By Mr. Curmudgeon

And another R-I-N-O bites the dust. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who during the ObamaCare debate said she did not have a problem with a government run health care scheme, was denied the Republican nomination to serve another six years as Alaska’s Senator. Instead, Tea Party and Sarah Palin-supported challenger Joe Miller will face down the Democratic challenger this November.

When Murkowski realized defeat was in the cards, she let it be known she would like to run as the Libertarian candidate, which was news to the Libertarians. The five-member executive committee of the Libertarian Party hastily convened an emergency meeting to decide the issue. Emerging from the powwow, Alaska’s Libertarian Party Chairman Scott Kohlhass said, “Let’s put this to rest; it’s not happening.”

How brain dead does one have to be to believe Libertarians would allow a big-government Republican to highjack a political party that takes its small government principles seriously? What did she take them for, Republicans?

Murkowski’s desperation is understandable. She first landed the Senate seat when appointed to it by her father, Gov. Frank Murkowski, in 2002. She just hated giving back the gift daddy so graciously awarded his precious little princess. It was Murkowski’s sense of entitlement that drove her to seek another political party to front her ambitions. There’s always Alaska’s Green Party.

Here in Florida, milquetoast Gov. Charlie Crist is equally clueless. When it became clear Florida voters would reject Crist’s Obama-friendly bid for the Republican Senate nomination, he bolted his party to run as an independent. The latest Rasmussen poll reports the Tea Party-supported Republican Marco Rubio leads Crist by 10 points (40 to 30 percent). Of Crist’s “supporters,” Rasmussen finds only 45% are certain to cast their vote for him. Wow, now that’s what I call “leadership we can believe in.”

This begs the question: “Will these Republican milquetoasts ever go away?” It appears not. So, it remains for us – the long-suffering Republican voter – to relentlessly sucker-punch these gutless hangers-on at the polls.

Go Tea Party!

By Mr. Curmudgeon

Today, the Huffington Post printed an apology on behalf of one of its bloggers, Beau Friedlander – former editor-in-chief of the now defunct left wing Air America Radio. In a posting, Friedlander wrote, “It is time to pop the tea bagger’s favorite balloon (so what if it will be replaced by another?), and with that in mind I hereby offer to negotiate a $100,000 payday to the person who will come forward with a sex tape or phone records or anything else that succeeds in removing Glenn Beck from the public eye forever. I am not offering the cash myself, but I will broker the deal and/or raise the money for what you bring to the table. (And it better be good.)” Friedlander ended the post by encouraging readers to contribute money to a “slush fund” to entice would-be Beck blackmailers.

The Huffington Post pulled the post and replaced it with an editor’s note, “This piece was published directly to the Huffington Post by the author. It didn’t meet our editorial standards and has been removed from the site.”

Friedlander posted an apology to Glenn Beck, no doubt at the insistence of his employer. “It was supposed to simply make the point that the right does not hesitate to play rough with the left, and the right is far better financed,” whined Friedlander. Really? The Obama campaign raised a half billion dollars in 2008. Maybe Friedlander needs to ask the community organizer to throw a little cash into his slush fund. Or ask Obama supporter and billionaire Warren Buffett for financial assistance. Who knows, there may even be a provision in the “financial reform” package passed by the Democratic Congress earmarking funds for enterprises like Friedlander’s in the name of “stimulus.” I mean, if they can pay researchers to feed cocaine to monkeys, they can certainly pay for this.

Beck and the Tea Party are getting under the left’s skin. The radical bomb builders of the 60s finally have one of their own in the White House and as Speaker of the House. What they couldn’t achieve with explosives, violent demonstrations and sit-ins, they accomplished at the ballot box, thanks mostly to a majority of sleep-walking Americans. The comatose have since wiped the sleep from their eyes.

In early August, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a report titled “Analysis of the First Year of the Obama Administration: Public Relations and Propaganda Initiatives.”

According to the report, “In several cases, federal employees have used agency resources to disseminate propaganda touting certain aspects of the President’s agenda…In every case, the White House and the agency whose resources it is co-opting attempt to create the impression that grassroots support for a particular policy exists when in fact it has been fabricated using taxpayer dollars.”

