Do You Ever See Tea Party Or Conservative Protesters Doing This Crap?

620 WTMJ reports "Locks superglued prior to protests of Governor Walker at local school"

MILWAUKEE - Protesters crowded the street outside Messmer Preparatory School in Milwaukee's Riverwest neighborhood as Governor Walker visited the school Friday to read to children.



The protests came just hours after someone vandalized the school ahead of the Governor's visit.



"Some of these folks super glued our front doors at the prep school," said Br. Bob Smith, OFM, the president of Messmer Catholic Schools, about the school on the corner of North Fratney and East Burleigh Streets.



He told Newsradio 620 WTMJ that a woman was walking in front of the school Thursday, asking people to protest.



According to Br. Smith, one protester said " 'Get ready for a riot,' because they were going to disrupt the visit."



Br. Smith said that, in his opinion, the Republican governor's visit to read to students there on Friday was not about political overtones connected to protests that have been happening all year in the state regarding the rollback of collective bargaining rights for many public workers.



"People ought to start acting like adults," said Br. Smith.



"You've got little kids who have no clue what you're even talking about, and you make something political when it isn't, that's just flat-out wrong."

Video here.



These people are sickening.



.

Far Left Liberals Repeating Their Palin Mistakes With Rick Perry

There is an expression about learning from one's mistakes, a lesson that far left Liberals haven't seemed to comprehend and the recent media, blogosphere, especially those on the far left, frenzy over Rick Perry shows that progressive Liberals didn't learn from the mistakes they made with Sarah Palin.



John McCain put Palin in the spotlight by choosing her as his VP of choice during the 2008 presidential campaign, but it was the far left, progressive Liberals that made Sarah Palin a household name. Who put her in a position she is in now, where every book she writes is a national best seller, candidates she chooses to support tend to do well in elections, facebook notes she writes end up being front page news and reporters follow her like little puppy dogs, is all thanks to the amount of ink, words, media stories and blog posts written about her and most of them by the far left in their attempts to destroy her.



Since Governor Rick Perry declared he is officially running for president in 2012, the political news site that shows the most talked about stories, Memeorandum, has been full of stories about Rick Perry.



Today alone, so far, I see no less that 70+ media articles, blog posts and video moments all about Perry.



Since he is a GOP candidate, one would expect most of the stories to be by conservatives who have a new face in the field, or Perry supporters that feel he would be the best choice as president.



At first it is to be expected that people from the opposite political side would comment, report Perry's declaration to run, perhaps dedicate a post or two to his record and his voting history, but the frenzy is full of misleading moments, cut videos edited for the specific purpose of trying to label Perry as racist, attempts to negate Perry's record in Texas where the jobs growth has been 37% of the nation's total...etc...



Using the numbers on job growth in Texas as just one example, something that was reported well before Perry entered the race, the far left cries "but they are low paying jobs", "unemployment is still 8.2%", "it is Texas oil that is responsible", and on and on they go to attempt to negate the very fact that Texas did have the largest job growth, to claim it means nothing and to make people forget that over the last decade, Perry was indeed the Governor that presided over it all.



So, of course, others step up and dig into the numbers, and show why those attempts are nothing more than hot air blown up the butts of those liberal site's readers.



Political junkies, like myself, will follow the process and learn all we can, but what do the general public, the majority of voters who never open a blog, hear the loudest from their half hour long nightly news?



Job growth in Texas has accounted for 37% of the nation's job creation.



Same thing about the latest bruhaha where Perry said it was almost treasonous for the Fed , to print out more money at time where our credit rating has been lowered for the first time in history, our economy is in the tank and we spend more than we bring in, and that if Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke did so, the people in Texas would treat him pretty ugly.



Liberals went on the offensive yet again, dedicating hundreds of stories and blog posts to claiming he threatened Bernanke... but what do those that watch the nightly news hear the loudest?



Perry doesn't think printing more money and throwing good money after bad is a good thing.



Those are just small examples of what the frenzy has done for Rick Perry.



The takeaway here is that before Perry entered the race, other than political junkies and those who live in Texas, not many people knew who Rick Perry was.



Days later, thanks in large part to the help of Liberal media personalities and far left progressive bloggers, Perry climbed to the top of the GOP people taking a double digit lead over Mitt Romney and InTrade has Perry listed as 8% more likely than Romney to walk away with the GOP nomination.



No amount of money could have bought Governor Perry that kind of publicity, no amount of campaign ad buys could have catapulted him into the homes of Americans and given him the name and face recognition he now has less than a week after entering the race.



Governor Rick Perry truly needs to start sending out thank you notes to each Liberal media personality, writer and journalist, as well as to every blogger that made sure his comments and speech soundbites made it to the national television news, local and cable.



.

Perhaps Liberals Should Sit Down, Shut Up And Listen For A Change

"The majority of citizens in nearly all the world’s most developed countries simply aren’t prepared to tolerate the degree of borrowing required to sustain generous welfare programmes any longer."---- Telegraph, Aug. 2, 2011

Going through the headlines over at Memeorandum today, watching Liberals whine, howl, beat their chest and demonize the Tea Party and members of the right over the debt deal that has been reached, agreed to and is passing through both chambers of Congress, I am seeing a theme of complete denial from the left side of the political spectrum.

One of the most arrogant pieces yet is over at Mother Jones by Kevin Drum.

But no matter how many times we try to kid ourselves with one poll result or another, liberals just don't have that advantage. The public is mostly in favor of raising taxes on the rich — though I suspect its support is pretty soft — but on the bigger issues they mostly aren't on our side. They think deficits are bad, they don't trust Keynesian economics, they don't want a higher IRS bill (who does, after all?), and they believe the federal government is spending too much on stuff they don't really understand. Conservatives have just flat out won this debate in recent decades, and until that changes we're not going to be able to make much progress.

This is why I blame the broad liberal community for our failures, not just President Obama. My biggest beef with Obama is the same one I had three years ago, namely that he's never really even tried to move public opinion in a specifically progressive direction. But that hardly even matters unless all the rest of us have laid the groundwork. And we haven't. Wonks, hacks, activists, all of us. We just haven't persuaded the public to support our vision of government. Until we do, the tea party tendency will always be more powerful than we are.

I call this arrogant because Drum admits that on the largest of issues the public is not "on our side", [Liberals] yet he believes it is because Liberals simply haven't convinced the rest of the country that the Liberal mindset and agenda is right and the majority of the public is wrong or simply doesn't understand what the "smarter"(in Drum's mind that would be Liberals) folks understand.

