Sunday, 22 April 2007


Ken Berwitz

Maybe they're just tired of the publicity.  Or tired of Hillary.  Or, as I prefer to think, maybe they've come to realize just how inconsequential this Imus thing is and how completely they were being exploited by people who couldn't care less about them:

Rutgers team skips Clinton meeting


April 20, 2007, 9:07 PM EDT

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton finally dropped by Rutgers to meet with the school's women's basketball coach -- but the players themselves skipped the half-hour meeting, citing their studies and Imus fatigue.

Clinton had been scheduled to meet with Scarlet Knight coach C. Vivian Stringer and an assistant, and possibly some of the players, Monday to talk with them about Don Imus's "nappy-headed ho" comments.

But that sit-down was postponed due to weather and because the story seemed far less significant after the Virginia Tech killings.

"Many of the players were in study hall from eight to noon and some had finals," explained a Rutgers source who said the players were "tired" of all the attention. "These young women need to do their classes, and wrap their spring semester."


Ken Berwitz

The reasons to dislike Chris Dodd are many and varied.  If I were compiling a list it would include his idiotic racist-friendly comments about Robert Byrd, that the press gave him a free pass on, but would have caused incalculable grief for a Republican (the proof?  Trent Lott DID get incalculable grief right about the same time, for saying something no more abrasive about Strom Thurmond).  I would also mention his work to create laws that enabled the Enron scandal (again with a free pass from the press). 

But today I think I'll just enjoy how completely the Waterbury (Connecticut) Republican reamed him in yesterday's editorial.  Here it is, for your enjoyment:


DODD: Sen. Dodd's emissions

Saturday, April 21, 2007

Copyright 2007 Republican-American

Connecticut's Sen. Christopher J. Dodd has accomplished the improbable: Despite several months on the campaign trail, he has yet to boost his standing among Democratic presidential candidates into single digits.

Nationally, he polls within the margin of error, making it statistically possible that nobody supports his bid.

In his latest attempt to distinguish himself, Sen. Dodd last week proposed steps that he said are vital to reduce pollution and limit global warming. He called for increasing fuel-economy standards to 50 mpg over the next 10 years and creating a corporate carbon tax that would make businesses pay a per-ton fee for carbon emissions. Explained the senator: "You can't just do this by talking about investing in fuel cells and investing in solar (energy). You've got to have a tough answer. And if you don't have a tough answer, you aren't going to get there."

The key question: Get where?

Does Sen. Dodd really believe that with current gasoline prices, any automotive manufacturer that could offer a competitively priced vehicle capable of getting 50 miles per gallon wouldn't have it on the market now? Or does he expect us all to revert to vehicles so small and light that they can't carry two people and their groceries without a tailwind?

A related question concerns which industries Sen. Dodd has in mind with his carbon-use tax. The domestic steel industry has been gutted, so by far the biggest source of carbon emissions is energy production, meaning that his proposed carbon tax would pass directly through producers and suppliers to consumers in the form of much higher electricity bills. Though purportedly a tax on smokestacks, the real payer would be anyone turning on a light bulb or TV set.

If Sen. Dodd is really so concerned about greenhouse gases, he should limit his own carbon dioxide emissions by keeping his mouth shut unless he has something worth saying.


Ken Berwitz

More politics in a minute, but first a paean to this magnificent, beautiful day.

It was sunny this afternoon with the temperature in the high 70's.  It doesn't get much better than that  So my wife and I decided to take full advantage of it!

First we took a drive to the Jersey shore -- Long Branch to be specific.  We walked for a while and then had a drink and shared an appetizer at McLoone's in Pier Village.  Then we sat on the beach and loved every second of it (along with lots and lots of others, as you might guess). 

Finally, this being my wife and all, we drove to The Grove in Shrewsbury, a nice outdoor shopping center and she shopped for a while as I sat on a succession of benches they put out for husbands (I'm not sure wives are even allowed on them).

Now we're back home, I put out the patio furniture and we well be dining al fresco.

There are lots of things to enjoy that cost money.  But whoever wrote that song "The Best Things In Life Are Free" was 100% right.  Too bad he couldn't convince the store owners at The Grove..........


Ken Berwitz

This is a relatively long essay, but so important that I have decided to post it all, not just excerpts. 

