Tuesday, 03 July 2007


Barry Sinrod
Tonight on Hardball 5pm est MSNBC

See what's free at AOL.com.


Ken Berwitz

Here, from www.sweetness-light.com, is a complete deconstruction of the New York Times' serial lying about joseph wilson and valerie plame. 

Let me repeat.  What the New York Times has published is a case of serial lying. 

Please read the short set-up piece, and then by all means link onto the writer's "exegesis"****, fully chronicled, of how valerie plame came to be outed.  You'll find that it bears no resemblance whatsoever to what the Times and most major media in this country have fed you.  Which means - since every date and every quote is fully checkable, that they have built a fraudulent case out of lies.

Then think - long and hard - about how blatantly they have lied to you and, therefore, how many other things they must lie about as well.


New York Times Boldfaced Lies About Joe Wilson

July 3rd, 2007

From the Orwellian pages of the New York Times:

Soft on Crime

When he was running for president, George W. Bush loved to contrast his law-abiding morality with that of President Clinton, who was charged with perjury and acquitted. For Mr. Bush, the candidate, politics, after a time of tarnished ideals, can be higher and better.

Not so for Mr. Bush, the president. Judging from his decision yesterday to commute the 30-month sentence of I. Lewis Libby Jr. who was charged with perjury and convicted untarnished ideals are less of a priority than protecting the secrets of his inner circle and mollifying the tiny slice of right-wing Americans left in his political base.

Mr. Libby was convicted of lying to federal agents investigating the leak of the name of a covert C.I.A. operative, Valerie Wilson. Mrs. Wilsons husband, Joseph Wilson, was asked to investigate a central claim in Mr. Bushs drive to war with Iraq whether Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Africa. Mr. Wilson concluded that Iraq had not done that and had the temerity to share those conclusions with the American public.

It seems clear from the record that Vice President Dick Cheney organized a campaign to discredit Mr. Wilson. And Mr. Libby, who was Mr. Cheneys chief of staff, was willing to lie to protect his boss

Remember how boldly and easily the New York Times lies each and every time you read an article from them.

They are shameless, dangerous liars.

(By the way, if you are still confused about what actually happened in the Wilson/Plame non-scandal, you might take a look at my exegesis: When And Where Joe Wilson IV Outed Valerie Plame.) .

**** Great word, isn't it?  "Exegesis" is the name of a diary, kept by the prolific writer Philip K. Dick, of  (from his web page) "autobiographical material, philosophical material, philosophical speculation and analysis of his own fiction". 

You have to admit that fiction certainly plays a major role in anything about joseph wilson and valerie plame.


Ken Berwitz

Maybe, for the purposes of this blog, her name should be Hypocrisy Clinton.  Really, what else can you call this woman?

Yesterday, Hillary Clinton lambasted President Bush because he commuted the prison sentence of Lewis "Scooter" Libby.  Mr. Bush did not pardon Libby, he commuted the sentence so it would not include prison time.  Libby remains convicted, is subject to 2 years' supervision and must pay a huge fine. ( He can, of course, still chose to fight this ridiculous conviction and clear his name.)

Now I expected that the usual Democratic suspects (Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, yada yada yada) would be whining about this.  They are terribly embittered because, after not getting any of the Republicans they thought would be nailed on Patrick Fitzgerald's witchhunt, they are losing even the one crumb they were tossed.  That stands to reason.

But HILLARY CLINTON?  If there is one woman on planet Earth who should shut up about Libby's prison commutation it is Hillary Clinton, the former "co-president".  No one, and I do mean no one, lives in more of a glass house than she does. 

Allow me to show you a partial list of criminals whose sentences were commuted by the Clinton administration on its way out the door in 2001. ( you can see the entire list at http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/commutationspaocht.htm). 

 As you read it, remember that Lewis Libby's "crime" was remembering several conversations with media people differently than the media people did.  That all, that's it, that is the sum total of what he was convicted of.  

Libby was not accused of or convicted of leaking valerie plame's name.  Too bad for him - obviously that wasn't at all a problem, since the man who DID leak it, Richard Armitage, was never indicted or charged with a thing.   (Amazing how the leak became a non-issue the minute it came out that the leaker wasn't part of the Bush administration.)