The reason Beck so terrifies the lunatics is that his rally proves the left has millions of real grass-roots opponents. Obama’s friends, on the other hand, are taxpayer funded fabrications, what Nancy Pelosi calls “Astroturf.”

On his Monday evening Fox News program, Beck discussed the 500,000 strong “Restoring Honor” rally he organized last weekend in the nation’s capitol. Beck recounted how he and the niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, pro-life advocate Alveda King, prayed before delivering their remarks to the gathering. Beck said King became concerned when she noticed he was wearing a bulletproof vest. Beck told his Fox audience he wore it at the insistence of his wife. Smart woman.

The massive Beck rally got Beau Friedlander a little scared and hot under the collar. And he impetuously tipped his hand. But it shows that the left is growing increasingly desperate as it sees Obama’s power slipping.

You see, the left has never had the numbers. But the one thing it does have – mafia like – is organization. The right, thanks to the Tea Party, is showing just how few the left have on their side. The Rev. Al Sharpton’s pathetically puny counter Beck rally was proof of that.

It will be interesting to see what desperate rear-guard actions the left attempts in the months leading up to the elections. And the attempt to blackmail or discredit Glenn Beck is just the beginning. In many ways, what the left does this election cycle is just a warm up for much worse to come when Obama faces disaster in 2012. You can count on things getting ugly, even violent – you know what they say about wounded animals.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

They tried calling them Astroturf. They tried calling them racists. But the Tea Party continues to grow as does the country’s admiration for them. The left, and their mouthpiece the New York Times, is elbow deep in their bag of tricks to find just the right slur that will stick to the growing small-government cross-party coalition, and think they have it. We all must hate the Tea Party because – are you ready – they are rich. No, really.

“Tea Partiers are relatively affluent, and nobody is angrier these days than the very, very rich,” says the desperate and wild-eyed Paul Krugman.

And there’s even a conspiracy theory to go along with the charge. “Three heavy hitters rule [the Tea Party]. You’ve heard of one of them, Rupert Murdoch. The other two, the brothers David and Charles Koch, are even richer, with a combined wealth exceeded only by that of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett among Americans,” says New York Times theater critic turned political commentator Frank Rich.

“And where, in all of this, are the responsible Republicans, leaders who will stand up and say that some partisans are going too far?” asks Krugman. They are losing their Congressional seats in Republican Party state conventions and in the primaries to Tea Party-friendly candidates. The rest, like the milquetoast John McCain, will remain mum until after the elections. By then, it will be too late for even the media-loved Arizona maverick to be of much help to his “friends across the aisle.”

If, as the Times suggests, we wealthy Tea Partiers (I for one am still waiting for my check from Rupert Murdoch) pose such a threat to our new and improved hope-and-change nation, why not form a counter Tea Party?

The aforementioned multi-zillionaire Warren Buffett backed Hillary Clinton before switching to Obama. If all it takes is a little cash to start a game-changing mass movement, why not lean on the “Oracle of Omaha” for some scratch?

Soulless materialists on the left can’t believe people are moved more by principle than money. In the Chicago mindset of community organizer Obama and his personality cult, everyone is on the take. It’s just the way business is done. And that has turned out to be their Achilles heel.

They cannot fathom why any American would not wish to have his life (and death if Obama’s health care monstrosity is allowed to survive) micromanaged by Washington Czars and bureaucrats. And that Americans should fear that Obama’s phenomenal debt threatens generations yet unborn, is beyond their comprehension.

That the citizenry should be up in arms just because Obama’s Justice Department is suing Arizona for attempting to prevent Mexico’s millions from becoming the nation’s largest welfare dependent is beyond them.

And they are still scratching their heads at the full-throated opposition to a 13-story Muslim monument to mass-murder two blocks from Ground Zero.

In their minds, the $800 billion in “stimulus” was a payoff for us to look the other way. And it’s the left’s obsession with money (mostly yours) that goes to the heart of the problem.

The crowd at the Glenn Beck “Restore Honor” rally totaled over 500,000 because the cause they gathered for involved God and Honor, two intangibles. You can’t put a price on invisible realities.

The counter gathering held by the race hustler and shakedown artist, the Rev. Al Sharpton, only mustered a few hundred. His “Reclaim the Dream” rally was more about reclaiming the momentum for Obama’s graft-laden dream than Martin Luther King’s. After all, King said men should not be “judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Rev. Al is unfamiliar with the concept of character because there’s no money in it.