What kind of a media do we have that will not report this to us?  Are they just lazy?  Or stupid?  Or so profit driven that they only feed us pap like anna nicole smith and the Rutgers anecdote? 

Or are they conflicted regarding which side they're rooting for?

In any event, here is the article.  Think long and hard about what it tells you:


Jihad and the Collapse of the Swedish Model

I decided to write this essay following the riots in Malm this weekend. Malm is Sweden's third largest city and by far the worst city in Scandinavia when it comes to Muslim aggression. I read recently that an Arab girl interviewed in Malm said that she liked it so much there, it felt almost like an Arab city. Native Swedes have been moving away from the city for years, turned into refugees in their own country by Jihad, not too different from the non-Muslims in some regions of the Philippines, southern Thailand or Kashmir in India, or for that matter Christian Serbs in Kosovo.
Sweden was presented during the Cold War as a middle way between capitalism and Communism. When this model of a society collapses and it will collapse, under the combined forces of Islamic Jihad, the European Union, Multiculturalism and ideological overstretch it is thus not just the Swedish state that will collapse but the symbol of Sweden, the showcase of an entire ideological world view. I wrote two years ago that if the trend isn't stopped, the Swedish nation will simply cease to exist in any meaningful way during the first half of this century. The country that gave us Bergman, ABBA and Volvo could become known as the Bosnia of northern Europe, and the Swedish model will be one of warning against ideological madness, not one of admiration. I still fear I was right in that assessment.

Jonathan Friedman, an American living outside Malm, mentions that the so-called Integration Act of 1997 proclaimed that Sweden is a Multicultural society. Notes to the Act also stated that Since a large group of people have their origins in another country, the Swedish population lacks a common history. The relationship to Sweden and the support given to the fundamental values of society thus carry greater significance for integration than a common historical origin.

Native Swedes have thus been reduced to just another ethnic group in Sweden, with no more claim to the country than the Kurds or the Somalis who arrived there last Thursday. The political authorities of the country have erased their own people's history and culture.

Jens Orback, Minister for Democracy, Metropolitan Affairs, Integration and Gender Equality from the Social Democratic Party said during a debate in Swedish radio in 2004 that We must be open and tolerant towards Islam and Muslims because when we become a minority, they will be so towards us.

This is a government that knows perfectly well that their people will become a minority in their own country, yet is doing nothing to stop this. On the contrary. Pierre Schori, Minister for immigration, during a parliamentary debate in 1997 said that: Racism and xenophobia should be banned and chased [away], and that one should not accept excuses, such as that there were flaws in the immigration and refugee policies.

In other words: It should be viewed as a crime for the native population not to assist in wiping themselves out.

Orback's attitude is what follows once you declare that culture is irrelevant. Our culture, even though we try to forget it, is steeped in a Judeo-Christian morality based on the Golden Rule of reciprocity: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. (Luke 6:31)

Muslims, on the other hand, are steeped in an Islamic tradition based on Muslim supremacy. Muslims view lack of force as a sign of weakness, and they despise weakness, which is precisely why Adolf Hitler stated his admiration for Islam, and thought it would be a better match for Nazism than Christianity, with its childish notions of compassion.

A Swedish man was nearly killed for the crime of wearing clothes with his own national flag while Sweden was participating in the 2006 football World Cup. Some Multicultural youths found this to be an intolerable provocation, and the 24-year-old man was run down by a car in Malm, where Muhammad is becoming the most common name for newborn boys.

Feriz and Pajtim, members of Gangsta Albanian Thug Unit in Malm, explain how they mug people downtown. They target a lone victim. We surround him and beat and kick him until he no longer fights back, Feriz said. You are always many more people than your victims. Cowardly? I have heard that from many, but I disagree. The whole point is that they're not supposed to have a chance. They didn't express any sympathy for their victims. "If they get injured, they just have themselves to blame for being weak," said Pajtim and shrugged.

The wave of robberies the city of Malm has witnessed is part of a war against the Swedes. This is the explanation given by young robbers from immigrant background in interviews with Petra kesson. When we are in the city and robbing we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes. This argument was repeated several times. Power for me means that the Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet. The boys explain, laughingly, that there is a thrilling sensation in your body when you're robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you've succeeded, it simply feels good. We rob every single day, as often as we want to, whenever we want to. The Swedes don't do anything, they just give us the stuff. They're so wimpy.