I disagree, the Liberal "Wonks, hacks, activists", as Drum calls them, have spent the last months doing nothing but trying to convince the general public that Liberals are right and the public is wrong. They have produced chart after chart, dedicated millions of words and posts and articles, explaining their thinking.

Guess what? The public opinion still has not changed.

The liberal arguments have been heard and rejected by the majority.

So, instead of simply admitting that the majority is more conservative than they are, believes the government should spend within it's means as the rest of us have to, think that our debt is out of control and needs to be brought down and government needs to be smaller, what do Liberals do when they cannot force their agenda down our throats?
They call them "hostage takers", "terrorists", they claim the Tea Party has declared "war" on America, they liken Republicans to "baby-kidnapping", and "monsters" and call the debt deal a "Satan sandwich

Libs do that instead of giving the majority of Americans the simple respect of having their own opinions that don't match their own and they blame Tea Party members of Congress, those the majority of the public voted for in the 2010 midterms, for the specific policies that Liberals are against, rather than considering their own agenda and beliefs are wrong.

One has to wonder if these Liberals, like Drum, have ever looked in the mirror and asked themselves, "could I be wrong, could the majority be right?"

I did that when I was a Clinton Democrat and lo and behold I found my answer was yes, I could be wrong and yes the majority could be right.

Perhaps if Liberals would sit down, shut up and listen for a change, they might actually learn they are not the smartest kids in the room and the majority of Americans are much smarter than our politicians or our pundits give them credit for.


[Update] Jonah Goldberg has a message for the Liberal media stooges and their hypocrisy.

Well, go to Hell. All of you.

Please read the whole thing.

.

Penza On Why Progressives Fail To Get Support For Policies: Arrogance

I was following an Al Gore discussion thread when I ran across a piece at The Moderate Voice that so accurately describes the far left liberal "progressives", I found it much more interesting that the Gore topic.

Penza states:

At its core the problem is a total failure of persuasion. Progressives often fail to get support for their policies because they often try to bully people into expressing agreement instead of undertaking the hard work of actually persuading them. That is the common root of many failed progressive efforts, from the speech codes that try to prevent dissent from emerging on the same college campuses where progressives used to champion it to the failure of global warming “climate change” activism to the ongoing political collapse of health care reform.

The common thread between these diverse progressive policy failures is an incoherent and often enraged failure to understand that sometimes people might disagree with them. When people disagree or even just start to express concerns, most progressive commentators just slap them into a category labelled “stupid” or worse and proceed to demonize them as evil to boot. When the dominant reaction to dissent is not argument but contempt and demonization, it imposes a heavy cost on progressive political viability. The voters don’t like being alternatively condescended to and outright condemned as jerks and rubes. The most surprising thing is that so many highly intelligent progressives are themselves surprised by this conventional and seemingly obvious feature of human psychology.

The reason this resonated so fast for me is because in the discussions listed under the original Gore piece, I had just clicked a link to a progressive site that made Penza's point quoted above, perfectly.

He’s just throwing shit to see if he can make a statue of a pony. Note the slippage between what might be a “character flaw,” as Mead dubs it, and Gore just being rich — a curious position for a rightist to take, to say the least. (Mead intones “You cannot even become enormously rich investing in companies that will profit if the policies you advocate are put into place,” which is some hard fucking luck for Dick Cheney, who is apparently morally superior to Gore in this calculus because he was always upfront about being a sonofabitch.) And get a load of this: “A fawning establishment press spares the former vice president the vitriol and schadenfreude it pours over the preachers and priests whose personal conduct compromised the core tenets of their mission; Gore is not mocked as others have been.” Damn. Mead wouldn’t be getting away with that shit if Bob Somerby were still alive.

I think Moderate Voice's Logan Penza should send FireDogLake's Thers a nice fruit basket as a thank you for proving every word he said as true.

.

Obama's Ideology Of Biting The Hand That Feeds Us

[Update] This 2:27 minute Rubio video is so awesome that I am putting the update of it on top of this piece..... Rubio speaks to class warfare: (H/T Hot Air)

“It’s class warfare, and it’s the kind of language you would expect from a leader of a third-world country, not the President of the United States.”

[End update]

Original post below

Who funds our government? Not who lends us more money to spend more, but where does the bulk of our revenue come from?

It comes from income taxes paid by the rich.

Tax Year 2008

Percentiles Ranked by AGI	AGI Threshold on Percentiles	Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1%	$380,354	38.02
Top 5%	$159,619	58.72
Top 10%	$113,799	69.94
Top 25%	$67,280	86.34
Top 50%	$33,048	97.30
Bottom 50%	<$33,048	2.7
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income Source: Internal Revenue Service

Chart obtained from National Taxpayers Union

If you go to the National Taxpayer Union link above you will see the charts all the way back to 1999.

The very same people that receive the tax breaks that Barack Obama has been harping on all week and in his radio address this morning are the people that pay an overwhelming majority of the income taxes across the country to fund Washington's wasteful spending habits.

These are the millionaires, billionaires, hedge fund managers, corporate jet owners, oil and gas companies etc.. and Barack Obama said something today to which I believe should be highlighted boldly.

"It would be nice if we could keep every tax break, but we can’t afford them," Obama said. "Because if we choose to keep those tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, or for hedge fund managers and corporate jet owners, or for oil and gas companies pulling in huge profits without our help – then we’ll have to make even deeper cuts somewhere else."

Emphasis mine.

Pulling in huge profits without our help!!! Obama's words.

These companies and people are not asking the government to give them a dime. They are earning their profits. Any business owner will tell you the reason they go into business is to succeed, to earn money, most want to expand and grow to earn more. Hire more. Sell more. All of which would help the economy.

The American dream.

Extending tax breaks to these people is not giving them money, it is taking less money from them that they have earned.

These are the folks that employ millions, provide jobs when the official unemployment is at 9.1 percent. These are the people that pour money into the economy by providing paychecks to those employees that go out and spend money on food, gas, clothing, school supplies for their kids and anything their families need.

These are the people that Barack Obama and the liberal left are declaring class warfare on.

Barack Obama and the liberal left would have you believe that letting them keep more of their own money, is actually giving them something and is adding to our nation's deficit.

An intellectually dishonest argument because the government is not writing them a check, is not paying them any money, is not bailing them out, is not spending one cent of taxpayer money on them.

If you have a bank account with $100 in it and you do not have to write a check out of it then no money is being taken out, there is no expenditure.

Barack Obama's statement that "we can’t afford" taxbreaks is another false argument.

