Voters Say Being 'Like Reagan' Is Most Positive Thing One Can Say About a Candidate

Scott Rasmussen does polls on just about every question of consequence imaginable. In one of his latest polls he asked a sampling of voters what is the most positive thing that could be said about a political candidate.

By far the voters stated that being 'like Reagan' is the most positive quality one could ask for in a candidate.

But some of the other terms we normally use to describe politicians have taken on a clearly negative connotation:

"Progressive” is becoming more of a dirty word, but all political labels – except “being like Ronald Reagan” - are falling into disfavor with many U.S. voters, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

“Liberal” is still the worst and remains the only political description that is viewed more negatively than positively. Being like Reagan is still the most positive thing you can say about a candidate.

Thus, liberals and progressives are viewed negatively while Reagan is viewed positively. Read the entire poll at Rasmussen Reports.

Leftwing Lies About Attendance at D.C. March

The radical, extremist, Obamanoid, Leftwing machine has kicked into high gear attempting to underestimate the attendance at yesterday's massive march on D.C.

Columbia Conservative Examiner blows the whistle on the lies.

I even read some laughable estimates that put the crowd at 30,000. ROFL!! Desperation.

But I Thought 'the Great One' Was Supposed to Revive Liberalism

Americans who consider themselves conservatives now outnumber Americans who consider themselves liberal by almost two to one, according to a new poll by the Washington Post and ABC News.

In the poll of 1,001 adults conducted between July 15-18, respondents were asked: “Would you say your views on most political matters are liberal, moderate, or conservative?”

Thirty-eight percent said they were conservative, while only 20% said they were liberal. Thirty-nine percent, meanwhile, said they were moderate.

The percentage of self-described conservatives has increased since President Barack Obama was inaugurated in January and the percentage of self-described liberals has diminished.

Read the whole thing at CNS News.

Blowing the Lid on the Progressive Movement

Liberals today prefer to be called 'progressives.' But have you ever stopped to consider the history and goals of the progressive movement? It is an eye-opener.

I discuss this topic today at Columbia Conservative Examiner.

It is imperative that we consider the underlying philosophy of this movement as we fight the attempts of the big government statists to intrude in every aspect of our lives.

Tell a friend?

LEFTWING NUTS MALIGN TEA PARTY PARTICIPANTS

The Leftwing loons are at it again prior to the July 4 Tea Party gatherings around the nation. As they did before, these Libtards are maligning Tea Party participants, this time even going as far as calling them 'unpatriotic.'

Texas Fred has been on the receiving end of the malicious attacks, and he files this story.

The Best Part of Obama's Speech...

...was Governor Bobby Jindal's response from the Republicans.

No clearer distinction could be made between big government Democrats and conservative Republicans than Jindal made last night.

Barack Obama's speech clearly defined his ideology. Spend trillions of taxpayer dollars and expand the role and scope of government, because the citizens simply can't be trusted with their own money. This is pure socialism.

Bobby Jindal, by contrast, stated that individual Americans can do anything we set our minds to do...if only government gets out of the way.

This is precisely the philosophy set forth by President Ronald Reagan in his 1981 Inaugural Address.

Liberals, Democrats, and President Obama believe that only the federal government can be trusted to 'fix' things. Conservatives, Republicans, and Bobby Jindal believe that the individual citizens can do far more than they ever conceived if they put their minds to it.

Who do YOU trust? The federal government? Or the people?

Terrorist Bill Ayers Now Writes for Huffington Post

Unapologetic domestic terrorist and Obama friend Bill Ayers is now writing for the Huffington Post.

Until now he has had an occasional writing gig at The New York Times, in addition to his duties as a university professor.

Apparently Adrianna Huffington believes that it is important to have a domestic terrorist on her team. Just one more reason to believe that liberals in this country have gone completely berserk.

The Colorado Model:How Leftists Plan a Takeover

Leftists who now control the Democratic Party in America can point to a successful model which they can use to take over the country.

It is called 'the Colorado Model,' a highly successful experiment involving rich liberals who funnel big bucks into a state to bury the GOP and insure that liberal/Leftist Democrats are elected to office.

So successful the model has been in Colorado that Democrats are considering implementing the same plan nationally.

