James, Todd - I what I mean about sore winners is, you guys won.  Cons, and not just Cons, Religious Right Neo-Cons, controll ALL aspects of the government.  President, Congress, Supreme Court, most State level positions, etc.  Liberalism has been defeated in America.  It doesn't exist.  Why are you guys still so heated?  What threat is there?  Me posting on a message board?  A random judge somewhere (who, don't worry, will be "taken care of" soon enough)?  Why is there so much anger?  You guys won.  The left is dead.  I don't get it.  Who cares what we say?  It means nothing.  We could run Jesus Christ as a candidate and you guys would still win.  Why not offer the glad hand of friendship and try to move forward.  What can we do?  Whine and cry?  Big deal, you still won.

Matt had a good idea there - here's a link to my best friend's web-site - well, it's part of his site.  He's a pretty hard-core conservative.  Anyway - I think this part of his site is really funny - check it out - http://netgeist.com/stickers.htm

I'll post the link to my friend's website/blog again, where you can now buy his book! Tons of archived posts, threads and articles. Bill's a great guy no matter what his political affiliation or bias. Enjoy!

http://www.ejectejecteject.com

As to Matt, upper middle class or rich New Yorkers are almost all liberal (NYC that is).

On the Island, it is much more mixed.  Moderate Republican traditionally. 

In fact I never until very recently ever even called myself Conservative.  I always considered myself a fairly moderate Republican, typical of Northeast Republicans, except my views on abortion are pretty conservative.  But besides that I was always more a Guiliani, Pataki, Schwarzennegger Republican, not a southern or religious one.

But in college and law school, I really got to see how some "liberals" for want of a better term saw any Republican.  Hitler-lite.  Racists.  Etc. Then I realized how distrubing it was that almost all of academia and the media were liberal (not moderate or New Deal) democrats (like, the protest marching, flag burning extreme for academia). I am sure it is similar in some very religious/conservative parts of the country, but the other way.

In the end, most of my views I believe are moderate, relatively in tune with the majority of people, and somewhat pragmatic.  I am not a Sean Hannity or a Rush Limbaugh, and never listen to them (well I do see Hannity and Colmes occasionally).  My favorite Presidents (modern) are FDR, Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan, and GWB. so go figure.

But I enjoy this forum-gives me a chance to hash out what I really think and see arguments from people from all over-real people. So it is good.  I enjoy playing devil's advocate-helps me refine my own views if I can argue both sides (as any good lawyer should be able to do lol) and try to find the faults in bith sides.

I think there is a liberal media, but I also don't think it's a "vast left-wing conspiracy" and I do think the card is played too often like the boy who cried wolf. ANd I think it is obvious Fox is biased.  But to me, it is just as obvious the NY Times and CBS are too.

I think that you are unlikely to find a less heated poster on this board.  I try very hard to keep my posts on a friendly and professional level, some joking, but no broad vacuous attacks, no personal insults, etc. 

Mike O'Brien wrote: What threat is there?  Me posting on a message board?  A random judge somewhere (who, don't worry, will be "taken care of" soon enough)?  Why is there so much anger?  You guys won.  The left is dead.  I don't get it.  Who cares what we say?  It means nothing.  We could run Jesus Christ as a candidate and you guys would still win.  Why not offer the glad hand of friendship and try to move forward.  What can we do?  Whine and cry?  Big deal, you still won.

Honestly Mike, you are not making any sense to me. (sorry).

But here is an answer anyway.

I would like to spend a day watching the news or TV or reading the paper and not be confronted with all the subtle political spin that is inherent in the coverage.  That is my wish for the media. That is not being a sore winner, that is wishing for some transparency of the process, and a significant decrease in the 'charged' words that are used to describe things.

"one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" (Reuters) is a good example of what i am talking about.  It is long past time to call the "militants" in Iraq what they are and they are terrorists.  They are killing civilian Iraqi's and attempting to overthrow the newly formed democratically elected government. Their agenda is not to function as "freedom fighters", but as enslavers. They are not militants or gunmen or any other accomodating term, they are terrorists.

That is, in a nutshell, what I am frustrated with. (there are easy to identify terminological parallels in just about every political issue)
 

Teod, we will no longer discuss anything political.
------------------------------

That's cool James. I look forward to other than political discussions with you.

uh....Red Sweaters anyone?   Maybe you were confused because your names were at the beginning, but that because I was specifically answering the question that you guys asked. 

And, Yes, Eric, that's your greatest post.