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

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 hair-pullers at MSNBC, like resident loon Keith Olbermann, must be beside themselves. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is charging General Electric, NBC’s parent company, with providing Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein $3.6 million in kickbacks in order to get access to the lucrative and corrupt United Nations oil-for-food program, which Saddam used to bribe his way around the international community’s economic sanctions. Cheryl Scarboro, who heads the SEC’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Unit said GE “failed to maintain adequate internal controls to detect and prevent these illicit payments.”

That begs the question: “Were Keith Olbermann’s objections to America’s toppling Saddam more a product of protecting an overseas paymaster or just a product of his Saddam-level hatred of George W. Bush?” Inquiring minds want to know.

According to the SEC indictment, GE subsidiaries paid kickbacks to the Saddam regime to get oil-for-food gravy. German-based Marquitte paid $1.2 million to the Iraqi Health Ministry in goods and services. Norway-based Nycomed paid $750,000 to secure a $5 million contract. Italy-based Italba paid $795,000 to gain a $2.3 million profit for mamma GE; in all, GE allegedly profited by $204 million thanks to Saddam’s murderous regime.

Just as an aside, Alexander Yakovlev, a Russian working for the United Nations Procurement Department, pled guilty to fraud in the UN oil-for-food scandal. Yakovlev helped facilitate a business deal that put cash in the pocket of one Ahmed Idris Nasreddin, a US and UN designated terrorist financier for Al Qaeda. And that juicy little fact was uncovered by America’s number-one cable news source…Fox.

Back in February of 2007, big-salaried (an estimated $4 million a year) GE employee Keith Olbermann went apoplectic when then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice compared toppling Saddam to America’s victory over Hitler. “…Secretary Rice, overthrowing Saddam Hussein was akin to overthrowing Adolf Hitler?” screamed an incredulous Olbermann. “Are you kidding? Did you want to provoke the world’s laughter?”

Apparently, the only one laughing was Keith Olberman – all the way to the bank…to cash his check from a murderous Middle Eastern dictator the MSNBC host assured us was not all that bad.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

Andrew Breitbart posted a video on his website that has gone viral. In it, angry members of the Obama media confront African-American conservatives defending the Tea Party against the NAACP’s declaration that the grass-roots movement is racist.

A question concerning an incident alleged to have occurred last March 20th, the day the House passed ObamaCare, was asked. On that day, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other House members went among the anti-ObamaCare “Code Red” rally outside the Capitol Building to rub ObamaCare stink in the face of the crowd. Rep John Luis (D-Ga) claimed demonstrators spat on him and yelled the “N” word.

Joyce Jones of Black Enterprise asked, “John Luis put his life in considerable risk and danger so that you could stand here and talk about freedoms. And I want to know why it’s so impossible for you to think that…somebody actually did spit on him or call him the ‘N’ word. Why would he lie about that when he’s experienced so much worse?”

Niger Innis, spokesman for the Congress of Racial Equality, replied, “John Luis is a hero, okay, I may disagree with him on a verity of ideological questions…he refused to press charges. Why? Because it is a fraudulent issue. Stop playing with racism. A man in Connecticut just killed nine people playing the victim card and alleged racism. It’s a powder keg, folks. And you should not play games with it in our country. We’ve come a long way and we don’t want to look back.”

Innis was referring to the murder-suicide in Manchester, Connecticut, on August 8th. Omar Thornton, an African-American employee at a Manchester beer distributorship, had just left a hearing where video footage proved he had stolen beer from the company, and was told to quit or he would be fired. Instead, Thornton pulled a handgun and shot eight fellow employees dead before turning the weapon on himself.

According to the Associated Press, Thornton “had complained of racial harassment…but a union official said Thornton had not filed a complaint of racism to the union or any government agency.” A Teamster official told the AP, “It’s got nothing to do with race. This is a disgruntled employee who shot a bunch of people.”

When ObamaCare passed, it’s obvious that Nancy Pelosi hoped against hope for a racial incident when she marched Rep. Luis, her sacrificial lamb, before the Tea Party protestors. And there’s no doubt that a friendly Obama media was alerted to Pelosi’s stunt to capture the moment on video and photos. Instead, the triumphant Democrats were met with jeers and justifiable shouts of condemnation, but to Nancy’s disappointment, no racial slurs.

On Pelosi’s orders, Luis made the charge anyway.