When you go to the grocery store to get food for the week but you only have (XXX) amount of money in your pocket, you may not be able to afford extras because you do not have the money in your pocket to spend on them.

You do not look at the person next to you and say "hey, I don't money for cookies so give me a few bucks" and when he says no, you blame him for not being able to afford those cookies.

Or do you?

Expenditure, via Dictionary.com

1. the act of expending something, especially funds; disbursement; consumption.

Yet Obama and far left liberal Democrats (yes, redundant, I know) would like you to think that not taking more from people out of their pockets is some type of "expenditure."

It isn't.

What the far left liberals are doing is trying to feed on jealousy and envy and every negative emotion human nature has.

I will repeat Obama's words, the so-called rich and businesses owners are funding America without our help, are creating what jobs there are left without our help, are feeding us without our help and Obama wants to bite the hand that is feeding him and even worse, he wants you to do the same.

The reason Obama and the far left liberal Democrats are doing this is because they do not want to cut wasteful government spending, they do not want to live within a budget, they do not want to fix the problem of spending more money than they have.

Tell me, when Obama and the far left liberals are done eating the rich, finished their meal and are patting their nice fat bellies, who is going to fund America's wasteful spending habits then?

.

Debt Limit Talks: Bush Era Rates Off Table And House Democrats Feel Ignored

After the bipartisan talks imploded last week when Democrats insisted that part of the deal include $400 billion in tax increases. This forced Barack Obama to finally come to the table in negotiations over raising the debt ceiling, which stands at $14.3 trillion now, to allow the U.S. to borrow more money.

There have been a flurry of meetings that now include Obama, Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a separate meeting with House Speaker John Boehner and another meeting with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) and Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.), assistant to the leader.

The Hill reports that the administration has stopped insisting on ending the Bush-era tax cuts.

I am starting to get a vague sense of deja vu though as I see headlines like "House Democrats feel jilted by the president in budget, debt talks."

Just as House Democrats did in December after Republicans took a large net gain of House seats,the biggest turnover of seats in decades, to take control of the House of Representatives, House Democrats are now upset, feeling that they are being taken for granted and ignored and complaining publicly.

“How is it that the House Democrats played such an important role [in the majority], and all of a sudden [the White House says], ‘Forget it, we’ll work with the Senate and the Republican leadership?’ ” asked Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), vice chairman of the Democrats’ Steering and Policy Committee.

House Democrats’ frustration with Obama is boiling in the intense heat of negotiations to reach a budget deal and raise the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.

Capitol Hill Democrats have been steaming for months, since being sidelined during talks to extend the George W. Bush-era tax rates and fund the government this year. Many say the White House takes their support for granted but ignores them when it comes to making policy.

“Before this year we were playing a strong role,” said Cuellar, but “now a lot of us feel like we’re almost being ignored.”

Before this year they played a strong role because they had an overwhelming majority, and they had a Democratically controlled Senate and White House and were able to shove anything that they wanted through because the GOP could not stop them from railroading laws and bills.

November 2010 midterms ended that one party reign.

They are frustrated, speaking out to reporters, angry and aren't at the point where they can admit the reason they are being "ignored" treated as if they are "irrelevant" is because House Democrats are irrelevant at the moment.

Of course Obama is taking them for granted, who else are they going to support in 2012? The Republican candidate against Obama?

I don't think so.

Obama knows the answer to that question and so do the House Democrats that are throwing their temper tantrums.

The Obama administration needs the debt ceiling voted on, passed and raised by August 2, 2011.

Republicans have made it clear that for any debt ceiling raise to pass the House of Representatives, an equal amount of spending cuts be part of the deal. Want $2 trillion (example) then cut that same $2 trillion. Republicans want a balanced budget amendment to show they are serious about stopping the practice of spending more money than we have.

Republicans seem to have learned their lesson when they were thrown out of leadership positions the last time by their base for spending like drunken sailors with taxpayer money. They understand they campaigned in 2010 on the premise of cutting spending and lowering our deficit and if they do not fight to keep those promises, they can be replaced again in the next election.







Wasteful Government Spending

Gallup found that 73 percent of national adults understand what liberal Democrats and Barack Obama (yes, redundant) do not seem to be able to... that wasteful government spending is more to blame for the rising federal budget deficit than not raising enough money in taxes.


Corporate Taxes vs Budget Cuts

In May, a New York Times/CBS News poll (neither organization can be accused of a "conservative slant") shows that most Americans prefer budget cuts over raising corporate taxes.

In general, however, few Americans back increasing taxes on American businesses: only 37 percent said corporate taxes should be increased to help reduce the federal budget deficit. The rest agree with an alternative argument that increased taxes would discourage American companies from creating jobs and hurt them in the global marketplace. Thirty-two percent would rather see corporate taxes remain as they are now and 26 percent said taxes on corporate profits should be decreased.

Government Shutdown vs Spending Cuts

In April Rasmussen found that 57 percent of polled voters suggest that a government shutdown would be preferred to not doing the deep spending cuts necessary to get the federal budget on its way toward balance. Only 31 percent believe that avoiding a shutdown is more important.


The bottom line here is that this battle, like the previous budget battles since November is being aired publicly with the same public referred to in the polls above, watching as Republicans fight for spending cuts, a balanced budget amendment and Democrats fighting to raise taxes.

I can almost see all those public statements used in GOP campaign videos with Democrats and Obama stating over and over again "raise taxes" with the GOP candidate saying "cut spending."

Democrats need to stop playing to their 13 percent fiscally liberal base and start playing to Americans as a whole or even to the 38 percent that view themselves as moderate on fiscal issues, or 2012 is going make their massive losses in 2010 look like a walk in the park.

.

Did You Hear? The Netroots Nation Bitchfest Has Begun

Did you hear the news of the day? The far left liberal annual bitchfest has begun. It is called Netroots Nations and you can think of it as the moonbats annual get-together where far left liberal progressive all gather to piss, moan, bitch, complain and threaten before they go back to their lives and plan on how to get the person they are bitching about this year, Barack Obama, reelected.

Headlines, via Memeorandum:

Huffington Post- Progressives ‘Break Up’ With Obama

President Barack Obama is decidedly "not [the left's] boyfriend anymore," progressive supporters of gay- and immigrant-rights said on Thursday, rebuking the White House for breaking promises to the left while also asking them for money.