Exit Folkhemssverige - En samhllsmodells snderfall (Exit the People's Home of Sweden - The Downfall of a Model of Society) is a book from 2005 about immigration and the Swedish welfare state model dubbed the people's home, written by Jonathan Friedman, Ingrid Bjrkman, Jan Elfverson and ke Wedin. According to them, the Swedish Multicultural elites see themselves first of all as citizens of the world. In order to emphasize and accentuate diversity, everything Swedish is deliberately disparaged. Opposition to this policy is considered a form of racism:

The dominant ideology in Sweden, which has been made dominant by powerful methods of silencing and repression, is a totalitarian ideology, where the elites oppose the national aspect of the nation state. The problem is that the ethnic group that are described as Swedes implicitly are considered to be nationalists, and thereby are viewed as racists.

The authors fear that the handling of the immigration policies has seriously eroded democracy because the citizens lose their loyalty towards a state they no longer consider their own. Instead of increasing the active participation of citizens, the government has placed clear restrictions on freedom of thought, freedom of speech and freedom of congregation.

Mona Sahlin has held various posts in Social Democratic cabinets, among others as Minister for Democracy, Integration and Gender Equality. Sahlin has said that many Swedes are envious of immigrants because they, unlike the Swedes, have a culture, a history, something which ties them together. Notice how Swedish authorities first formally state that Swedes don't have a history or a culture, and then proceed to lament the fact that Swedes don't have a history or a culture. A neat trick.

Sahlin has also stated that: If two equally qualified persons apply for a job at a workplace with few immigrants, the one called Muhammad should get the job. [] It should be considered an asset to have an ethnic background different from the Swedish one. In 2004, she was quoted as saying that A concerted effort that aims at educating Swedes that immigrants are a blessing to their country must be pursued, stressing that her compatriots must accept that the new society is Multicultural. Like it or not, this is the new Sweden.

Mona Sahlin was elected leader of the Social Democratic Party, as thus a future contender for the post of Swedish Prime Minister, in 2007.

Why does the government dispense with the social contract and attack its own people like this? Well, for starters, because it can. Sweden is currently arguably the most politically repressive and totalitarian country in the Western world. It also has the highest tax rates. That could be a a coincidence, but I'm not sure that it is. The state has become so large and powerful that is has become an autonomous organism with a will of its own. The people are there to serve the state, not vice versa. And because state power penetrates every single corner of society, including the media, there are no places left to mount a defense if the state decides to attack you.

It has been said jokingly that while other countries are states with armies, Pakistan is an army with a state. Likewise, it could be argued that Sweden started out being a nation with a bureaucracy and ended up being a bureaucracy with a nation. In fact, the bureaucracy formally abolished the very nation it was supposed to serve. Its representatives are no longer leaders of a people, but caretakers preoccupied only with advancing their own careers through oiling and upholding, if possible expanding, the bureaucratic machinery.

Swedes pay the highest tax rates of any (supposedly) free nation, and for this they get flawed social security, non-existent physical security and a state apparatus dedicated to their destruction.

Anna Ekelund in the newspaper Aftonbladet writes that: We are a people who allow ourselves to be insulted by the government on a daily basis. We are not expected to be capable of thinking for ourselves, of deciding what we will read, or managing our own money. [] Swedes are as co-dependent as an alcoholic's wife. Yet we do not hurry to the ballot box to remove the prevailing systems. Not because we don't want to but because too many of us have painted ourselves into their corners.

Moreover, Swedes are keenly aware of the fact that their country is viewed by many outsiders as a model society. Sweden is a deeply ideological state dedicated to imposing a certain world view on its citizens, and because the state is ideological, dissenters are quite literally treated as enemies of the state.

In the book The New Totalitarians, the British historian Roland Huntford in the early 1970s pointed out that it was easier to establish the Fascist model of the corporate state in Sweden than in Mussolini's Italy for cultural reasons, since Sweden had a centralized bureaucracy whereas Italians are skeptical of state authority. Put simply: Swedes have tended to trust their bureaucrats, which no Italian in his right mind would ever do.

According to him, The Swedes have a horror of controversy as something unpleasant, inefficient and vaguely immoral. They require for peace of mind, not confrontation, but consensus. Consensus guides everything: private conversation, intellectual life and the running of the State.