The race card, in other words, was cynically played by a White Liberal to discredit the only credible movement opposed to what she sees as big government’s “essentially unlimited” power. That Luis, a man who was beaten during the civil rights struggle, should stoop so low is breathtaking.

But the race card is wearing thin with most Americans because it is used to excuse a multitude of sins — from the monstrosity of totalitarian ObamaCare to an angry man’s thirst for free beer and his willingness to kill for it.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

The controversy over who would get the coveted Helen Thomas anti-Semite seat in the White House pressroom has come to an end. The Associated Press’ White House correspondent will get to plant his pampered bottom front-row-center at the next Robert Gibbs stonewalling session. But what really got people’s attention was that Fox News would move up to AP’s vacated front row seat.

For some strange reason, the lunatics at MoveOn.org, established to convince the nation and its lawmakers that President Clinton’s perjury before a federal grand jury was fine because it only involved extramarital sex, were really frightened Fox might get the coveted Helen Thomas anti-Semite seat.

“It’s bad enough that we have to fight the constant smear campaigns and appeals to racial paranoia from FOX and the right-wing media,” complained Clinton’s sex scandal apologists, “We can’t let them have the best seat in the White House press briefing room and the legitimacy that it confers.”

Instead, as Fox moves to the front row, the soft-speaking narcoleptics at National Public Radio get Fox’s old second-row chair.

Note to Fox: what if your White House correspondent Major Garrett saws halfway through each of his old seat’s legs before the big MoveOn to the front row? I’m just saying…

In the end, the White House Correspondents’ Association felt compelled to let a little fresh air into the White House pressroom to clear that confined space of Thomas’ anti-American/anti-Israeli/anti-Semitic/pro-terrorist left-wing stench.

I’m sure Thomas is stewing over the insult in her candlelit Hamas-provided apartment in Gaza.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

With President Obama’s timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan as likely to succeed as his timetable for closing Gitmo, the left is pulling out all the stops and giving the community organizer a little taste of George W. Bush’s medicine. Someone leaked six-years worth of classified military documents to that disseminator of America’s top secrets — the New York Times.

This put White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs in the uncomfortable position of having to sound like Dick Cheney. “We are in this region of the world because of what happened on 9/11,” Gibbs reminded a forgetful White House press corps. “Ensuring that there is not a safe haven in Afghanistan by which attacks against this country and countries around the world can be planned. That’s why we’re there, and that’s why we’re going to continue to make progress on this relationship.”

The documents were released through Wikileaks, a Website that dubs itself “a multi-jurisdictional public service designed to protect whistleblowers, journalists and activists who have sensitive materials to communicate to the public.” Its founder, Julian Assange, told Germany’s Der Spiegel, “I enjoy crushing bastards.”

The administration states that there is no there there; that the information says what most have known for a while – that US military policy has been a little short in the war-making department. The documents also verify that the intelligence service of our fine ally Pakistan is aiding the Taliban. This, of course, should not surprise us since Pakistan was one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban and supply the scruffy misfits with arms.

The most striking revelation in the documents is how America’s Vietnamization program for Afghanistan (a winning-the-hearts-and-minds strategy coupled with Afghan army training intended to eventually relieve our military duties there) is turning out to be something of a fizzle.

The Second World War should have taught us that nation building only works after braking your enemies will and ability to wage war. It took two atomic bombs to break the will of Japan’s fanatical Imperial Army and its desire to die for the honor of its emperor-god.

Today’s America would never go as far to stop an enemy as ferociously fanatical. Instead, we merrily march down the well-trod road to Vietnam.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

“Last year I, too, resigned from an administration job, after I uttered some ill-chosen words about the Republican Party and was accused – falsely – of signing my name to a petition being passed around by 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Partisan Web sites and pundits pounced, and I, too, saw my name go from obscurity to national infamy within hours,” writes former “green jobs czar” Van Jones in a New York Times Op-Ed.

Funny, he forgot to deny co-founding the San Francisco Maoist organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM). No wonder Obama tapped Jones for a czarist position in his administration…Jones is quite the community organizer.

Jones forgets that a copy of the “911 Truth Statement,” which demanded an “… immediate inquiry into evidence that suggests high-level government officials may have deliberately allowed the September 11th attacks to occur,” is easily obtained online…he’s number 46 on the honored roster of signatories.