The Note- ABC News- Fear & Loathing In Minneapolis: Progressives Vent Frustration With Obama At Netroots Nation

Daily Caller- Capper to a great week: Piqued Netroots Nation freaks critique bleak Obama geek


Other headlines, via Google search, include but are not limited to;

Politico- Liberals' frustration on display at Netroots

Slate- Netroots Nation: The Sadness of Crowdsfrustration on display at Netroots

Then you have the blogospheric discussions surrounding those headlines, such as TPMDC with "Progressives Still Fighting Obama, Democrats At Netroots 2011"

Weasel Zippers- Obama's Communication Czar Heckled By Liberals During Daily Kos Conference...

The Nation- Netroots to White House: Where's the Love?

Booman Tribune- The Professionally Disgruntled — For the second straight year …

The most amusing part of all this is that after they are all done stomping their feet, beating their chests, screaming about how horrible Obama is and how he has disappointed them to no end, they understand just as Barack Obama does, they will either help him get reelected in 2012 or they will sit it out because they certainly won't vote for a Republican candidate.

Barking Moonbats are alllllll bark and no bite when it comes to Barack Obama.

Obama is probably kicked back, feet on his desk, laughing his butt off and telling his advisers "Please, who do you think they are going to vote for in 2012? A REPUBLICAN???? Dude, I own their asses."

.

Liberal Media Hoisted By Their Own Petard On Sarah Palin Emails

The Telegraph explains how the media frenzy and their pleas for readers to search the email dump of over 24,000 Sarah Palin emails from when she was Governor of Alaska, backfired on what Palin refers to as the "lame stream media".

One can only assume that the Left-leaning editors who dispatched teams of reporters to remote Juneau, the Alaskan capital, to pore over the emails in the hope of digging up a scandal are now viewing the result as a rather poor return on their considerable investment.

If anything, Mrs Palin seems likely to emerge from the scrutiny of the 24,000 pages, contained in six boxes and weighing 275 pounds, with her reputation considerably enhanced. As a blogger at Powerline noted, the whole saga might come to be viewed as “an embarrassment for legacy media”.

It gets worse for the media outlets that were so enamored with the idea of finding dirt on Palin, then finding none.

Sites that support Palin, such as Conservatives4Palin are now highlighting her accomplishments, her style of running Alaska, using the very same methods the NYT, Wapo and other media attempted.

Asking their readers to go through the emails and gathering links and whole excerpts to archive which show an on-hands, smart leader.

The difference is, where the media was looking for a bombshell to make Palin look bad and failed and have admitted there was no bombshell, Conservatives4Palin's efforts are showing considerable results.

The media is cherry-picking small excerpts to highlight, but they are leaving the bulk of the 24,199 pages out of their reports. That’s where you come in…

We need to gather links from the email database that prove what kind of leader Governor Palin really is. We need to find the stuff the media doesn’t want the public to know about. We want to show the stuff they aren’t reporting but is still available online. The media wanted to “expose” what kind of executive Governor Palin was while in office… So, let us oblige them! We need your help collecting and archiving excerpts.

It is always entertaining to see the liberal media outlets hoisted by their own petard.

.

Sarah Palin Outsmarts The Left Again?

Once again Sarah Palin says something, the left jumps all over it inferring she is simply stupid and ooooooops, she is right, thereby once again making fools and idiots of the left?

Did they really do it again?

Is Sarah getting the last laugh like she certainly did the last time the left leaped before looking?

Let us head over to William A. Jacobson, Associate Clinical Professor, Cornell Law School and see if Sarah once again proved that she is smarter than the liberal left.

Legal Insurrection:

Not having any real reason to look into it any deeper, Sarah Palin's statement that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting seemed odd.

But it appears that the popular version is not complete.

In fact, as pointed out at Conservatives4Palin, Revere did in fact tell the British that the colonial militias, who had been alerted, were waiting for them. Here is the original historical text written by Revere (spelling in original, bold added):

I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back,and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms

Palin's short statement on the video was less than clear; that sometimes happens but the part of the statement which has people screaming -- that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting -- appears to be true.

I am beginning to think Palin is deliberately picking parts of history that aren't well known just so she can make fools of the liberal left. She might figure she doesn't need to discredit them because they are so easily manipulated into discrediting themselves.

Just a thought.


Quick reminder about the last time Palin got the last laugh on liberals:

In October 2010, the left tried this and Sarah Palin made fools of them when she referenced the 1773 Tea Party and the left jumped right out of the plane, just to find out... ooooops, no parachute!!

Story: Sarah Palin referenced the 1773 Tea Party and members of the far left liberal progressive portion of the Democratic party decided to deride her for her lack of knowledge, it was tweeted, retweeted, reported on and generally the left were having a field day stating that Palin didn't know the date of the Tea Party.

Welllllllllllllllllllllllll, once they actually looked up the Tea Party, you know, using the dandy little thing called a SEARCH ENGINE..... the backtracking began.

I will end this as I ended the October piece the last time Palin Derangement Syndrome forced the liberal left to look like the bumbling idiots they truly are.

Generic Presidential Ballot Has Republicans Ahead Of Obama

Rasmussen hands Barack Obama more bad news in a week which economic news has already been devastating for him.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that in a hypothetical 2012 presidential matchup, a generic Republican candidate earns support from 45% of Likely U.S. Voters, while the president attracts 43% of the vote. Three percent (3%) favor some other candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

On average, 57.3 percent of the American public believes the country is on the wrong track. Home prices continue to drop by over 4 percent in the first quarter of 2011, unemployment is at 9 percent and Friday's report is not projected to be good. Added to that, the so-called recovery is faltering.

It never was a recovery. The massive stimulus package that Obama and the Democratically controlled House and Senate passed, simply put a band-aid on a gushing wound, postponed the inevitable and ended up costing more and worsening the job situation.

Quick analogy- Take a lot of money and pump it into a failing business without changing the way the company does business will do no more than help that business keep the doors open until they run out of the money that was pumped into it.

If you do not address the root cause of a failure, no amount of money is going to stop it from failing over and over again.

When businesses and/or corporations grow and expand they hire more people. Basic Job Growth 101.

The stark contrast coming into the 2012 election is clear.

Liberal Democrats , including Obama believe pumping more money into the economy aka "invest" will help it recover. Republicans believe spending less by cutting government spending and working on helping businesses grow will help the economy and encourage massive job growth.

You don't bite the hand that feeds you and Obama and liberals, like rabid dogs, continue to attack the very people that can help the economy recover, by threatening them with higher taxes or creating regulation after regulation to prevent them from growing.

Conservatives and liberals are walking, no running, in opposite directions, widening the gap between the two and by November 2012 the choice before the American people is going to be very very clear.

.