By contrast, the fine upstanding sorts whose sentences were commuted by Clinton included traffickers in heroin, cocaine and PCP (angel dust), embezzlers, defrauders, tax evaders, etc. etc. etc.  But I bet none of them ever misremembered a conversation......

Here is that that partial list:

BERGER, Benjamin Conspiracy to defraud the United States; wire fraud; false statement; money laundering; filing a false tax return
CAMARGO, Gloria Libia Conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute, attempt to possess cocaine with intent to distribute
CAMPBELL, Charles F. Conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine, distribution of crack cocaine
CHANDLER, David Ronald Conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute marijuana; engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise; murder in furtherance of a continuing criminal enterprise; aiding and abetting the use or carrying of a firearm in relation to a drug-trafficking offense; money laundering
CHIN, Lau Ching Conspiracy to possess heroin with intent to distribute; interstate travel to commit a drug offense
COFFMAN, Loreta De-Ann Conspiracy; possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine; use of telephone to commit drug offense; distribution of crack cocaine near a school
CURRY, Derrick Conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base; aiding and abetting the distribution of cocaine base; and aiding and abetting the possession of cocaine base with intent to distribute
ELBAUM, Jacob Conspiracy to defraud the United States; embezzlement from federally funded program; wire fraud; mail fraud; making a false statement; filing a false tax return; failure to file a tax return
FRINK, Antoinette M. Conspiracy to aid and abet the possession of cocaine with intent to distribute; aiding and abetting the possession with intent to distribute; counseling others to travel in interstate commerce with the intent of facilitating the possession of cocaine with intent to distribute
GOLDSTEIN, David Conspiracy to defraud the United States; wire fraud; embezzlement from a federally funded program; mail fraud
MACDONALD, Peter, Sr. 1. Racketeering; racketeering conspiracy; extortion by an Indian tribal official; mail fraud; wire fraud; and interstate transportation in aid of racketeering

2. Conspiracy to commit kidnapping; third-degree burglary

REYNOLDS, Melvin J Bank fraud; wire fraud; making false statements to a financial institution; conspiracy to defraud the Federal Election Commission; false statements to a federal official
RIVERS, Dorothy Obstruction of a federal audit; false statements to a federal agency; tax evasion; failure to file tax returns; wire fraud; mail fraud; theft from a federally funded organization
WEINIG, Harvey Conspiracy to commit money laundering; criminal forfeiture and misprision of felony

Had enough?  Well there are plenty more, including the terrorist Susan Rosenberg and the international felon and all around piece of garbage Marc Rich -  whose former wife Denise then contributed $400,000 (!!!) to the Clinton Library.

Then there were the pardons Clinton's brother Roger was trying to sell (with some success, apparently) for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

And the grand finale?  How about the 16 FALN (Puerto Rican) terrorists - yes, terrorists - pardoned by Clinton when Hillary was running for the senate in New York, and hoped to get a boost from Puerto Rican voters who are plentiful in that state.  These terrorists never even asked to be pardoned, but Bill Clinton went ahead and let them go free, just when it would benefit Hillary. 

16 terrorists freed on Hillary's behalf!  Does anyone know where they are now?  Who they are working with?  What they are doing? 

To Hyprocrisy Clinton:  Do yourself a favor and shut up about presidential commutations.  Do us all a favor and shut up about presidential commutations. 

Come to think of it, do us all a favor and just shut up, period.



Ken Berwitz WE don't know? That's not true.  I do know. It's YOU who doesn't know, and the reason is that you desperately don't want to. The leaker - who admitted it and apologized for it - is Richard Armitage. You can't reinvent facts by shutting your eyes tight and holding your ears. They are still facts.  One other thing:  You love to toss around this "death" sentence for treason, as if it had any basis in reality:  Do you have any idea of how many people in this country's entire history were put to death for treason?  And what this tiny number did that was treasonous?  HINT:  If you think it was that they had a conversation with a journalist that they remembered differently than the journalist, think harder. (07/03/07)


Ken Berwitz

How good is your memory?  Do you remember when Cindy Sheehan bowed out of the peace movement?  Wow, you ARE good.  That was what, five whole weeks ago?

