that when I insult a liberal who has first insulted me, that I am doing something that leads to greater civility. Don't pretend I said that. Is the guy who beats up a bully "advancing civility"? Of course not, he has another purpose in beating up the bully. One purpose in returning the insult is to call attention to the initial insult. You guys throw them out so loosely that it seems you sometimes are not even aware how insulting you regularly are to conservatives here. (that is the plural "you")

May I be the welcome you to the internet? Please, make yourself at home. You will find a great deal of information. Please note, however, that roughly 270 million people in North America have access to the internet, and it is quite common for people to behave badly in posting. You may be tempted to react in kind, which may lead to a phenomenon known as a "flame war". Alternatively, you could choose to either ignore the posters behaving badly, or call them out, without engaging in the same behavior. Within the limits, if any, imposed by the forum's "administrator", it's really up to you to decide.

Hi friend. Thanks for the condescending note! Thanks for confirming what I've just spent several posts talking about. I had no idea about all of those fascinating pieces of information you provided. Thank you for helping out a stupid ol' conservative!

That post does not call you stupid. You seem to have an extremely thin skin for someone hanging out on an anonymous message board.

See...this is what you guys have done multiple times in this thread (and many others). You post this paragraph that obviously implies that I am totally ignorant about message boards. It implies I don't have a clue about things such as flame wars. It does so in a condescending way. That is undeniable.

Then when I point out that you implied these things by referring to "a stupid ol' conservative" you say..but I didn't call you stupid. I can read, pal. I know what you did and did not actually write. I can also comprehend the impications beyond the words themselves. That is my whole point in this thread. You guys inuslt conservatives, explicitly and often implicitly. When you are called on the implicit insults, you revert to the words themselves, abandoning what you actually meant.

It is ridiculous.

I'm not thin skinned. I simply wish these threads were not as full of reflexive insults. If I moderated, I would delete stuff that was insulting and not on topic, but I don't moderate here. I just post stuff once in a while.

It's fine to consider that post to be condescending. You can think the poster is jerk for not saying things a different way, but to be so offended that someone acted in a condescending manner to you, and the implied insult to the intelligence of all conservatives does seem a little thin skinned. I'm not even sure what would be left of DCUM if you moderated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

Jeff,

I presume you've read all the posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you expect a conservative poster here to be a doormat for the ugliness of the liberal posters. If you trace my IP address, you know that I am a poster from the right who regularly complains about the uncivil tone in political threads.



I don't become uncivil with people I disagree with until they become that way with me. When people become offensive I have no problem in calling them jackasses. You were that way in a thread with me several weeks ago and I stand by the insults I made to you. You started the insulting comments with me in that thread.

Enough with the sanctimony.

So, what you are saying is that you are not opposed to incivility -- indeed, you proudly engage in it yourself. You are simply opposed to incivility directed at you and people you perceive to be like you.

Do you believe that reacting with name-calling to comments you perceive as insulting will lead to greater civility? I don't think so, myself.

I proudly refuse to let people who are uncivil to me treat me as a doormat. I am proud to stand up for myself. I just explained that I don't throw the first punch. You know that is the case.

I did not say that when I insult a liberal who has first insulted me, that I am doing something that leads to greater civility. Don't pretend I said that. Is the guy who beats up a bully "advancing civility"? Of course not, he has another purpose in beating up the bully. One purpose in returning the insult is to call attention to the initial insult. You guys throw them out so loosely that it seems you sometimes are not even aware how insulting you regularly are to conservatives here. (that is the plural "you")

May I be the welcome you to the internet? Please, make yourself at home. You will find a great deal of information. Please note, however, that roughly 270 million people in North America have access to the internet, and it is quite common for people to behave badly in posting. You may be tempted to react in kind, which may lead to a phenomenon known as a "flame war". Alternatively, you could choose to either ignore the posters behaving badly, or call them out, without engaging in the same behavior. Within the limits, if any, imposed by the forum's "administrator", it's really up to you to decide.