Over 200 years ago, American’s declared their independence based on intangible truths; the Unalienable Right to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

They pledged their fortunes to win our freedom; an intangible truth they felt was worth the price to secure their greatest possession, and what the impoverished materialistic left so desperately lacks – “sacred Honor.”

By Mr. Curmudgeon

While we were distracted by President Obama’s domestic transformative changes for America, a little known international project was underway in the nation. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sent functionaries around the country to compile information for a report meeting the guidelines of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process of the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

According to the State Department report, “This document gives a partial snapshot of the current human rights situation in the United States, including some of the areas where problems persist in our society.”

This, of course, begs the question: who were the UPR consultants that met with Hillary’s State Department minions? Here’s a partial list:

* Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, host organization…the ACLU
* National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, Urban Justice Center
* American Indian Law Center, Navajo Nation
* NAACP
* American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
* Housing Action Illinois, John Marshal Law School
* Human Rights Watch
* Open Society Institute

In other words, the US is being accused of human rights abuses by every domestic crackpot organization demanding more redistribution of your income or a kinder, gentler approach in dealing with international Islamic jihad. And that’s not all.

According to the State Department report, “A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.”

And so, the Obama administration has presented a report, the first the US has ever submitted to the UN’s Human Rights Commission, admitting to an international human rights violation – the State of Arizona’s attempt to secure its southern border with Mexico.

And who sits on the United Nations Human Rights Commission? Cuba, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, Pakistan, Angola and China are but a few. And Obama hopes they are gracious enough to accept his apology on our behalf and his promise to force all fifty US states to live up to the high expectations of Cuba and other UN dictatorial member states.

Now that Obama has recognized the UN as the guarantor of human rights, something no past US president was ever so deranged to do, what will happen should “We the People” violate Cuba or China’s interpretation of human rights?

There are always sanctions and embargos – even military action in extreme cases.

When I was a kid, there was a local restaurant whose owner placed a large billboard facing a busy boulevard. The sign read “Get the US out of the UN.”

When will Republicans get it through their thick skulls that another winning plank for their party is our nation’s withdrawal from the world body?

The left will accuse the GOP of turning the US into a rogue state. The opposite is true. America would assert its independence for a second time in world history by refusing to be subject to an organization comprised of corrupt and evil rogue states.

I have always believed that there is only one act for which the US owes the world a sincere apology – the establishment of the United Nations.

But that’s one apology Obama will never make.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

The new Pew Research Center poll that found 18% of Americans believe President Obama is a Muslim (up from 11% in 2008), has the administration in a panic. “The White House said on Thursday that President Obama is a Christian who prays daily as it looked to tamp down growing doubts among Americans about the president’s religion,” the New York Times reported. During the president’s flight to Martha’s Vineyard for a little R&R, presidential spokesman Bill Burton told reporters, “…They [the American people] are not reading a lot of news about what religion the president is.” Burton then attempted to cover his bases, “The president is obviously a Christian. He prays every day.”

And the president and his party need all the prayers they can get. According to the Pew poll, “…even among many of his [Obama's] supporters and allies, less than half now say Obama is Christian. Among Democrats, for instance, 46% say Obama is a Christian, down from 55% in March 2009.” This must cause the secular populations of Europe and our media elites to scratch their heads.

After the president gave his unqualified support for the construction of New York’s Ground Zero mosque, Time magazine conducted its own poll. “24% said they [Americans] think he is Muslim,” Time found.

The Democrats thought America was ready for change; that, as a nation, we were geared up to make the transformation into a secular socialist state. Stalin thought the same of Poland. He never thought the Polish people’s Christian faith would give them strength to withstand the onslaught of dehumanizing socialism for over half a century. “How many divisions has the Pope?” Stalin once quipped. The Solidarity movement proved that number to be in the millions.

Obama doesn’t have a Muslim identity crisis. He has a secular socialist crisis. But America is still a religious country, and the smoldering Judeo-Christian collective consciousness obliges them to view the world in moral and not political terms. Therefore, Americans have pegged Obama’s “otherness” (the New York Times’ description) as Islamic.