Red States Add More Jobs Than Blue States- Part 2: By The Numbers

Part two to my previous piece showing The Business Journals' data obtained by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics which found that Texas over the last decade has seen private sector job growth of 732,800 while California shows a private sector job decrease of 623,700.

The whole thing got me to thinking about the totals of all the blue states,red states and purple (swing) states, and I added up the numbers.

The final totals show 22 states considered "red", adding the private-sector jobs increased, subtracting the private-sector jobs decreased, left the red states with a plus 451,600 private-sector job increase over the last decade.

The 21 states considered "blue", and DC (making 22)adding the private-sector jobs increased, subtracting the private-sector jobs decreased, left the blue states with a minus 2,041,300 decrease in private-sector jobs.

Only 7 states are listed as purple, considered swing states which on any given year could swing blue or could swing red and those states total up to a 589,900 private-sector job decrease.

BY THE NUMBERS

Red States
Utah +90,000
Idaho +28,600
Wyoming +28,200
Nebraska +27,000
Alaska +34,400
Oklahoma +13,000
Kansas -42,500
North Dakota +49,600
Alabama -72,900
Texas +732,800
Mississippi -42,700
South Dakota +17,600
South Carolina -21,500
Montana +35,300
Kentucky -36,600
Indiana -165,500
Georgia -174,600
North Carolina -95,800
Tennessee -99,000
Arizona +90,200
Louisiana -5,700
Virginia +61,700

Total: +451,600 private-sector job increase from April 2001 to April 2011


Blue States
Massachusetts -140,700
Rhode Island -14,700
New York -17,000
Hawaii +26,500
Vermont -5,700
Maryland +9,900
Illinois -363,100
Connecticut -54,400
California -623,700
Delaware -13,300
Maine -16,300
New Jersey -175,600
Washington +63,000
Michigan -619,200
Minnesota -56,800
Oregon -5,500
Pennsylvania -20,400
New Mexico +34,300
Wisconsin -80,500
Iowa +1,300
New Hampshire -12,200
DC +42,800

Total w/DC added: -2,041,300 private-sector job decrease from April 2001 to April 2011

Purple (Swing) States
Arkansas -4,000
Nevada +39,600
West Virginia +7,200
Colorado -64,800
Florida -16,500
Missouri -98,500
Ohio -460,900

Total: -597,900 private-sector job decrease from April 2001 to April 2011

Page 1

(Correction made to this post)

Red States Add More Jobs Than Blue States: Texas Adds Highest Number Of Jobs Over Decade, California Suffers Biggest Decline of Jobs

Part two- By The Numbers found here.

The Business Journals' On Numbers provides a chart showing private-sector employment trends between 2001 and 2011, as well as the one-year changes from 2010 to 2011, state by state.

From April 2001 to April 2011 Texas has increased it's private-sector jobs by 732,800 and in the last year alone, from 2010 to 2011, the increase is listed at 251,700 private-sector jobs increased.

California, while enjoying a one year gain from 2010 to 2011, has suffered the biggest decline over the decade, losing 623,700 private-sector jobs.

The runners-up to Texas in private-sector growth were Arizona and Utah, which added 90,200 and 90,000 jobs respectively, during the decade from 2001 to 2011.

The data was obtained by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for the chart used by The Business Journal.

The latest data shown by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics also shows that Texas holds 8.0% unemployment, which is 1% lower than the national average and California holds 11.9% unemployment which is 2.9% above the national average.

Hot Air's Ed Morrissey makes this argument:

What do Texas, Utah, and Arizona all have in common? They are all right-to-work states. Among the top five states, only Washington does not have right-to-work laws allowing employees free choice whether to join unions. Seven of the top ten job-growth states are right-to-work. The only right-to-work state in the bottom 10 is Georgia. Earlier this month, Jim DeMint issued a report showing the correlation between right-to-work legal environments and growth:

Could be. I am sure some would argue against it but the data doesn't lie, it is just interpreted differently by those with different political agendas.

What cannot be argued is Texas is a long time Conservative state and California is well known to be a Liberal one. Politicians elected in each state are directly responsible for state politics, budgets, spending programs, spending cuts and job creation ideas.

In fact the top ten states in the On numbers list, in order, are:

Texas- RED
Arizona- RED
Utah- RED
Washington- BLUE
Virginia- RED
North Dakota-RED
District of Columbia -BLUE
Nevada- PURPLE
Montana- RED
Alaska- RED

(Technically, Washington D.C is a special district, not a state- added here only because On Numbers included it)

Conservative State-Red
Liberal State-Blue
Swing State-Purple

Apply state-by-state politics to the national argument that has been raging over the the federal deficit, government spending, spending cuts and job creation, where both sides of the political spectrum have their own opinion, for lack of a better word, on what needs to be done to address each issue, especially job creation.

It comes down to what set of ideas work and while everyone has their own opinion, if we go by the actual numbers, only one set of ideas seems to consistently provide the desired results in regards to private sector job creation.

"Texas added more jobs in the past 10 years than the total jobs of the 19 states, including the District of Columbia, that were positive for job growth."--- The Business Journals

It is up to voters to decide in 2012, more jobs or more "stimulating" experiments.

Page 2

.

Note To The Far Right : CUT. IT. OUT... Pretty Please

Seriously folks, get your act together.

Here is the deal as I see it (me being a conservative voter)- In 2008, Barack Obama, a man with no experience to warrant a position like the President of the United States of America, was elected as the President of the United States of America.

Why?

Voters turned against Republicans, pure and simple. They were the tipping point.

In 2010, after a far left extreme liberal agenda was jammed down America's throat, debt rising at unimaginable speed, government spending reaching monumental levels, bailouts mania, stimulus that stimulated nothing but higher unemployment and Obamacare, voters turned, yet again, and handed a victory to the GOP on the largest scale in over 70 years.

They did with the promise from the GOP that they would get serious on spending cuts, work on job creation and get the ball rolling to lower our debt.

From the 2008 election to the 2010 midterms, many of us, myself included, watched and wrote about the far left liberal so-called progressive extremists tearing the Democratic party apart, piece by piece, insisting that for the "good" of all, the far left liberal agenda should be shoved down American's throats and Americans would understand afterward what a wonderful thing Democrats had done.

How'd that work out? Huh? Huh?

Hint: 2010 Midterm elections.

So here we are, April 2011. A budget deal was negotiated, one that should have been passed last year while Democrats held the House, the Senate and White House, but the hard choices that needed to be made were too much of a "political hot potato," so they kicked the can down the road and the deal had to be made between a Republican controlled House of Representatives, a Democratically controlled Senate and a Democratically controlled White House.