The then Minister of Education, Mr. Ingvar Carlsson, defined the purpose of schooling: It is to produce a well adjusted, good member of society. It teaches people to respect the consensus, and not to sabotage it He also on one occasion said that School is the spearhead of Socialism. Mr. Carlsson was Swedish Prime Minister as late as 1996. In 2007, now as Sweden's consul general in Istanbul, Carlsson said that the trend towards a Multicultural Europe is unstoppable; therefore, Islam must be recognized as a domestic European religion.

Mr. Carlsson's mentor in the Social Democratic Party and predecessor as Swedish Prime Minister (1969 to 1986), Mr. Olof Palme, openly flaunted his disregard, if not contempt for, Western civilization: The Renaissance so-called? Western culture? What does it mean to us? Under the watchful eye of the Labor movement, Swedish education has for decades mounted deliberate attacks on Western culture, making it look suspect.

According to Mr. Huntford, When the Swedes change ideas, they do it to the full, leaving no room for criticism or reservation. The country lacks intellectual defences; anything new will conquer without resistance being offered. The consensus assumes that technological advancement is the sole path to happiness, and the Gross National Product the only measure of national success. It also assumes that the good of the collective at all times must take precedence over the good of the individual. It prescribes that the fundamentals of Swedish society must never be questioned or discussed.

This is how Mrs Maj Bossom-Nordboe, then departmental chief of at the Directorate of Schools, expressed it: It's useless to build up individuality, because unless people learned to adapt themselves to society, they would be unhappy. Liberty is not emphasized. Instead, we talk about the freedom to give up freedom. The accent is on the social function of children, and I will not deny that we emphasize the collective.

Roland Huntford ended his book with a warning that this system of soft-totalitarianism could be exported to other countries. He has been proven right since:

The Swedes have demonstrated how present techniques can be applied in ideal conditions. Sweden is a control experiment on an isolated and sterilized subject. Pioneers in the new totalitarianism, the Swedes are a warning of what probably lies in store for the rest of us, unless we take care to resist control and centralization, and unless we remember that politics are not to be delegated, but are the concern of the individual. The new totalitarians, dealing in persuasion and manipulation, must be more efficient than the old, who depended upon force.

Following the September 2006 elections, Fredrik Reinfeldt became Prime Minister of Sweden, presiding over a center-right coalition government. This is, in my view, positive. Sweden has been described by some as a one-party state, since the Social Democrats have been in power for 65 of the last 74 years. However, the differences between the left-wing and the right-wing in Sweden are not always that big.

The last time these parties were in power, under the leadership of PM Carl Bildt from 1991 to 94, they presided over massive immigration, and have not been vocal in their opposition to the Multicultural policies since. The new Foreign Minister Bildt as a UN Commissioner to the Balkans called for recognizing Islam as a part of European culture.

PM Reinfeldt has stated that the original Swedish culture was merely barbarism: It can sometimes be good to humbly remind of the fact that a great deal of what constitutes Sweden has been created in [a process of] evolution, exactly because we have been open to accept other people and experiences.

Reinfeldt said this following a visit to an area called Ronna in Sdertlje, near Stockholm. One year earlier a police station in Sdertlje was hit by shots from an automatic weapon following a major confrontation between immigrant youths and police. The trouble in Ronna started after a Swedish girl had been called a whore and reacted to this. Ethnologist Maria Bckman, in her study Whiteness and gender, has followed a group of Swedish girls in the immigrant suburb of Rinkeby outside Stockholm. Bckman relates that several of the blond Swedish girls stated that they had dyed their hair to avoid sexual harassment.

I have called Sweden a soft-totalitarian country, but I am sometimes not so sure about the soft part. Opinion polls have revealed that two out of three Swedes doubt whether Islam can be combined with Swedish society, and a very significant proportion of the population have for years wanted more limitations on immigration. Yet not one party represented in Parliament is genuinely critical of the Multicultural society.

Is it just a coincidence that the one country on the European continent that has avoided war for the longest period of time, Sweden, is also arguably the one Western nation where Political Correctness has reached the worst heights? Maybe the prolonged period of peace has created an environment where layers of ideological nonsense have been allowed to pile up for generations without stop. I don't know what Sweden will look like a generation from now, but I'm pretty sure it won't be viewed as a model society. And if the absence of war is one of the causes of its current weakness, I fear that is a problem that will soon be cured.