Contrary to popular perception, liberals are clearly NOT those who 'empathize with the poor' but are elitists who believe the masses should live by a different set of rules than their own.

Most of them are affluent and prescribe a very Spartan manner of living for average citizens while they themselves drive the largest limos and live in mansions, spewing carbon based trash into the air like no 'average citizen.'

They have no intention of giving that up once they force the rest of us into serfdom with limited choices as to how we control our own lives. Had they had honorable intentions they would have already given up the lavish lifestyles.

But Al Gore, Barbra Streisand, Susan Sarandon, and thousands of other rich liberals continue to demand the best of everything the world has to offer while lecturing the rest of us about driving SUVs, running our air conditioning, or even using Albuterol to control asthma--one of the latest casualties of the false 'global warming' hysteria.

One of the worst offenders is Democrat elitist operative George Soros, the billionaire who has pumped multi-millions of dollars into the Democratic Party for the single purpose of first controlling the Party, and then controlling America.

The details of the plan for a national takeover read like a scene from a futuristic science-fiction novel. Barack Obama has even spoken of a large, well-trained 'citizen army' that would not only function along side of the U.S. military but possess all of the equipment to be just as powerful.

So don't look now, but liberal storm troopers may be on the way!

The Tipping Point May Be Closer Than You Think

All it would take for America to lose its hard-fought liberties as embodied in the Bill of Rights as applied to ALL citizens is two terms of Barack Obama along with a Democrat majority in Congress.

In less than 8 years the U.S. would become like Canada, Great Britain, and other so-called 'free countries' in the West that have disarmed their citizens and thrown people in jail for speaking their minds...unless their speech is approved by the 'pc speech and thought police.'

Canada even has the Nazi-like silencing of free speech down to an art through so-called 'human rights tribunals' that really have nothing to do with protecting human rights but persecuting and prosecuting citizens who speak an unpopular message that 'offends' certain minority sectors of society.

This is the ugly, hidden truth of modern-day liberalism. In the name of supposedly 'being open and accepting of all' liberals would dismantle the rights of citizens to say anything at all that anyone, anywhere would find offensive--that is, if the offended parties happen to be Muslim, gay, Leftist, or environmentalist extremist.

But the rest of us can simply go to hell.

Hence, Nancy Pelosi wants to bring back 'the fairness doctrine' so that she can be unfair to conservatives in the name of fairness.

With a majority in both houses of Congress, and with Barack Obama in the White House, you can rest assured that the Democrats will not stop until Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and others are forced off the air. The politically correct movement will have a field day with such lunacy as equating those who believe the global warming theory is faulty science with 'Holocaust deniers.'

And don't forget the gun issue. No matter what the Supreme Court decided on Heller, two terms of Obama with a Democratic Congress will not only change the makeup of the Court but insure that gun bans are brought back full force.

My friends, this is why we may be nearing 'the tipping point.' Those who believe in the Bill of Rights for each individual citizen must get ready. If the potential scenario I have portrayed becomes reality, then it will be time to invoke Jefferson's reset button.

It's later than you think.

Why Liberal Politicans Want Gas Prices High

It is a big mistake to believe liberal politicians who decry the high price of gasoline and condemn the oil companies for their 'obscene' profits.

Their crocodile tears are merely a smokescreen that hides their true intent.

And their charge that 'Bush did it to help his buddies in the oil business' is but a red herring to draw attention away from their sordid scheme.

Liberals, in fact, want our gasoline prices at the pump to be as high as they can go. And the reason is very simple--the higher the costs the more Americans will be forced to stop using gasoline.

The plan to which I refer is a simple but elaborate scheme to manipulate the markets so that gasoline prices will rise to a level that is totally beyond the reach of most Americans. The result, of course, is reduced consumption and a public outcry for alternative fuels.

Barack Obama openly admitted to this scheme in a news interview recently, during which he was asked if he were comfortable with the skyrocketing prices at the pump. He stated that he 'would have preferred a more gradual adjustment,' meaning, of course, that he did not deny at all his desire for gasoline prices to be high and for American consumers to hurt as a result.

He simply would have 'done it more gradually.'