This is the worst kind of news for Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Having risen to power on the coattails of Chicago’s Islamic scourge of God, they are seen as The Prophet’s imams. And the draconian methods they employed to pass The Prophet’s stimulus and health care bills were as unyielding as any fatwa issued by the Ayatollah Khomeini. Then Imam Pelosi made things worse for Democrats by announcing her intention to investigate opponents of New York’s Ground Zero mosque – many of whom are survivors of the 3,000 victims who perished on 9/11.

The upshot of all this is that the Democratic Party has shown itself to be so dramatically outside the mainstream of American thought and tradition that a growing number of citizens see them as foreign and as hostile as Osama bin Laden.

And the Tea Parties are proving themselves to be the noble Crusaders who can sweep the scourge from our lands.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

The New York Times is beside itself over a new Pew Research Center survey that finds more Americans than ever think President Obama is a Muslim. When he was running for office in 2008, Obama was perceived as being submissive to Islam by 11% of the country. Today, that number stands at 18%.

“The findings suggest that, nearly two years into Mr. Obama’s presidency, the White House is struggling with the perception of ‘otherness’ that Candidate Obama sought so hard to overcome,” laments the Times, “in part because of an aggressive misinformation campaign by critics and in part, some Democratic allies say, because Mr. Obama is doing a poor job of communicating who he is and what he believes.”

What’s fascinating about the Pew finding is that Americans define Obama’s “otherness” in religious terms. And they see that otherness as Islamic. His recent White House remarks supporting the building of the Ground Zero mosque didn’t help to discourage that perception.

The influences on Obama’s world view only partially hale from Mecca. They come primarily from James H. Cone – by way of Obama’s minister of 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Cone is the angry theologian that crafted Black Liberation Theology in the late 1960s.

In his book , “The Emergence of a Black Theology of Liberation,” Cone writes:

“The Christian identity of the black self was not important to [Nation of Islam's] Malcolm X. For him, Christianity was the white man’s religion and thus had to be rejected. Black people, Malcolm contended, needed a black religion, one that would bestow self-respect upon them for being black. Malcolm was not interested in remaking Christianity into a black religion…While Martin and Malcolm were prevented from coming together during their lifetime, I was determined to put them together in black liberation theology.”

Obama’s “otherness,” therefore, is correctly seen by a growing number of Americans as Islamic. Obama’s “transformative change” is right out of the writings of Cone, and represents the culmination of Black Liberation Theology and Malcolm X’s demand for “a radical change in the interlocking structures of society.”

This also explains the America-hating radical left’s affinity for radical Islam and its support for the building of a mosque so close to Ground Zero.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

The Chicago jury in the trial of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was finally able to agree on something: that Blago lied to federal agents about his involvement in political fundraising. The other 23 counts in the indictment are less clear to them. After all, it’s not like they had thousands of hours of taped telephone conversations proving Blago used the power of his executive position to muscle political contributions. Oh, wait…they did.

One such conversation had Blago threatening to stall a state increase in Medicaid reimbursements to an Illinois children’s hospital unless a $50,000 contribution was put in the mail…immediately, if not sooner. That’s a tough call for this Chicago jury. Is it really a bribe if, well, you put the guy receiving it in the executive mansion? Think of all the good he can accomplish with that extorted money. And, they think, “it isn’t my money he’s extorting.”

Before you judge the jury, it’s worth reflecting on their dilemma. Swimming in the shark tank that is Chicago, they have learned from experience that the only way to make it in life is at another’s expense. It’s a kind of political Darwinism. Unlike Darwin’s theory that claims man evolved from the lower primates, in the Chicago version man evolved to spend trillions of tax dollars in a vain attempt to stimulate the American economy. Some of that stimulus money makes its way to labs where lower primates are fed cocaine. It doesn’t need to make sense because it’s not about results. It’s about spreading other’s wealth around.

After all, Al Capone used some of the profits from his criminal enterprise to establish soup kitchens in Depression-era Chicago. Hamas does likewise in the Gaza Strip, because hypocrisy is the compliment evil pays good.

Obama took Capone’s hypocrisy national. There was only one problem: There still exists a kernel of Judeo-Christian morality in the heartland where more evolved creatures are appalled by the kind of organized theft a Chicago jury finds acceptable and every day.