The deal was made. Government didn't shut down, the GOP set the tone of discussion to surround spending, deficits and job creation by the end, and even had Obama and Harry Reid touting spending cuts as historic and the largest ever seen.

The GOP did so in a manner which kept voters (you know the people that will determine what direction and what message to send in 2012)engaged, informed and took into account that voters would rather see the major battle fought over trillions and not just billions. Those same voters, the majority, (which again for those that are slow, determine the outcome of elections) did not want to see a government shutdown over billions when the real fight is to come to cut spending by trillions.

Now I see hardcore conservatives, who admittedly are taking a principled stand, criticizing the size and scope of the deal that was made. I see them willing to tear into anyone that dares look at the good the GOP has done with the first initial battle.

Whether they admit it or not, there was plenty of good done. Starting with setting the public debate stage with the proper theme of debt, spending and jobs.

Lets take a quick look at what the GOP has accomplished, being in control of only the House of Representatives: (Via The Politico)

***The $40 billion in cuts was not only historically high, it was more than Boehner himself wanted to push for a few short months ago.

***Earmarks, which many thought would never go away, are now taboo - even to earmark addicts like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who reluctantly gave them up after the 2010 election.

***Deficits are all the rage on Capitol Hill, and will be until Congress wends its way through the debt limit fight and the next budget. The word “deficit” appeared in 470 documents in the Congressional Record between the beginning of January and the end of March, more than in any session’s opening since 1995, according to a review by POLITICO. And Americans listened: Asked by Gallup to identify the most important problem facing the nation, 13 percent said “federal debt” in March of this year, up from 8 percent a year ago.

***The broader budget debate is now fought on the tea party’s terms: It’s not whether to reduce government, it’s by how much. This helps explain why serious centrist commentators and even some liberals PRAISED a $6 trillion budget cut plan proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.). Remember how a similar plan was received two years ago?

***Thanks to a pickup of 675 legislative seats in 2010 - many because of these budget principles

***The most sweeping work is getting done in states. Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana are now working, real-time labs for discovering how much the party can cut government - without cutting off the support of independents. A GOP senator told us the party studies what happens in these state showdowns to test the limits of what will work here. One early finding: Many think Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) went too far, too fast by gutting union power without first educating the public.

***The real fight over spending erupted in late spring of 2009, and consider the results: The GOP won the governor’s races in Virginia and New Jersey in 2009; the Scott Brown Senate race in Massachusetts in early 2010; then won back the House, picked up Senate seats and captured the most state legislative seats in a single year since Watergate — all in November of last year.

Most Republicans and moderate conservatives are looking at the big picture, seeing the messaging war won, the stage for the future battle set to fight the bigger fight over trillions and time being bought to inform the public each step of the way so that the majority of the public is behind them.

All that in a few short months.

I took a political leanings test once, assumed I would come out as a moderate conservative, and was extremely surprised to see the test tell me I was in the top 10 percent of "ulta-conservative".... wow, really? I thought I was mellow.

The reason I tell you about that test is because I happen to agree with the hardcore far right extreme conservatives on quite a few of their political beliefs.

I believe the budget deal should have been fought over trillions (as the 2012 budget battle will be with Paul Ryan's GOP's Path to Prosperity). I believe a government that spends more than it takes in will go bankrupt, it is unsustainable. I believe saving billions in the face of a $14 trillion debt is ridiculous.

So far I agree with almost everything the far right wants and believes we need as a country.

So, why am I telling the far right to CUT. IT. OUT?

I disagree with how they want those goals achieved and how they are prepared to tear the Republican party into pieces as the far left progressives did with the Democratic party.

Back to the top everyone:

From the 2008 election to the 2010 midterms, many of us, myself included, watched and wrote about the far left liberal so-called progressive extremists tearing the Democratic party apart, piece by piece, insisting that for the "good" of all, the far left liberal agenda should be shoved down American's throats and Americans would understand afterward what a wonderful thing Democrats had done.

I am watching the far right head down the same path as the far left extreme portion of the Democratic party did from 2008 to 2010. I am watching the far right encourage Republican politicians to make the same mistakes the far left liberals forced their politicians to make from 2008 to 2010.

The principles, to which I agree with them on most issues, of the far right and their own thoughts on how our Representatives should achieve those principles, seem to be more important to them than the majority of the public and the voters in the upcoming elections.

Voters, the majority of them, must be behind everything that is done. They must have time to research the available information. They must be given time and the respect shown to them to decide issues for themselves without being told "you have to pass it to learn what is in it" (Nancy Pelosi, Obamacare quote)

Inevitably we see the argument how politicians shouldn't make their decisions based on "polls" and for the most part that is true but politicians are elected to represent their constituents and if the majority of voters turn against a party as they did Republicans in 2008 and Democrats in 2010, those voters can and will replace those politicians they feel did not represent them.

Most Tea Party supporters seem to have found a good balance here. They are arguing that more needs to be done at the same time acknowledging the limitations the politicians have to work with.

Ever heard the expression "pick your battles"?

The war is the 2012 budget, the one just passed was simply a skirmish to set the stage.

Politicians- Please do not make the same mistake Obama/Reid/Pelosi made. Do not allow the extreme portion of the GOP party to cause you to lose the majority of voters.

Far right- Please do not make the same mistakes the far left liberal so-called progressives made. Don't rip the Republican party to shreds when we will need them to unite and fight the biggest war to come.

We are all on the same side here. Can we start acting like it?

I am begging you... CUT. IT. OUT. Pretty please.

.

People Running From Liberal Welfare States

Must read piece at RCP called "Voting With Their Feet"

Teaser:

The latest published data from the 2010 census show how people are moving from place to place within the United States. In general, people are voting with their feet against places where the liberal, welfare-state policies favored by the intelligentsia are most deeply entrenched.

When you break it down by race and ethnicity, it is all too painfully clear what is happening. Both whites and blacks are leaving California, the poster state for the liberal, welfare-state and nanny-state philosophy.

Read the entire thing.

Then follow up by reading the NYT article titled "Many U.S. Blacks Moving to South, Reversing Trend."

Politicians lie. Pundits interpret information according to their own ideology.

Numbers don't lie.

.

Budget Battle On The Hill And In The Blogosphere

We spend too much. We spend more as a country than we take in.

That is the underlying concept the GOP has been preaching since before the November midterm elections and their promises to cut government spending was, in large part, one of the major reasons voters handed them the biggest victory seen in decades with one of the largest turnover of House seats, giving control of the House of Representatives to the Republicans and stripping that gavel from Nancy Pelosi to make John Boehner the Speaker of the House.