To be fair, Obama is not the only liberal politician who has bought into this way of thinking.

Al Gore was one of the first to devise such a scheme of market manipulation, not only just prior to his 2000 Presidential campaign but going all the way back to 1994 when, as Vice-President, he cast the tie-breaking vote to mandate that oil companies provide a mixture of ethanol to be added to the gasoline sold at the pump.

The scheme has been a gradual increase in gasoline prices ever since, not to mention the fact that demand for ethanol has resulted in soaring food costs as politicians have sold their souls to the devil by taking food from the mouths of hungry children worldwide and making fuel out of it.

Democrats from Obama to Gore to Pelosi to Reed have all supported policies that prevent drilling for oil right here at home, where there are some of the richest crude oil fields in the world, while at the same time supporting measures that increase taxes on oil and gasoline and mandate alternative sources of energy that in essence do nothing to ease the financial burden on most Americans.

For example, they will not adequately fund the development of hydrogen fuel cell technology, nuclear power, or even wind power. Ted Kennedy, for example, has consistently opposed the placing of windmills along the east coast.

At the same time, Democrats have opposed increasing refinery capacity and the building of more refineries--two measures that, along with oil exploration and drilling right here at home, would have the net effect of lowering the price of gasoline at the pump.

Liberals are heavily indebted to environmentalist extremists who believe that gasoline and cars are evil and that we should do anything to wean the country off of oil.

But the problem is that the market has been relatively uncooperative--until now.

As long as gasoline remained relatively cheap according to the world's standards, Americans had no real incentive to push for alternative fuels. And thus, the Democrats and their cohorts developed a multi-pronged plan to manipulate the markets, prevent oil exploration and drilling in this country, oppose every single proposal to develop nuclear and wind-based power, and mandate the use of corn for fuel, thus driving up the costs of energy and food.

And let us not forget that oil speculators who moved offshore so as to avoid regulation in the U.S. are one of the primary sources of oil prices skyrocketing on the open market.

These persons can be easily manipulated by corrupt politicians with sordid schemes who lure their prey by dangling the carrot in their faces of mega-profits from the purchase of oil futures.

That way, 'everybody wins.' Liberal politicians get their wish for oil to be priced out of reach, thus manipulating Americans to cut consumption, while at the same time insuring that speculators get a bounty from the oil price boon.

It's not rocket science, my friends. Obama, Pelosi, Gore, Reed, Kennedy, and others want you to suffer for your own good. And they ARE succeeding.

Second Amendment News Roundup for 6/25/08

Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:


Mike McCarville says that a group of Oklahoma Democrats used the Iwo Jima picture to endorse local Democratic candidates. The problem is the leader of the group didn't have permission, which prompted an apology.

JR has a link to Gun Facts, an e-book that debunks all of the common myths about gun control. All you do is download it.

JR also weighs in on the current debate about open carry.

Roberta X says that the hand-wringing has already begun among the antis concerning Heller vs. D.C., although the decision has not even been issued from the Supreme Court.

Armed and Safe has the MUST-read of the day concerning the centrality of guns during the Civil Rights movement...on the part of the oppressed!

Clayton Cramer has an interesting read today on why his respect for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy continues to decline.

Gateway Pundit reports that Barack 'Fruitcake' Obama unleashed a spray of machine gun style bullets in attacking Dr. James Dobson. The Fruitcake doesn't realize that Dr. Dobson represents millions of evangelical votes.

Gateway Pundit also notes that the (Un)Fairness Doctrine is back full force. Nancy Pelosi supports it, despite the free publicity she and her Marxist cohorts get from the MSM. Can you imagine what this group of clowns will do with a greater majority AND a Democratic President?

One more from Gateway Pundit. Here is what liberal Christianity stands for, and it is SICK.

Gun Pundit reports that because we didn't get a decision on Heller vs. D.C. today, it will be tomorrow for sure.

Sharp as a Marble is a law-abiding gun owner. And it's a good thing!

Sebastian reports that the VPC has unleashed a pack of lies about concealed carry holders.

WHO IS THIS MAN?! LOL. Breda has a link that shows us.

David Codrea links to a post that says, 'There is no such thing as gun control.' Take a look.