Jones, of course, was claiming victimhood ala Shirley Sherrod, Georgia’s former rural development director for the Department of Agriculture, who was forced to resign when an edited video surfaced in which she admitted past racism.

“Life inside the Beltway has become a combination of speed chess and Mortal Kombat,” complains Jones, “one wrong move can mean political death. In the era of YouTube, Twitter and 24-hour cable news, nobody is safe. Even the lowliest staff member knows that an errant comment could wind up online, making her name synonymous with scandal.”

Jones is still living in his Maoist utopian dream. Here in America, government officials look constantly over their shoulders for a reason. The basic civics lesson lost on Jones is that everyone in government serves at the pleasure of “We the People.” Jones’ former boss, President Obama, with his steadily dropping approval ratings, is beginning to realize what happens when the voice of the people is ignored.

The reason guys like Jones have such an affinity for Mao, is that the Chinese mass murderer could perpetrate his long lamentable list of crimes with no interference from the victims of his community organizing.

Jones then blames the real culprit threatening the forward-looking cadre of the people in the White House. “The high standards and wise judgments of people like Walter Cronkite once acted as our national immune system, zapping scandal-mongers and quashing wild rumors. As a step toward further democratizing America, we shrunk those old gatekeepers — and ended up weakening democracy’s defenses.”

As the recent JournoList scandal proved, the mainstream media’s “immune system” is far worse than the disease. No one in the mainstream media thought it in the public interest to report Jones’s Marxist affiliations. Only Fox News’ Glenn Beck thought it note worthy. And, as the scribblers at JournoList will tell you, Beck is no Walter Cronkite.

Gatekeeper Cronkite is the one who told Americans on February 27, 1968, “…for every means we have to escalate [in Vietnam], the enemy can match us, and that applies to invasion of the North, the use of nuclear weapons or the mere commitment of one hundred, or two hundred, or three hundred thousand more American troops to the battle.” Cronkite’s remarks, of course, are laughable, unless your loved ones were Vietnamese boat people who perished at sea or a domino that fell in Pol Pot’s killing fields. No wonder Jones misses the “national immune system” provided by the longtime CBS News anchor. Cronkite believed resisting Southeast Asia’s community organizers was futile.

“When it comes to politics in the age of Facebook,” continued Jones, “the killer app to stop the ‘gotcha’ bullies won’t be a technological one — it will be a wiser, more forgiving culture.”

Back in the day, the disgruntled community organizer would don US surplus army fatigues, gather his Marxist-Leninist manuals and hide in the jungle with his merry band of followers, there to plot the toppling of the old regime and who would lead the firing squads in the new. That, however, was the old-school community organizer.

Today, a jungle environment would only soil his power tie. And besides, he likes that corner office – with the view of the park – at the tax-exempt foundation. In short, today’s community organizer has been Oprafied.

When confronted with opposition, he gets an Op-Ed in the New York Times and whines like a little girl.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

As Republicans were heading into the presidential primary season of 2008, the Weekly Standard’s William Kristol advised conservatives to keep their expectations low, which was the standard Republican state of mind pre and post Ronald Reagan:

“Beyond the normal human frailties that affect all of us, including undoubtedly the commentators at this journal, there is one error that is distorting much conservative discussion of the presidential race. It’s -Reagan nostalgia.

“It’s foolish to wait for another Ronald Reagan. But not just because his political gifts are rare. There’s a particular way in which Reagan was exceptional that many of us fail to appreciate: He was the only president of the last century who came to the office as the leader of an ideological movement.”

And small-thinking Republican voters gave small-thinking John McCain the Republican presidential nomination. Painfully aware of the cosmic ideological void in his soul, McCain managed to pull one idea from the still-pulsing reptilian portion of his brain: he turned to Alaska’s Gov. Sarah Palin to breathe life into an otherwise dead campaign. To the extent that McCain elicited any stirring in men’s souls was clearly do to Palin’s conservative message and passion.

Contrary to what the New York Times would have us believe, conservatives don’t take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh. The grass-roots Tea Party movement that coalesced during the battle over ObamaCare, came seemingly out of nowhere, taking Obama, conservative talk-radio and the Republican establishment by surprise. Beltway Republicans (and Limbaugh for that matter) were horrified that the Tea Party was equal in its contempt of big-government Republicans as Democrats. One Republican recognized the importance of the Tea Party and gave it support…Sarah Palin.

