Thursday, 22 March 2007


Ken Berwitz

Interested in seeing what life will be like if we don't fight terrorism successfully and wind up under shari'a law?  Here's a little taste for you, from Germany:-

'Qur'an allows wife abuse'
22/03/2007 16:33  - (SA) 

Berlin - Germany was outraged on Thursday after it emerged that a German woman judge had refused a Moroccan-born German woman permission to file for divorce on the grounds that the Qur'an allows husbands to beat their wives.

"Where are we living? Woman judge allows beating in marriage and invokes the Qur'an," said a front-page headline in Germany's top-selling Bild newspaper.

"This Moroccan woman has the same right to protection from a violent husband as any German woman. Anything else would be misconceived sensitivity to the benefit of the husband and would amount to racist discrimination against the wife," said the Tageszeitung daily.

The Central Council of Muslims in Germany also condemned the decision.

"The judge should have made a decision based on the German constitution instead of the Qur'an," said spokesperson Nurhan Soykan, who said that violence and mistreatment, regardless of the gender of the victim, were also grounds for divorce in the Islamic world.

A court in the western city of Frankfurt on Wednesday upheld a complaint of bias against the judge lodged by the lawyer of the 26-year-old woman, who has two children.

Husband 'threatened to kill her'

Another judge will hear her case.

The woman had filed for immediate divorce on the grounds that the husband, also of Moroccan origin, regularly beat his wife and threatened to kill her.

The claims were backed up by a police report.

But the female judge, who has not been named, made clear in a letter that the wife's bid had little chance of approval because, according to her, Islamic law allowed a man to strike his wife.

German politicians from all parties were united in disgust at the judgement.

"When the Qur'an takes precedence over the German basic law, then I can only say: Good night Germany," said Ronald Pofalla, the secretary-general of the conservative Christian Democratic Union of Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Hans-Christian Stroebele, of the opposition Greens, said the kind of abuse suffered by the woman should be punished by laws governing bodily harm in Germany.


Take a good, long look.  And when you do, remember that the people who intend for us all to live this way are going to fight against western civilization whether or not we fight back.

If we fight we may be able to stave them off.  If we don't fight, we can't.  And if we can't, this is how we will eventually live.   

People who do not support the fight (often because they are more interested in short term political gain than protecting our civilization) are our enemy's allies, whether they intend to be or not.


Ken Berwitz

As you may have noticed, I rarely mention political polls.  That is because I consider most of them a hot steamy pile of BS (this is over 40 years of research talking).  There are lots of reasons for this opinion, and I'll detail some of them in a subsequent blog. 

Do you think that fudging polls means changing the numbers or asking leading questions?  As they say in Brooklyn, fuggedaboudit.  Believe me, those are the abolute tip of the iceberg.  There are ways of cooking political polls that you never dreamed of. 

That having been said, however, I will now show you a couple of political poll numbers.  Again, this is not because I live by them, as many people seem to do.  It is because people who DO live by them should at least see the full picture, not just what media want them to see.

You have been told for years now that President Bush's low poll numbers mean he is rejected by the country, that his policies are wrong and must change, that he is an incompetent, etc. etc. etc. yada yada yada blah blah blah.  Well here are the latest Gallup poll numbers for President Bush ----- AND the latest poll numbers for the new Democratic congress.

What's that?  You didn't know polling data exist for congress too?  Or you did know, but didn't realize there are recent data?  Maybe when you look at the numbers you'll have an idea of why mainstream media have kept you in the dark about this:


                        APPROVE  DISAPPROVE  UNSURE

PRES. BUSH         35%             61%                  4%   

CONGRESS          28%             64%                  8%


What do these data tell you?  They tell you that, after about 2 1/2 months of living with the Democratic congress they elected, voters now give that congress an appreciably lower rating than President Bush.

Therefore....the media are brimming with this information and the Today show is airing segments with Democratic leadership during which they ask what has gone so wrong that only one in four approve, and keith olbermann is derisively attacking Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid every day and chris mouthews is demanding to know why President Bush is so preferred to Democrats.  Right?

Well?  That is what you've seen and heard, isn't it?  After all, these are the people who hang by their thumbs waiting for every new poll that shows how unpopular President Bush is. aren't they?  They must be just as obsessed with poll numbers for Democrats, mustn't they?

Simply stated, you have about as much chance of seeing and hearing this from our "neutral" media as Helen Thomas has of winning the next Miss Teen USA pagaent.

Remember this the next time a joyous Matt Lauer or an overeager Tim Russert or a breathless chris mouthews or an enthusiastic New York Times tells you how bad George Bush is doing in the polls.  The laugh will do you good.


Ken Berwitz

It appears that presidential candidate John Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, has suffered a recurrence of the breast cancer she was originally diagnosed with at the end of the 2004 campaign.

Let's hope that Ms. Edwards can beat this cancer and that it never comes back again.  My heart goes out to her and the Edwards family. 

UPDATE:  The initial reports are wrong.  The cancer is bone cancer.  Edwards just said that it is not curable but it is treatable --- and compared it to diabetes.  He also said it was "relatively minimal", and Elizabeth followed up by referring to it as "low volume. 

Edwards says there will NOT be any suspension of his campaign.

Let me repeat what I said earlier:  Let's hope that Ms. Edwards can beat this cancer and that it never comes back again.  My heart goes out to her and the Edwards family.


Ken Berwitz

Here, courtesy of Robert Novak, is a crystal-clear demonstration of what a fraud Hillary Clinton is.  It's far from the only one, but it's the latest I know of.  Read it and see.  Then wait to see it in the mainstream media.  And wait.  And wait.  And wait..........