Ken Berwitz

I just read an excellent article by Matt Taibbi, on the ludicrous claim that rap and hip hop are somehow exempt from their own racism.  It also points out the unparalleled hypocrisy of corporations, which have made billions of dollars on this filth, acting like Cotton Mather wannabes over Imus.

You can read the entire article at .  But if you don't care to, I've excerpted some of the key parts for you below. 

I apologize in advance for the Mr. Taibbi's overuse of bad language - I have a feeling that is a prerequisite for being published in magazines like Rolling Stones these days.  I also disagree completely with his equation of Imus with rap and hip hop.  However vile you might find the "nappy headed ho's" comment, it is one of many tools in Imus' radio workshop.  Rap and hip hop provide little else:


THE LOW POST: The Imus Sanction

In a media shitstorm, everyone ducks for the cover of easy moral outrage


Ultimately, the fact that rappers are now being held accountable for something Imus said shows the bias many people have against hip-hop culture. Hip-hop is often the scapegoat of everything gone wrong in America, but hip-hop didn't slander the Rutgers women's basketball team, Don Imus did, so let's stay on point here...The point is, hip-hop didn't invent cursing, slurs, bad language, sexism or misogyny, though hip-hop like so many other fictional forms of the culture uses this type of language as a form of expression, however problematic it might be. This expression represents the way people in the streets talk. It might not be pretty or politically correct, but it is a unique form of fictional expression that emerges from the minds and mouths of young black men.
-- Dr. Todd Boyd, professor of critical studies at USC, writing for

The most annoying thing about the Don Imus fiasco? The instant it blew up into an absurdly overdone national controversy, we all knew exactly how everyone was going to play it -- or overplay it, as it were.

We all knew that the angry-white-guy columnists of the ilk were going to turn even the previously-hated liberal Imus into a martyr of the political correctness age ("Imus, Political Correctness and the end of America" was Douglas McKinnon's not-at-all-hysterical offering). We knew Al Sharpton would show up, business card in hand, at the back of the ambulance, offering his services. We knew campus feminists would surface en masse to paint Imus as a hatemongering symbol of the old-boy white male power structure that secretly still insists on its power and privilege in American society, his show a daily vulgar wink to fellow members of the Matrix. And we knew -- or at least I knew, since I've personally been through a couple of these media ass-whippings before -- that virtually every editorial denouncing Imus would include a line in there that would read something along the lines of, "And the worst thing is, his so-called 'jokes' aren't even that funny."

First of all, let's just get this out of the way: The idea that anyone in the media world gives a shit about the dignity of women, black or white, is a ridiculous joke. America's TV networks have spent the last forty years falling over each other trying to find better and more efficient ways to sell tits to the 18-to-35 demographic. They make hour-long prime-time reality dramas these days about shopping-obsessed sluts hitting each other with pocketbooks, for Christ's sake. Paris Hilton -- dumb, rich -- gets her own prime-time show. MTV, the teenie mags, the pop music industry, they're basically all an endless parade of skinny, half-naked brainless women selling makeup and jeans to neurotic, self-hating, weight-obsessed little girls.

The idea that NBC -- the company that proudly produced 241 episodes of Baywatch, a show whose two main characters for nearly a decade were Pamela Anderson's tits -- was "offended" by the use of the word "ho" is beyond preposterous. Until this incident, I would have wagered very good money that "ho" would be in the title of at least one NBC-produced reality pilot within the next ten years. You can't see that? Trivia-battling sluts in Ho-llywod Squares? An irony-for-irony's-sake callgirl-improvement show called Pimp My Ho? Would you bet real money that the Paris-and-Nicole vehicle The Simple Life wasn't originally called Whore Acres at some stage of the pre-production process? I sure as hell wouldn't. Programming decisions of the The Bachelor ilk aren't spontaneous mid-show farts by an aging drug-battered brain like the Imus deal -- they're wide-awake decisions, forged in the crucible of number-crunching corporate reflection, to use reactionary images of cheap brainless skanks to sell Fritos and pickup trucks.