Speaking at the first Tea Party Convention in Nashville, Tennessee, last February Palin said, “…I will live, I will die for the people of America. Whatever I can do to help. This movement is the future of politics in America….Put your faith in ideas. I caution against allowing this movement to be defined by one leader or operation. This is about the people.”

The media, of course, dismissed Palin’s significance. A.C. Klienheider at Nashvillepost.com reported on the Palin’s speech with the usual dose of venom mingled with a heavy dollop of wishful thinking. “The Tea Party movement is dead,” wrote Klienheider. “The one I was familiar with anyway…Sarah Palin drove a stake right through its heart live last night on C-Span…She gave a partisan Republican address.” And, as we now know, it was all part of a JournoList smear campaign against Palin that continues to this day.

With Palin closely identified with the Tea Party, the media would portray the movement as phony “Astroturf” created by Macivalian Republican strategists such as…uh….uh…well, you get the picture.

Then came the Republican primaries. Palin’s endorsements began unseating the very Republican incumbents the media cabal said were the driving force behind the Tea Party. Stranger still, only 28 of 178 House Republican incumbents joined the new House Tea Party Caucus, with the Beltway Republican leadership running from the caucus as fast as their little feet could take them. The American people see through the media lies and steadily identify with the Tea Party’s stated goal of rational Constitutional restraints on government that have all but vanished under Obama.

As the taxpayer-supported mouthpiece of big-government, National Public Radio, admitted, “…Palin’s endorsements in Republican primaries – her most significant political initiative since resigning her post in Alaska last year – have been more adventurous and more successful than her critics (and some of her allies) choose to imagine.”

Today, the Economist magazine published a poll that shows Republicans leaning toward a “leader of an ideological movement” than the usual and tired McCain-like Republican retreads: Sara Palin 28%, Mitt Romney 18%, Newt Gingrich 17%, Mitch Daniels 4%, Tim Pawlenty 1%, Mike Pence 1%, Haley Barbour 1%, John Thune 1%, No preference 17%.

The “no preference” 17%, those independents souls, are most likely to move to the Palin column as her political momentum grows in our increasingly Tea Party America.

As Palin’s star rises, another politician’s is dimming. President Obama now enjoys 34% diehard support among the nation’s desperate hope-and-changers. If that isn’t bad enough, a Quinnipiac poll found that a generic Republican candidate would beat Obama 48% to 40% if the election were held today.

This thought experiment may be a little taxing for Beltway Republicans, but I hope the rest of you will bear with me. Imagine that Republican voters nominate a Reaganesque “leader of an ideological movement” to head the Republican ticket in 2012…instead of the usual generic John McCain-like Republican? If your brain synapses are firing on all cylinders, you know the fate that awaits Obama’s hope and change.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

For those of you who were living under a rock during the Ronald Reagan era, or are too young to remember, what you are about to read may shock you. The mainstream media is overwhelmingly to the left in its political leanings, with the loonier amongst its minions conspiring by e-mail on how to spin stories in a way that reflects badly on conservatives and will propagate through the echo chamber that is the mainstream media.

Funny, you don’t look shocked. Neither am I. Still, it’s nice to get confirmation in black and white.

Kudos go to Tucker Carlson, himself a cable news talking-head and the Editor-in-Chief of the Dailycaller.com. Dailycaller got its hands on tasty e-mail exchanges between influential left-wing yellow journalists, left-leaning organizations and academic members of the Internet site JournoList.

Here are just a few excerpts of e-mail exchanges between lefty scribblers and a nutty professor regarding the only conservative voice on television:

John Judis, The New Republic:

“…It may be that it’s counter-productive for the White House to out them [Fox News], but it would not be unprincipled for the O adm to give precedence to the other networks and to newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post that try to adhere to, rather than exploit, the older standard.”

Daniel Davies, The Manchester Guardian:

“…I’m genuinely scared by this development…a shameless and unethical media organization cannot be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracized…”

Jonathan Zasloff, UCLA law professor:

“…I hate to open this can of worms, but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?”

Remember those tense days after Fox’s Glenn Beck outed Obama’s “Green Jobs Czar ” Van Jones for founding a Maoist organization in la-la-land San Francisco? I mean, no one in the mainstream media would touch that story with a ten-foot cattle prod. On the one hand, it reflected badly on the Obama administration’s vetting skills. On the other hand, it showed a possible Obama administration affinity for the redistributive Marxist ideas espoused by China’s mass-murdering fanatic.