Dr. John Lott reports that there is a move underway in Florida to overturn the new law allowing licensed gun owners to keep their firearms locked in their cars while at work.

Judges like THIS make me want to puke. Michelle Malkin reports.

Obama's Internet Rapid Response Team

As we reported in the Second Amendment News Roundup section of The Liberty Sphere yesterday, Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama has launched a new website for the single purpose of rapidly responding to and repudiating negative comments about the candidate.

Of particular concern to the candidate is what he terms 'false rumors spread on the Internet.'

Using the real-time concept and the immediacy of the Internet, Obama hopes to blast and squelch any negative comment about him as soon as it happens. The candidate hopes that such 'rapid response' by his handlers will help to stop the 'rumors.'

Indeed, it is unfortunate that false rumors are spread about anyone, and politicians get their share. For example, it is a widespread belief among many in the electorate that Obama is a closet Muslim. That belief is false. The candidate is a member, or was a member, of a Christian congregation in Chicago, albeit an extremely liberal/extremist one.

The Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago is one of the most liberal, Leftwing churches in the nation, but it is part of a mainline Christian denomination. Yet many persist in referring to Obama as a Muslim.

This rumor is one that the Obama people refute on the new rapid response website. But what they don't tell us is that Obama has actually inadvertently fueled the rumor by consistently
supporting Muslim and Arab causes and by making statements that are clearly anti-Jewish.

Another rumor the new website hopes to snuff out is the claim that Obama doesn't place his hand over his heart when he says the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States flag.

In order to 'refute' that rumor, the Obama people post a video that shows the candidate in the Senate, clearly with his hand over his heart, as he recites the Pledge.

The problem is what they don't tell us. On the campaign trail Obama has been seen reciting the Pledge without the traditional salute of placing one's hand over one's heart. In one instance he didn't recite it at all even as fellow Democrats on the platform did so.

And this is not to mention the fact that Obama very publicly took his flag lapel pin OFF after having worn it for several months while campaigning. The candidate claims that the reason for the change was that having a flag on one's lapel is no indication that the person is patriotic.

Well, Senator, it is certainly more likely for a person who is not wearing the flag pin to be unpatriotic than a person who is wearing one. And that is the understatement of the year. Which of the hate-America. flag-bashing, anti-military extremists wear flag lapel pins?

And if the Senator felt that when he first started his campaign for President it was important enough to wear the lapel pin, then why did he suddenly decide that it was important enough to take it OFF?

Thus, the new website purports to address untruths and false rumors while failing to tell the complete truth. The rest of the story is curiously missing.

I have a hunch that this is the best we can expect from the new website.

But you can see for yourselves and make up your own minds. Here is a link to Obama's new Internet Rapid Response Team, called 'Fight the Smears':
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/fightthesmearshome/

The House Blocks 'the Fairness Doctrine'

Washington, DC (TLS). In a striking victory for free speech and conservative talk radio, the U.S. House of Representatives today voted to block federal funding to revive the so-called 'Fairness Doctrine.'

Long derided by conservatives as a ruse by which Democrats seek to shut down conservative talk radio, and thus silence their voices entirely from most of the traditional media, the Fairness Doctrine was born in an era when there was no television, no cable or satellite TV, and no Internet.

In fact, one has to travel all the way back to the year 1929 to understand the context out of which the Fairness Doctrine was born.

Radio was the only source of electronic media in those days. Print newspapers and radio were the only game in town. The Fairness Doctrine was implemented as a means to insure the fair reporting of all sides of political news, since radio was one of only two sources of such news.

Thus, the Fairness Doctrine prevented radio from being dominated by one point of view. Plus, there was no such thing in those days as 'conservative talk radio,' which is funded by market-driven forces based upon ratings.

With the advent of various and sundry different forms of news reporting, such as television, direct mail, and the Internet, no longer did radio have a monopoly on electronic media. Suddenly people could get their political news and commentary in a variety of media.

This meant the end of the Fairness Doctrine, since the circumstances which necessitated it no longer existed.

Liberal politicians within the Democratic Party have long envied the remarkable success of conservative talk radio. And, they most certainly have bemoaned its influence, in spite of the fact that ever since the beginning of television news, political news has been reported with a definite liberal bias.