Let me repeat myself.. we spend too much.

Ezra Klein runs the latest reports in the ongoing budget battle down in one paragraph:

Back in February, Paul Ryan unveiled what was supposed to be the opening bid from the House Republicans: $32 billion in cuts for the rest of 2011. But the Tea Party demanded more and House leadership quickly caved, doubling their proposed cuts to more than $60 billion -- or almost $100 billion less than barack Obama’s 2011 budget request (quick note: different news stories present these numbers differently, as it depends on whether you use Obama’s budget request or 2010’s funding as a baseline. I’m using the difference from 2010 funding, which makes for lower sums). Now Democrats are offering as a compromise measure $30 billion in total cuts, or exactly what Ryan’s original proposal had called for. Pretty neat, huh?

Progressive liberals in the blogosphere are having another woe is me moment over the latest $20 million in cuts the Democrats are offering up. Calling their party leaders losers, calling the offer pathetic because they don't want spending cuts and generally peeved that Democrats are supposedly caving in.

People like Ezra are handing out the talking points as evidenced by his title "A huge win for the Tea Party, a win for Republicans and a big loss for Democrats."

Really?

Is that truly where they want to go with this?

The U.S. is over $14 trillion in debt, we spend more than we take in, and Republicans were handed the largest victory in 70 years in the last elections on the campaign promise that they would cut spending massively.

$30 billion is a start, I will admit that because I see each "drop in the bucket" as going toward the eventual outcome of filling the bucket, emptying it, then putting it back down to collect more.

Liberals like Ezra would love for conservatives to see the "Democrats have lost" meme and kick back, smile happily and stop pushing for more spending cuts, but that is not going to happen.

It is not a we win, you lose game. It also shouldn't be a conservative vs liberal battle either, but it is because the priorities of the left do not match the priorities of the right or Independents.

Gallup recently found that 71 percent of Americans say they worry about the economy "a great deal," 22 percent say they worry about the economy a "fair amount" with only 7 percent listed as "only a little/not at all."

64 percent of Americans say they worry about federal spending and the budget deficit a "great deal" with 23 percent saying they worry about it a "fair amount" and 12 percent listed as "only a little/not at all."

Those are the top two out of 14 issues Gallup polled on.

The breakdown of those Gallup findings are telling though and explains why supporters claim Democratic leaders are folding or losing in their eyes.

Click image to enlarge

Federal spending doesn't even register in the top four for Democrats while it is in the top two for Republicans and Independents.

The fiscal showdown continues as Congress returns to their jobs this week and in this specific case Republicans have the majority support of the American people who understand what liberal pundits do not seem able to grasp.

40 days ago the GOP controlled House passed a bill to fund government and cut spending and 40 days later the Senate, which is still Democratically controlled, has not because they are fighting to prevent the spending cuts the House passed.

We spend too much.

If Democrats force a government shutdown because they refuse to understand that basic concept, Americans are more than aware of which party is fighting to cut spending and which party is fighting tooth and nail to prevent those cuts.

.

The Difference Between Liberal 'Tea Party-Like' Uprisings And The Actual Tea Party

The Hill reports on Liberal groups that are attempting to create a "Tea Party-like public uprising" against Republicans on the issue of steep budget cuts.

Liberals are backing the wrong horse once again.

The difference between what Liberals will attempt and fail and what the Tea Party has done successfully is very simple.

The Tea Party's positions against government spending mimic the majority of Americans that in poll after poll have said they want smaller government to spend less of taxpayers money, a decrease in the federal deficit and budget cuts.

The Liberal's attempting to replicate the Tea Party, are fighting against steep budget cuts and continue to encourage even more spending of money the country doesn't have.

So the difference is quite easily seen.

The Liberals are arguing and fighting against what the majority of American voters want. The Tea Party's positions represent what most Americans want.

This is why one is successful and the other is doomed to failure.

.

This, Right Here, Is What Is Wrong With Progressive Liberals

In 2007, the yearly Kos Convention, now named Netroots Nation, hosted Democratic presidential contenders, Democratic politicians and liberals from across the country and they hold this convention every year.

Do Conservatives protest this convention, do hundreds flock outside holding signs and declaring that liberals do not have the right to meet and discuss their agenda?

Not that I have seen, please feel free to provide evidence to the contrary if you have photos of any massive protest against this or any other liberal meeting.

In the meantime, the news is full today screaming headlines "Hundreds march outside Koch brothers' retreat."

Koch Industries is the nations second-largest privately held company. They fund efforts to push for limited-government, libertarian agenda as well as help organize Tea Party groups.. among other things.

Charles and David Koch held their eighth retreat for prominent conservative elected officials, major political donors and strategists, and according to Koch spokeswoman Nancy Pfotenhauer, the meeting "brings together some of America's greatest philanthropists and job creators … who share a common belief that the current level of government spending in our nation is simply unsustainable."

The meeting is focusing on ways to reduce the rising federal deficit, she said, as well as "strategies to promote policies that will help grow our economy, foster free enterprise and create American jobs."

Liberals have MoveOn.org and many attend the annual Net Nations conventions which has work groups set up to discuss the progressive agenda and how to further it, just to name two such events and organizations, which bring Democratic politicians, strategists, presidential contenders together to discuss many of the same issues. Groups that donate heavily to the progressive agenda, but in the eyes of a liberal, to their thinking, they have the right to bring together like minded individuals, corporations and such but Conservatives do not.

About Koch Industries:

Koch Industries was co-founded by Fred C. Koch in 1940 when they developed an innovative crude oil refining process. Now Koch Industries is a conglomerate based in Wichita, Kansas, with subsidiaries involved in manufacturing, trading and investments. Koch is involved in manufacturing, refining and distribution of petroleum, chemicals, energy, fiber, intermediates and polymers, minerals, fertilizers, pulp and paper, chemical technology equipment, ranching, finance, commodities trading, as well as other ventures and investments.

To liberals the Kochs represent "corporate greed" as the protest signs signal.

Last I heard, starting a business, building it up and creating a profit by offering services for money, is the basis behind capitalism. Handing that business down to your children to have them expand and grow it, is a legacy.

It also creates jobs for thousands if not millions over time.

In the twisted minds of liberals, Koch's main offense is that they are conservative/libertarian in political nature and they are prepared to put their money where their mouth is.

How dare them support the Tea Party!! How wrong of them to have a political affiliation as well as having money. How "insidious" for them to use their money to help achieve their goals and what they believe to be right for the country and themselves.