That was the last straw.

Someone in the Obama administration must have gotten the New Republic’s John Judis memo, and Fox was denied access to all the administration’s talking heads. But the tactic backfired.

Fox personalities just started interviewing each other. Suddenly, Fox’s large and growing audience (ratings spiked during the White House-Fox spat) was treated to 24-7 conservative analysis of the world – with no snappy comebacks from Obama’s White House.

Then Beck added another White House scalp to his belt. He aired a video of then White House communications director Anita Dunn going on and on about one of her favorite philosophers…Mao Tse-tung. She joined Van Jones under the wheels of Obama’s ever-busy killer bus.

The president eventually relented, figuring it was better to let Fox interview Obama officials than to fire every Maoist on the White House payroll.

When John McCain made the only rational decision of his dismal political career and picked Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate in 2008, the minions at JournoList hooked up in cyberspace to craft a plan to deal with the meddlesome Reaganesque conservative:

Suzanne Nossel, chief of operations for Human Rights Watch:

“I think it is and can be spun as a profoundly sexist pick. Women should feel umbrage at the idea that their votes can be attracted just by putting a woman, any woman, on the ticket no matter her qualifications or views.”

Jonathan Stein, Mother Jone’s:

“That’s excellent! If enough people – people on this [JournoList] list – write that the pick is sexist, you’ll have the networks debating it for days. And that negates the single thing Palin brings to the ticket.”

Daniel Levy, Century Foundation:

“This seems to me like an occasion when the non-official campaign has a big role to play in defining Palin, shaping the terms of the conversation and saying the things that the official [Obama] campaign shouldn’t say…scare people about having this woefully inexperienced, no foreign policy/national security/right-wing Christian wing-nut a heartbeat away [from the presidency]…”

If only Palin had topped the 2008 Republican ticket instead of the clueless John McCain, Obama would still be the woefully inexperienced, no foreign policy/national security/left-wing ACORN wing-nut Senator from Illinois.

The JournoList smear campaign against Palin still echoes to this day, but Palin is having the last laugh. Today, she is the driving force behind the Tea Party juggernaut eradicating McCain-like drones in the Republican primaries (with the notable exception of the pathetic McCain himself…no one is perfect). And Palin’s Tea Party picks are well positioned to sweep into Congress and take the purse strings from the hands of that Bay Area lunatic, Nancy Pelosi.

Since the days of the Cold War, the left’s single and unrelenting charge has been that the right is continually looking for conspiracies under every rock.

The unrelenting reality of history is that the conspiracies were there, the left was either in denial or favored their outcome.

JournoList-gate and Climate-gate shows that, where the left is concerned, their conspiracies have global reach. Like Satan, the left “as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.”

By Mr. Curmudgeon

You have to hand it to New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. He tells you what most politicians believe but won’t say in public. Speaking of us idiots who oppose the unbridled power of the state, Krugman says “the evidence suggests that issues don’t matter…in part because voters are often deeply ill informed.”

“There’s no point berating voters for their ignorance,” Krugman tells Washington’s doomed incumbents, “people have bills to pay and children to raise, and most don’t spend their free time studying fact sheets. Instead, they react to what they see in their own lives and the lives of people they know. Given the realities of a bleak employment picture, Americans are unhappy – and they’re set to punish those in office.”

Could it be that voter revulsion at “what they see in their own lives and the lives of people they know” has something to do with the bipartisan big-government policies of today’s Washington?

Contrary to what Democrats and the media tell us, like US immigration law, tools for regulatory oversight of Wall Street, Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae were already in place. They simply weren’t enforced. Our current economic crisis, which resulted from a bipartisan affordable-housing policy from Congress and easy-money policies from the Federal Reserve, are a damning indictment of “deeply ill informed” big government. “Oops, sorry, we’ll do better next time” won’t do.

Disengaged voters beget disengaged politicians. What frightens Krugman, Obama and clueless Beltway Republicans is that the sleeping American giant appears to be waking. The terrifying realization that keeps Krugman up at night is that a new breed of representative is heading to Washington that may begin dismantling that corrupt cesspool’s Keynesian leviathan.