Former 'Goldwater girl' tripped up

March 12, 2007

While Hillary Rodham Clinton came out second best to Barack Obama in their long-range oratorical duel at Selma, Ala., the real problem with her visit there a week ago concerned her March 4 speech's claim of her attachment to Martin Luther King Jr. as a high school student in 1963. How, then, could she be a "Goldwater girl" in the next year's presidential election?

The incompatibility of those two positions of 40 years ago was noted to me by Democratic old-timers shocked by Clinton's temerity in pursuing her presidential candidacy. Barry Goldwater's opposition to the 1964 voting rights bill was not incidental to his run for the White House but an integral element of conscious departure from GOP tradition that contributed to his disastrous performance.

No political candidate should have to explain her high school days. What Clinton said at Selma is significant because it betrays her campaign's panicky reaction to the unexpected rise of Obama as a serious competitor for the Democratic nomination.

The Clinton game plan for returning to the White House reflected tactics used in 2000 when she parachuted into New York to tie up campaign money, secure support from important Democrats and discourage potential opponents for the nomination. It seemed to be working on the national scene, discouraging longtime presidential aspirants. Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana and former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack dropped out, and Democrats who dared to run were being snowed under by the Clinton tide.

Clinton's plans were transformed by Obama, an African American threatening the hard allegiance of black voters forged by Bill Clinton. On one hand, the Clinton campaign has attacked Obama and his supporters. On the other hand, she has sought to solidify her civil rights credentials.

Speaking at Selma's First Baptist Church on the 42nd anniversary of the "bloody Sunday" freedom march there, Clinton declared: "As a young girl [age 16], I had the great privilege of hearing Dr. King speak in Chicago. The year was 1963. My youth minister from our church took a few of us down on a cold January night to hear [King]. ... And he called on us, he challenged us that evening to stay awake during the great revolution that the civil rights pioneers were waging on behalf of a more perfect union."

Young Hillary Rodham answered that challenge the next year as the 17-year-old class president at Maine East High School in the Chicago suburbs. She described herself in her memoirs as "an active Young Republican" and "a Goldwater girl, right down to my cowgirl outfit." As a politically attuned honor student, she must have known that Goldwater was one of only six Republican senators who joined southern Democratic segregationists opposing the historic Voting Rights Act of 1964 inspired by King.

Hillary headed the Young Republicans at Wellesley College as a freshman before defecting to the Democrats. When in 1969 at age 22 she was the first Wellesley student to deliver the commencement address, she talked about a demonstration at the college that "protested against the rigid academic distribution requirement" and supported "a pass-fail system" and "a say" in "academic decision making." That was not quite King's agenda.

While Clinton was re-inventing her past, her campaign was shaken by the first serious, public Democratic criticism of the Clintons since the 1992 presidential campaign. The sharp rebuke of Hollywood producer David Geffen, an erstwhile Clinton friend now backing Obama, was approved unanimously by a campaign conference call. Bill Clinton was not on that call, but the former president, described by Democratic sources as "incandescent" over Geffen's remarks, recommended the harsh response.

Hillary Clinton's road to the White House is not going as planned. Instead of a steady procession to coronation at the Denver convention, she is involved in a real struggle against credible opponents led by Obama. No wonder she and her handler were tempted to imply the existence long ago of a teenager in Chicago's suburbs who never really existed.



Ken Berwitz

I am posting the article below without very much comment, because very little is needed.

All I ask is that you think about the news you watched on TV and/or read in your paper today.  Did you see anything about this? 

The lesson here isn't that Al Gore is a hippocrite (that's a word I invented, for people who are the biggest hypocrites among us).  That is obvious on its face.   The lesson is that media - again - are treating Gore as a protected species by suppressing his hippocrisy.  By doing so, they maintain his demigod status -- among the people they've kept ignorant, that is. 

Well, you won't be part of that group.  Please read below:

WASHINGTON, DC Former Vice President Al Gore refused to take a Personal Energy Ethics Pledge today to consume no more energy than the average American household.  The pledge was presented to Gore by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, during todays global warming hearing.
Senator Inhofe showed Gore a film frame from An Inconvenient Truth where it asks viewers: Are you ready to change the way you live? 
Gore has been criticized for excessive home energy usage at his residence in Tennessee. His electricity usage is reportedly 20 times higher than the average American household.
It has been reported that many of these so-called carbon offset projects would have been done anyway. Also, carbon offset projects such as planting trees can take decades or even a century to sequester the carbon emitted today. So energy usage today results in greenhouse gases remaining in the atmosphere for decades, even with the purchase of so-called carbon offsets.
There are hundreds of thousands of people who adore you and would follow your example by reducing their energy usage if you did.  Dont give us the run-around on carbon offsets or the gimmicks the wealthy do, Senator Inhofe told Gore.
Are you willing to make a commitment here today by taking this pledge to consume no more energy for use in your residence than the average American household by one year from today? Senator Inhofe asked.  
Senator Inhofe then presented Vice President Gore with the following "Personal Energy Ethics Pledge:
As a believer:
        that human-caused global warming is a moral, ethical, and spiritual issue affecting our survival;
        that home energy use is a key component of overall energy use;
        that reducing my fossil fuel-based home energy usage will lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions; and
        that leaders on moral issues should lead by example;
I pledge to consume no more energy for use in my residence than the average American household by March 21, 2008.
Gore refused to take the pledge. 


Buy Our Book Here!

Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.

About Us

Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.

At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!