I mean come on, liberal protests are never funded and organized by groups, unions or organizations, right? Protesters are never bussed in by liberals to liberal rallies or such, right?

If Conservatives held massive protests against Liberal conferences and meetings where Liberals got together to discuss what their ideas and politics, they would accuse, hell they would scream bloody murder, about how Conservatives were trying to stifle their free speech, their right to a political belief.

Yet that is exactly what liberal protesters did at the Koch retreat. All because these folks are rich and influential. Isn't that prejudicial? Isn't that discrimination?

Oh no, sorry, in the eyes of the progressive liberals you cannot be discriminatory and prejudicial against the rich, they aren't people, they are rich.

The fact that they cannot even see their own hypocrisy and double standards, right there, is what is wrong with the far left liberals of today.

.

Majority Of Americans Believe Left Attempted To Exploit AZ Tragedy To Make Right Look Bad

Quick post on Gallup who finally asked the appropriate question about what portion of Americans feel the far left and commentators that attempted to convince the public to think the right's rhetoric was somehow responsible was just using "the tragedy to make conservatives look bad."

In other words, the public saw right through the left's pathetic attempts to spin and connect the right with the act of Jared Lee Loughner when he shot and killed 6 people and injured 13 others.

The poll was conducted Jan. 11, three days after Jared Loughner allegedly shot and killed six people in Tucson, Ariz., and seriously injured numerous others including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Some of the early news coverage of the shootings discussed whether the increasingly inflammatory language used in political debate today could have motivated the shooter to attack the Democratic member of Congress. That theory was put forth by the sheriff of Pima County, Ariz., who argued that conservative thought leaders like Sarah Palin use language that may encourage their supporters to commit acts of violence against their opponents.

Most Americans reject that theory, with 53% agreeing that commentators who allege conservative rhetoric was responsible were mostly attempting to use the tragedy to make conservatives look bad. Roughly one in three, 35%, say the commentators were making a legitimate point about how dangerous the language used by conservatives can be.

Though Americans doubt that the language used in political debate was a motivating factor in the shootings, they are inclined to believe all major U.S. political groups are going too far in using inflammatory language to criticize their opponents. In fact, Americans are about equally likely to say Democrats (51%) and Republicans (53%) are guilty of this. A similar percentage also believe this applies to supporters of the Tea Party movement.

Americans watch and listen and make up their own minds no matter how often the left attempts to mislead them.

As a side note since the left's attempt included a very strong push to mislead the public and pin blame on Sarah Palin for Loughner's acts, once she responded, it seems the public views her as more "sincere" and "believable" after seeing her response to those far left liberals attempts.

Can you say... BACKFIRE?

.

Note To Dems: Telegraphing A Punch Makes It Less Effective

Any boxer will tell you that if you telegraph your punch at your opponent you give them time to duck, weave and counter punch.

Over the last two years Republicans have been able to drive media messages and Democrats have, admittedly failed at the public messaging for things such as Obamacare, the Stmulus package, Cap and Trade and much of that has been blamed for the severe losses Democrats suffered during the midterm elections.

I see a piece at the liberal The Plum Line which shows Democrats just didn't get it, they still do not understand how to message effectively and once again they are telegraphing their moves leaving Republicans an abundance of time to counter.

Not to mention picking their battles.

Republicans nailed the Obamacare battle early on and the public stayed opposed, by an overwhelming majority throughout the whole public debate and to this day, each and every poll shows the majority of Americans still opposed to Obamacare.

Democrats have set out to stage a "title" for the Obamacare repeal bill. A repeal that once again has the support of the plurality in some cases (Gallup) and majority of Americans in others (Rasmussen), and instead of a news conference with hard and fast interviews following it slamming the name into the public eye quickly, what do they do?

They are letting bloggers trickle the "title", taking any possible sting out of the bite before the repeal is even voted on in the House of Representatives.

"The Patient's Rights Repeal Act."

At a House Dem leadership meeting last week, Dem leaders decided that this is the phrase they will officially use to brand the House GOP's push to repeal health reform, aides tell me.

With House Republicans set to press forward with repeal next week, the idea behind the Dem talking point is to emphasize what repeal would take away from you -- and to position the plight of the patient in the center of this battle.

Dems are gearing up for a major campaign against repeal, in hopes that it will give them another crack at selling the American public on the law by highlighting its most popular provisions and arguing that repeal would do away with them.

Hoping that they get "another crack" at selling Obamacare to the public? Two years of public debate and the law is still just as unpopular. They lost that battle, that ship has sailed, yet they are once again picking a fight where they already took a massive knockout punch.

That is their first mistake but it gets better.

Where do I start with this.... okay, back to the boxing analogy. A fighter doesn't telegraph a punch but they also do not throw a punch when they are flat on their asses on the floor after having been knocked down.

(Click image to enlarge)

Head on over to the RCP site and scroll down to see the polling down for the last year.

That folks is a knockout punch and the fighter that got knocked out is still swinging from the floor and looking like a fool flailing around on the mat.

I am almost embarrassed for them.


Related:

House to hold delayed vote on healthcare repeal next week

.

49 Percent Of Americans Find Democratic Party 'Too Liberal'

Gallup reports that 49 percent of Americans believe the Democratic party has become "too liberal" with 38 percent believing the Democratic party is just about right. On the flip side, 34 percent of American find the Republican party "too conservative" while 41 percent find the Republican party just "about right."

The recent increase in perceptions of the Democratic Party as too liberal could be a response to the expansion in government spending since President Barack Obama took office, most notably regarding the economic stimulus and healthcare legislation.

The 49% of Americans who now believe the Democratic Party's views are too liberal is one percentage point below the 50% Gallup measured after the 1994 elections, the all-time high in the trend question first asked in 1992.

Since February 2008, the percentage calling the Democratic Party "too liberal" has increased by 12 points among independents and 8 points among Republicans, with little change among Democrats.

This confirms what a previous Gallup poll found which was that conservatives are still the dominant ideology as 40 percent of U.S. Adults self identify as conservative, 35 identify as Moderate and just 21 percent self identify as liberals.

Americans are still right of center in terms of ideology and liberals are still the minority with those identifying as "very liberal" only total 6 percent.

Liberal Democrats are disconnected from the majority of America, which is why the things they seem to fight for or against so hard is done against the opposition from most of America.

The most recent example of that is the tax deal Barack Obama negotiated with Republicans that liberals so opposed, yet ever poll conducted showed Americans supporting it as a whole package.

That deal was signed into law December 17, 2010 with top Democratic leadership noticeably absent from the signing ceremony.

.