Jim Hoft links this chart from Gallup:

Gallup reports:

If this pattern continues, 2011 will be the third straight year that conservatives significantly outnumber moderates — the next largest ideological bloc. Liberalism has been holding steady for the past six years, averaging either 21% or 22%, although notably higher than the 17% average seen in Gallup polling during the early to middle ’90s.

What struck me was the remarkable consistency of the data.  Over the past 20 years, the number describing themselves as liberal has ranged between 16 and 21% (5-point range), as moderate between 35 and 39 43 (8-point range), conservative between 36 and 41 (5-point range).

Note how the number has surged from 37% in 2008 to 41% today.

Maybe that’s because we’re more open to reaching out to those with differing points of view.

NB: Thanks to reader Less for correcting an error in the post.

Andrew Malcolm reflects on Obama’s leadership style as manifested in recent negotiations with congressional Republicans:

Obama will, no doubt, have more to say about the deal today. See if he throws in more sour grapes as he did after the GOP won its Bush tax cut extensions in last December’s talks. Back then, Obama, who promised to bring both sides together if elected in 2008, called his fellow deal-makers “hostage-takers.”

. . . .

Obama stepped into the stalled talks in recent weeks. He never offered his own new debt reduction plan, but used several public statements and closed White House meetings to show executive leadership and criticize other plans.

He used his poll-tested “balanced approach” demand numerous times (meaning more taxes as well as spending cuts) and sent aides like David Plouffe out to repeat how Republicans were demanding “my way or the highway.”

Via Instapundit.  Read the whole thing

Wasn’t Obama the guy who was “trying to break is a pattern in Washington where everybody is always looking for somebody else to blame.“

Looks like one of our critics was having a bad day on Friday and decided to vent on our Facebook page:

If I were a federal Representative or U.S. Senator, I’d be getting a lot of calls today from party leadership making the case for the debt compromise package.  I remain ambivalent about it.  Enough liberals are “freaking out” about the package, with one Democratic Senator calling it the “Death Of Keynesian Economics.”  All that sounds good.

But, I don’t like this idea of a superduper congressional committee to find even more cuts.  That sounds like passing the buck to me, avoiding those “tough decisions” the president tells us we need make.

Stacy McCain, who offers some thoughts on the death of Keynesianism, links a post making perhaps the best case for supporting the legislation.  Datechguy, who has actually read the bill, says it

is not an example of steaming in the right direction, it is an example of completing the turn of the ship so it is facing in the right direction but you have to turn the ship before you change directions, this is the turn.

Not quite a step in the right direction then, but turning your body so that the next step you make will be.

UPDATE: In one of her many (must-read) posts on the debt deal, Jennifer Rubin quotes Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking minority leader on the Senate Budget Committee who reluctantly backs the bill as a “first step“. She also reports that he. . .

. . . has railed against the absence of a proper budget process. For over two years, the Senate has not produced a budget. This is not simply a matter of being a stickler for rules. Sessions understood that, without a budget, Senate Democrats could evade responsibility for making tough choices and simply demagogue whatever Republicans proposed.

Emphasis added.  We do need to keep reminding people about that Democratic failure.  Read the whole thing.

Today, August First, my great Centennial State of Colorado marks its 135th birthday. On this date in 1876, the territory between the 37th and 41st parallels and 102° and 109° West was designated the 38th of the United States of America.

Ours is a beautiful and bountiful state with the vast prairies in the east, the majestic Rocky Mountains separating the continent, and awe-inspiring vistas on our Western Slope. Colorado is home to 53 of the 88 US mountains over 14,000 feet—its most famous, Pike’s Peak being the inspiration for the song “America the Beautiful”.

Colorado is home to exquisite wildlife, endless outdoor activities, and—if I may say so myself—some of the best people you’ll ever meet. If you’re looking for a getaway from the record heat and general misery of the East Coast this summer, or if you’ve had enough of earthquakes and sharks out West, you’re invited: Come out to Colorado and see what we have to offer!

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HQ)

“Men,” writes David K. Li in the New York Post, “have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the altar – whether they’re straight or gay.”

While several studies have suggested that there are more gay men than lesbians, there have been more lesbian marriages than gay (male) ones by a margin of 3-to-2.  Since the Nutmeg State, for example, recognized same-sex marriages, “3,252 lesbian couples have wed . . . compared with just 2,053 gay guys.”

It does seem women seek to “nest” more than do men.  Guess some of our male fellows just prefer being the lone wolf.

(This is not the first time I’ve noted this phenomenon, but as I came across the (relatively recent) article while surfing the web, thought I would share it with y’all.)

Over at YidWithLid, Jeff Dunetz calls the bipartisan debt deal “a huge victory for the Conservative wing of the party.”  He includes a lot of bullet points about the deal as well as the Speaker’s PowerPoint presentation offering details of the “Two-Step Approach” to hold the president “accountable,” contending that it cuts government spending more than it increases the debt limit.  (H/t:  Instapundit.)

Jennifer Rubin agrees with Dunetz that all “in all Republicans have much to crow about.”

I learned of the deal via CNN, having looked up from my cardio machine to see the “Breaking News.”  I initially thought it was a bad deal, given how some commentator on the “news” network seemed to be gloating, but then they showed the president who didn’t seem too pleased, especially when he lashed out at those Republicans who prevented millionaires and billionaires from paying their fair share.

(Question for consideration:  why does Obama feel the need to attack Republicans for this failure to increase taxes on some of the most productive in our society.)

I’ll just say I have mixed feelings about the deal.  I don’t think Republicans should have given in to the president’s demand that they agree to extend to the debt limit through the 2012 campaign.  If Ronald Reagan, as Obama claimed in his speech last week, raised the debt ceiling eighteen times, that means he did it, average, more than twice a year.  Why shouldn’t a president who has lately (rhetorically at least) become so fond of the Gipper have to do it less often, only once in two years?

That said, before the deal was announced Michael Barone said Republicans had won because the fight was on our proverbial turf, “over cuts not more taxes.” (more…)

Over at the Washington Examiner, Charlie Spiering looks at the president’s loss of Twitter followers:

“Since @BarackObama’s busy spamming folks on Twitter, @TomRooney was kind enough to share a copy of BO’s debt plan: http://1.usa.gov/olI0Cc,” Congressman Patrick McHenry wrote linking to a blank document.

Presidential candidate Herman Cain wrote:  “@BarackObama calls for bipartisanship. Then tweets out names of GOP lawmakers to attack. #youredoingitwrong #compromise”

Must be that new kind kind of politics, put yourself forward as post-partisan while leveling partisan zingers at your political adversaries.