As legendary ABC News icon Howard K. Smith stated in the 1970s, 'Let's face it. Most of us in this business are liberal Democrats. This is bound to reflect on the manner in which we report the news.'

Yet, in spite of this consistent leftward leaning medium of television, the Democrats simply could not resist turning green with envy when they looked at Rush Limbaugh's ratings. They even attempted several failed forays into talk radio themselves, featuring liberals such as Al Franken and others, all of whom met a quick demise due to low ratings.

When no one is listening to your show, it's hard to get advertisers to spend money getting you to promote their products.

The failure of 'liberal talk radio' in the open marketplace of ideas led many Democrats to conclude that if they cannot compete with the conservatives on the radio, then they should force radio stations through legislation to put liberals on the air.

That legislation came in the form of the revival of the Fairness Doctrine.

The House of Representatives, however, under the leadership of several conservative Republicans, successfully passed an amendment to an appropriations bill today that blocks using federal dollars to fund any revival of the Fairness Doctrine.

Not surprisingly, many conservative Democrats joined them in voting for the amendment.

Over in the Senate, don't expect the Fairness Doctrine to have any more success than it did in the House, despite Trent Lott's retort about talk radio 'ruining this country.' A very humbled and contrite Trent Lott appeared on Chris Wallace's Sunday morning program on Fox News to state that, 'Talk radio has helped me in many ways through the years. I believe that they should have the right to say whatever they please.'

Does this mean, then, that Democrats and liberals will be barred from lending their voices to the issues of the day, simply because they cannot shut down conservative talk radio? In spite of the fact that this is obviously what they want the voters to think, don't believe it for a second.

The Democrats still have the New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Miami Herald, Time Magazine, Newsweek Magazine, ABC News, CBS News, CNN, NBC News, more than a dozen filmmakers in Hollywood, and countless other forms of news to roll out the liberal party line in the media.

And this is precisely why their whines concerning the 'unfairness' of conservative talk radio are simply not credible. In fact, the entire charade makes them look like a bunch of spoiled cry-babies.

LEFT WING CONSPIRES TO DESTROY TALK RADIO

Washington, DC (TLS). Sources inside the Senate have reported that Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York) and Barbara Boxer (D-California) are conspiring with other Left Wing operatives to destroy conservative talk radio.

As we reported last evening, Republican Senator James Inhofe states that he has evidence that Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer are planning legislative action to cripple talk radio.

The link to the video of Inhofe making these charges is here:
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2042.html


But that's not all.

One organization, Think Progress.org, has published a 'how-to' instructional memo on ending conservative talk radio's influence.

As we have stated many times before on The Liberty Sphere, talk radio is the ONLY major media source where conservatives have a voice, other than Fox News. The liberals have controlled the mainstream media for decades. ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN have all been in the hip pocket of Democrats for as long as they have been in existence.

And now, apparently the commie-nazis like Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, Moveon.org, and many others wish to pull off a coup--to take control of all of the radio airwaves in addition to controlling television news.

My friends, this is not just the rantings of a rightwing blogger. These people are serious, and they have a plan...a PUBLISHED plan. We need to gear up for this fight, for this one is a battle where we MUST draw the line in the sand.

Here is the complete plan to silence conservative talk radio:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/20/radio-report

LIBERAL LIES ABOUT AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ

Washington, DC (TLS). Remember when we invaded Iraq, and all the Liberals howled that they agreed with the military campaign in Afghanistan, but not Iraq?

Remember that ever since that time the Liberals have qualified their opposition to the War in Iraq by saying, 'But I was all for Afghanistan.'

Bull. Don't believe a word of it. They are lying.

They protested going into Afghanistan too. I was there and saw it with my own eyes. In short, they don't want to use military force for ANYTHING that serves our security or national interest, period!

Read this eye-opener from Blonde Sagacity:
http://mobyrebuttal.blogspot.com/2007/06/better-late-than-never.html

Congress Tried Twice to Make Churches 'Lobbyists'

Washington, DC (TLS). With the Leftwing in control of Congress under the Democrats, a consistent, persistent attempt is afoot to make churches 'lobbyists' under federal law.