The Blago jury is deadlocked, with the judge likely to declare a mistrial for the remainder of the charges. That deadlock stems from moral confusion. In Chicago, theft is good as long as you get a cut. That’s how it works in political machines that call themselves cities.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

President Obama has figured out a winning strategy for Democrats heading into November: attack Republicans for attacking Social Security. In fact, the headline for Paul Krugman’s New York Times column was “Attacking Social Security.” Funny how these hyper Keynesian socialists are on the same wavelength.

Paul Krugman insists GOP “attackers claim that they’re concerned about the program’s financial future. But their math doesn’t add up, and their hostility isn’t really about dollars and cents. Instead, it’s about ideology and posturing. And underneath it all is ignorance of or indifference to the realities of life for many Americans… So let’s beat back this unnecessary, unfair and – let’s not mince words – cruel attack on working Americans.”

In his weekly radio address, Obama claimed Republicans are “pushing to make privatizing Social Security a key part of their legislative agenda if they win a majority in Congress this fall,” calling such a move “an ill-conceived idea that would add trillions of dollars to our budget deficit while tying your benefits to the whims of Wall Street traders and the ups and downs of the stock market.”

This is the same big government that devised the Community Reinvestment Act, which started the ball rolling in the direction of sub-prime lending, which popped the housing bubble, which destroyed home values and caused Wall Street to crash, destroying your real retirement 401k and mutual fund investments.

Democrats are counting on the greatest asset in their arsenal: your ignorance. And that ignorance has served them well, from FDR to Obama. Here’s a few uncomfortable facts the donkeys in Washington and at the New York Times would rather you not know:

• 1. Which president and political party changed the protected “trust fund” status of Social Security, dumping all that cash into the General fund to pay for unsustainable Great Society programs? President Lyndon Johnson and his Democrat controlled Congress.
• 2. Which political party ended the tax deduction for Social Security withholding? The Democratic Party.
• Who extended Social Security payments to immigrants who never paid into the system? President Jimmy Carter and his Congressional Democratic majority.
• 3. Which political party began taxing Social Security annuities? The Democrats under Bill Clinton, with Vice President Al Gore casting the tie-breaking vote in the U.S. Senate.

According to Krugman, “Conservatives hate Social Security for ideological reasons: its success undermines their claim that government is always the problem, never the solution.” The “success” of Social Security, at least for Democrats, is that it serves as a slush fund to buy the votes of targeted constituencies at the expense of America’s vulnerable elderly. Now that’s what Democrats call compassion.

The Associated Press reports that, “…Democrats have been able to seize on the issue because of a proposal by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the top Republican on the House Budget Committee that would allow younger people to put Social Security money into personal accounts.”

Now that the Democrat’s policies have destroyed both Social Security and the American economy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barney Frank ask that you continue allowing them to manage your retirement “today, tomorrow and forever,” as President Obama put it.

Personal accounts would only keep your lovely money in your hands and far from the reach of “compassionate” Democrats.

Younger Americans should remember the name Ernest Ackerman. Why? You see, Ernest was the first Social Security beneficiary. In 1937, Earnest received a whopping Social Security lump-sum payout ­in the amount of 17 cents.

At least Earnest got something. Young Obama voter should be so lucky.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

At Friday’s White House gala commemorating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, President Obama said, “Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality. And here in the United States, Ramadan is a reminder that Islam has always been part of America and that American Muslims have made extraordinary contributions to our country.” The president then weighed in on the latest intended contribution to our country by Islam. “Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan…” The president may not be a fan of property rights, but assured Muslims he’ll make an exception at Ground Zero.

Saturday, the president further clarified his statement, “I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right that people have that dates back to our founding.” Interesting how a president whose totalitarian health care plan shows contempt for the Constitution’s limits on government power, uses it for convenient cover to support a monument to mass murder.

At the same time, Obama can’t bring himself to comment on the disgusting in-your-face statement the Ground Zero mosque shouts to America and the Islamic world. If Obama can’t apologize on our behalf, he has nothing to say.

And the president’s support for a gloating monument to shadow over 3,000 American innocent dead is not due to any pro-Muslim feeling on his part. He merely admires the ability of Islam’s religious totalitarian ideology to community organize on a global scale.

In other words, Obama suffers from Osama envy.