Hi friend. Thanks for the condescending note! Thanks for confirming what I've just spent several posts talking about. I had no idea about all of those fascinating pieces of information you provided. Thank you for helping out a stupid ol' conservative!

That post does not call you stupid. You seem to have an extremely thin skin for someone hanging out on an anonymous message board.

See...this is what you guys have done multiple times in this thread (and many others). You post this paragraph that obviously implies that I am totally ignorant about message boards. It implies I don't have a clue about things such as flame wars. It does so in a condescending way. That is undeniable.

Then when I point out that you implied these things by referring to "a stupid ol' conservative" you say..but I didn't call you stupid. I can read, pal. I know what you did and did not actually write. I can also comprehend the impications beyond the words themselves. That is my whole point in this thread. You guys inuslt conservatives, explicitly and often implicitly. When you are called on the implicit insults, you revert to the words themselves, abandoning what you actually meant.

It is ridiculous.

I'm not thin skinned. I simply wish these threads were not as full of reflexive insults. If I moderated, I would delete stuff that was insulting and not on topic, but I don't moderate here. I just post stuff once in a while.

Oh come on. If your two kids are hitting each other over the head with sticks, do you give one time out or two?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you are being a jackass, you are acting like a jackass.

Not you ARE a jackass.

Context is everything.

Actually, it exactly means "ARE". I know that conservatives frequently reject science, but this is the first time I've learned that they sometimes reject grammar as well. The poster who wondered if conservatives read may have been on to something.

Context is everything. Without it, words are just words

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you are being a jackass, you are acting like a jackass.

Not you ARE a jackass.

Context is everything.

Actually, it exactly means "ARE". I know that conservatives frequently reject science, but this is the first time I've learned that they sometimes reject grammar as well. The poster who wondered if conservatives read may have been on to something.

Context is everything. Without it, words are just words

The context here is your inability to understand simple English. Maybe this page will help you:

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/to_be.htm

The irony here is that "being" is the present participle of "be". The word "is" is a "to be" verb. Conservatives have spent years teasing Clinton about questioning the definition of "is". Now, you are doing exactly what Clinton did.

You are being foolish. I don't mean that you are "acting" foolish. I mean that you are actually foolish.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you are being a jackass, you are acting like a jackass.

Not you ARE a jackass.

Context is everything.

Actually, it exactly means "ARE". I know that conservatives frequently reject science, but this is the first time I've learned that they sometimes reject grammar as well. The poster who wondered if conservatives read may have been on to something.

Context is everything. Without it, words are just words

The context here is your inability to understand simple English. Maybe this page will help you:

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/to_be.htm

The irony here is that "being" is the present participle of "be". The word "is" is a "to be" verb. Conservatives have spent years teasing Clinton about questioning the definition of "is". Now, you are doing exactly what Clinton did.

You are being foolish. I don't mean that you are "acting" foolish. I mean that you are actually foolish.

See, that's the thing. One can't BE a fool without ACTING foolish. But one can act foolish without actually being a fool.

Now, again, you can say the black dog isn't black because he has three white hairs, but I prefer to live in a more practical world.

And what's even funnier is you continue to prove the PP's point by having to put an insult in virtually every one of your posts. Furthermore, you even went as far as to state that nothing insulting was said, aside from the PP's comments when some progressive made a very overtly sexual comment. Were I of Sandra Fluke's progressive feminist ilk, we'd be having a far different discussion, but given I'm a conservative, and therefore, practically minded, I understood that that person's BEHAVIOR was simply disgusting and saw it as a reflection on him/her.

But that comment? Even when pointed out to you, you simply ignore in favor of insulting conservatives. Ah, the tolerant left

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

This thread is so perfect. You guys on the left just cannot help but being jackasses to a conservative poster.

You just can't shut yourself up and be civil.

Thank you for modeling civility perfectly: by calling everyone "jackasses".