The race question is even more ridiculous. Dr. Todd Boyd notwithstanding, there's just no way to talk about the Imus incident without talking about hip-hop and rap culture. Let me just say right up-front that I listen to a lot of rap music. I'm one of those revolting well-off suburban white kids who grew up on PE and NWA and privately mourns the fact that he looks like an idiot in a Starter jersey. I love rap music, always have. But as an adult white male I also know a minstrel show when I see it, and that's what rap has turned into.

Satan himself couldn't have designed a more effective vehicle for marginalizing black culture than modern hip-hop. In the early days rap music was scary social commentary; it was raw and real and it vividly described a violent street culture that white people didn't know about and didn't want to know about. But very quickly rap turned into a multibillion-dollar industry in which the same corporate behemoths who sold us crap like Garth Brooks and boy bands and Britney Spears made massive profits selling a stylized, romanticized version of black misery to white kids in the suburbs.

Pop Quiz: Where did the practice of calling all black women, and especially black women who are not actual prostitutes, hos? I seem to remember a line from Boyz n the Hood where some girl complains to Ice Cube about his habit of calling all women bitches. "Oh, I'm sorry, ho!" is the answer. Laughs all around. When the Imus thing hit, we heard Snoop Dogg explain that the difference between rappers using the word "ho" and Don Imus using it is that unlike "old-ass white men" like Imus, rappers are "not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about hos that's in the 'hood that ain't doing shit." Oh, I get it, Snoop -- you were satirizing the hos and bitches. You obviously checked the crowd to make sure nobody had a degree when you did your "So all the niggaz and the bitches, raise your muthafuckin hands in the air!" act. And it was satire when Ludacris did his thing: "but hos dont feel so sad and blue/cuz most of us niggaz is hos too."

As for the people who say there's no connection between hip-hop and what Imus said, they're out of their minds. Without Ludacris and 50 Cent and "We Luv Deez Hoez," Don Imus doesn't even know what a ho is. The unspoken truth about the Imus story is that there is no difference at all between what Imus does and what Snoop Dogg does. They both get paid to make ethnic slurs. In this case they both use the same one, one stealing from the other. The only difference is that Snoop doesn't know the joke is on him, too.

We've got a TV entertainment industry that ritualistically demeans women, a recording industry that makes billions cartoonizing black culture and a radio and film comedy industry that lives almost exclusively off lowbrow racial stereotyping. Guys like Carlos Mencia even use the same jokes over and over, changing words here and there to fit the different stereotypes. (Mencia did "That's like going to Compton and finding the only Hispanic teenage girl who isn't pregnant" and he also did "That's like going to a NASCAR event and finding the only white girl who doesn't have a black eye.") Every comic in America does this shit. It's gone so far that we even make jokes about making jokes about ethnic groups (Sarah Silverman's song about "I love you more than Asian people are good at math" comes to mind). And we get critics to bail out these comics by saying things like "He/she mocks bigotry and stereotypes by ironically embracing them" (the Voice's Michael Musto has used that one before) but deep down inside we all know that's bullshit. I dare anyone to watch tape of Richard Pryor doing his impression of a stuttering Chinese restaurant owner and then tell me with a straight face that Pryor is "mocking Asian stereotypes by ironically embracing them."

Of course he isn't. He's laughing at stuttering Chinese people. And the way Richard Pryor does it, it's funny. If Pryor were still alive and coherent today we'd put him on HBO, where he'd do huge ratings with the very same people who are pretending now to be appalled by Don Imus. Because we love our black jokes, we love our Jew jokes, we love our redneck jokes and we love our misogyny -- we just don't want it all on the wrong network in the wrong time-slot, coming from a white guy, in whose mouth it might very well sound like the bigot in all of us. And when it does pop up in the wrong place, coming from the wrong person, we've got to pull the "I'm shocked, shocked" act and pretend it's a criminal aberration. Because that's much easier than facing the truth about what we just heard.


To me, the most salient point of this sorry incident is not just that it makes fools of every Black person who cons him/herself into believing that rap and hip hop aren't enormously damaging to how they are viewed by others.  It is also that Black people who defend this filth are telling the world it is ACCEPTABLE to them.  Maybe even DEFINES them. 

The only good thing I can say about this is that it might make the klan and White citizens' councils obsolete.  Nobody likes redundancy.

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!!