Although the sponsors of this legislation have failed in both attempts, they are committed to keep trying until this is passed into law.

Should your church be considered a 'lobbyist' if it tries to influence Congress on, say, abortion legislation? If these nutcases have their way, it will.

Read the whole story concerning the Democrats' dastardly scheme here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55762

Alec Baldwin Verbally Abuses 11-Yr.-Old Daughter

Washington, DC (TLS). Alec Baldwin, the Hollywood Leftist elitist who stated he would 'move out of the country' if George W. Bush were elected President, has been caught red-handed engaging in severe verbal and emotional abuse of his eleven-year-old daughter.

I am still waiting for Baldwin to make good on his word to move out of the country.

It's been seven years now. Perhaps it is time for us to usher him out.

Baldwin referred to his own flesh and blood as a 'pig.' And this is not the worst of it. At the end of this article you will find a link to a site where you can hear each and every word of Baldwin's violent rage against his daughter on a voice mail message he left for her.

Warning! This taped excerpt contains vile language and should not be listened to by under aged persons.

So, why do we publicize such things on The Liberty Sphere? Simple. You have a right to know what the self-righteous, particularly the bleeding-heart Liberal hypocrites, are actually doing and saying behind closed doors. They hold the rest of America to a standard they are not willing to abide by themselves.

Baldwin is a despicable human being. And when you hear what he said to his own daughter, you will in all likelihood agree.

To hear Baldwin's abusive rampage against his daughter, click here:
http://www.tmz.com/2007/04/19/alec-baldwins-threatening-message-to-daughter

Renewed Calls for Assault Weapons Bans

Washington, DC (TLS). The Salt Lake terrorist attack by Bosnian Muslim Sulejmen Talovic has resulted in renewed calls for assault weapons bans. As always in cases like this, the usual suspects among the gun-grabbers and Leftist ideologues seize incidents such as school shootings, mass murders in shopping malls, and the like, in order to attempt to capture public sentiment at a vulnerable moment to advance their subversive agenda. That agenda is the disarming of law-abiding citizens in the name of keeping criminals from using guns.

Of course, the apologists for the Left will predictably claim that since Talovic had no history of violent activity, then the only way to address tragedies such as the one he perpetrated is to pass legislation restricting access to weapons among the general population.

Naturally, the Liberals will never acknowledge that it was a concealed weapon carried by a citizen who happened to be a cop off duty that stopped the killer. Had this hero not been present, had he not used the concealed weapon in his possession, then the carnage wreaked by Talovic would have been infinitely worse.

But let's cut right to the chase for a moment, shall we? Instead of making law-abiding citizens pay for the actions of a criminal minority, why don't we go straight to the source of these problems and acknowledge that extremist Muslims are intent on carrying out this type of attack and others like it, and we had best be getting ourselves ready for urban warfare against terrorists--warfare that will require citizens to carry and use their guns.

The same can be said for school violence. Administrators and others within school systems across the country need to be allowed to carry concealed weapons. A teacher armed with a gun would have stopped most mass murderers in schools long before they were able to get off a single shot in most instances.

Instead, in our politically-correct 'gun-free zones' we have left these areas wide open for criminals who don't give a flying flip about the law to bring in their weaponry, leaving ordinary citizens as sitting ducks.

Frankly, I am growing very impatient with these grand social designers of the Leftwing and their grossly illogical proposals for more anti-gun laws. These laws do not work, and two major studies by the CDC and the American Academy of Science prove it.

What DOES work is profiling. It is time to ditch the lame-brained politically correct approach to not identifying likely suspects for the fear of offending CAIR. The attack in Salt Lake was part of the Jihad. The young man who carried out the attack was more than likely a victim of Sudden Jihad Syndrome, which is growing rampant among Muslim young men around the world after they are exposed to the extremist rhetoric of Islamic Jihadists.

Here is a better proposal. Just as the cop in Salt Lake was allowed concealed carry, so should the citizens be afforded the very same right. In the absence of law enforcement personnel at crime scenes, the citizens need the right to defend themselves against the onslaughts of violent criminals. If anything, the Salt Lake case is an example for the need for the citizens' right to concealed carry.