Jeff,

I presume you've read all the posts in this thread. I'm not sure why you expect a conservative poster here to be a doormat for the ugliness of the liberal posters. If you trace my IP address, you know that I am a poster from the right who regularly complains about the uncivil tone in political threads.



I don't become uncivil with people I disagree with until they become that way with me. When people become offensive I have no problem in calling them jackasses. You were that way in a thread with me several weeks ago and I stand by the insults I made to you. You started the insulting comments with me in that thread.

Enough with the sanctimony.

So, what you are saying is that you are not opposed to incivility -- indeed, you proudly engage in it yourself. You are simply opposed to incivility directed at you and people you perceive to be like you.

Do you believe that reacting with name-calling to comments you perceive as insulting will lead to greater civility? I don't think so, myself.

I proudly refuse to let people who are uncivil to me treat me as a doormat. I am proud to stand up for myself. I just explained that I don't throw the first punch. You know that is the case.

I did not say that when I insult a liberal who has first insulted me, that I am doing something that leads to greater civility. Don't pretend I said that. Is the guy who beats up a bully "advancing civility"? Of course not, he has another purpose in beating up the bully. One purpose in returning the insult is to call attention to the initial insult. You guys throw them out so loosely that it seems you sometimes are not even aware how insulting you regularly are to conservatives here. (that is the plural "you")

May I be the welcome you to the internet? Please, make yourself at home. You will find a great deal of information. Please note, however, that roughly 270 million people in North America have access to the internet, and it is quite common for people to behave badly in posting. You may be tempted to react in kind, which may lead to a phenomenon known as a "flame war". Alternatively, you could choose to either ignore the posters behaving badly, or call them out, without engaging in the same behavior. Within the limits, if any, imposed by the forum's "administrator", it's really up to you to decide.

Hi friend. Thanks for the condescending note! Thanks for confirming what I've just spent several posts talking about. I had no idea about all of those fascinating pieces of information you provided. Thank you for helping out a stupid ol' conservative!

That post does not call you stupid. You seem to have an extremely thin skin for someone hanging out on an anonymous message board.

See...this is what you guys have done multiple times in this thread (and many others). You post this paragraph that obviously implies that I am totally ignorant about message boards. It implies I don't have a clue about things such as flame wars. It does so in a condescending way. That is undeniable.

Then when I point out that you implied these things by referring to "a stupid ol' conservative" you say..but I didn't call you stupid. I can read, pal. I know what you did and did not actually write. I can also comprehend the impications beyond the words themselves. That is my whole point in this thread. You guys inuslt conservatives, explicitly and often implicitly. When you are called on the implicit insults, you revert to the words themselves, abandoning what you actually meant.

It is ridiculous.

I'm not thin skinned. I simply wish these threads were not as full of reflexive insults. If I moderated, I would delete stuff that was insulting and not on topic, but I don't moderate here. I just post stuff once in a while.

It's fine to consider that post to be condescending. You can think the poster is jerk for not saying things a different way, but to be so offended that someone acted in a condescending manner to you, and the implied insult to the intelligence of all conservatives does seem a little thin skinned. I'm not even sure what would be left of DCUM if you moderated.

Not the PP, but the hard, cold reality here is that the tolerant left isn't so tolerant as evidenced in this thread. Then when it's pointed out, the dialogue becomes how thin-skinned conservatives are. I'd love, just once, to see a progressive leftist take responsibility for his/her own actions.

[Anonymous]

I take responsibility by not excluding conservatives from my book group. How's that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I take responsibility by not excluding conservatives from my book group. How's that?

It's a start. Not a hard thing to do in liberal-land

[Anonymous]

I'm happy to take responsibility for occasionally being snarky on DCUM, but I have no idea what that has to do with "cold hard reality".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I take responsibility by not excluding conservatives from my book group. How's that?

It's a start. Not a hard thing to do in liberal-land

Conservatives always have an excuse for why they can exclude others. It must be so tough that only 40% of the metro area is conservative.