Well guess what.  She's baa-a-a-a-a-a-aack.  As if anyone believed her when she said she was finished.  An attention whore is an attention whore. 

But anyway, here is an excerpt from Ms. Sheehan's "I have returned" statement.  Prepare to be stirred to the bone (ok, maybe the funny bone, but that's a bone too):.

Out the Instigator

by Cindy Sheehan

Tue Jul 03, 2007 at 11:01:58 AM PDT

Call out the Instigator
Because theres something in the air
We got to get together sooner or later
Because the revolutions here
You know its right!
Thunderclap Newman

Im not backing off. I tried to remove myself from the political realm of the US, what BushCo is turning into an Evil Empire, but the blatant audacity of George commuting Scooters sentence (hes not ruling out a full pardon and you know he will) has dragged me kicking and screaming back in. I cant sit back and let this BushCo drag our country further down into the murky quagmire of Fascism and violence, taking the rest of the world with them!

I have sat quietly back these past five weeks as the slaughter in Iraq sorrowfully surges along with Georges bloody escalationand as the philosophical opposition to the war has soared to almost four out of every five Americans. I have remained silent when Senator Barack Obama said that impeachment is only reserved for grave, grave breeches! Well, BushCo has created hundreds of thousands of graves dug by their lies and greed. For cripes sake, George admitted to breaking the FISA Act (which is a felony) that also breeched the 4th Amendment to our Constitution that already prohibited illegal search and seizure. How was Bill Clintons offense graver than Georges, Dicks, or Scooters? Did we ever think that the criminality and arrogance of the Nixon White House would be eclipsed in our time with nary a baaaah from the Sheeple in Congress?  .

If you want to read more of this verbal vomit, go to http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/3/13594/28191 and have a ball.   Me, I'd rather watch paint peel.

Did you, COULD you, have any doubt that this unhinged looney-tune would try to come back?  Or that she would be exploited again by the hard-left crowd that used her so completely the first time around?

We'll see if even her former pals on the left want to deal with the national whining champion a second time.  I hope so, it's a match made in heaven.



Ken Berwitz

What do you call a prosecutor who is charged with finding out who leaked someone's name, finds out almost immediately who the leaker is, but then proceeds to conduct a multi-year investigation anyway, costing untold millions of dollars in taxpayers' money and legal fees for dozens of people who were not guilty of a thing?

How about Patrick Fitznifong?

When does Patrick Fitzgerald...er, Fitznifong answer for his actions?  If he were investigating Bill Clinton, he'd have been tarred and feathered multiple times by now (see Ken Starr). 

And when does Richard Armitage, who DID leak valerie plame's name, answer for it?  If the leaker had turned out to be Bush or Cheney or Rove, the way the leftwing haters were hoping it would, do you think any of those three could have just said "whoops, sorry" and walked away as Armitage has?

Evidently, since the culpable party is not part of the Bush administration but, rather, one of its critics, leaking plame's name ain't so bad any more.  Maybe the torquemada wannabes are finally noticing that she wasn't a covert agent at all under the law.  And that her husband is a proven liar who has about as much acquaintance with honesty as osama bin laden has with a Passover seder.

Years ago, my brother in law and I were talking about basketball, and he said "isn't it funny how if a dirty player gets traded to your team he isn't dirty anymore, just very aggressive"?   I think of that as I think of how leaking valerie plame's name went from the crime of the century to a forgettable little anecdote the minute they couldn't nail a Bush heavyweight for it.

Patrick Fitznifong.  That would look good on a subpoena.....


Ken Berwitz

I occasionally preface blogs by saying "you can't make this stuff up".  It is meant to communicate that what I am about to show you is so nutty that it must be real, because the human mind couldn't contort itself enough to imagine it. 

Well, here is an exerpt from today's Sydney (Australia) Morning Herald.  See if you think this qualifies:.

July 3, 2007

HUMANS are just one of the millions of species on Earth, but we use up almost a quarter of the sun's energy captured by plants - the most of any species.

The human dominance of this natural resource is affecting other species, reducing the amount of energy available to them by almost 10 per cent, scientists report.

Researchers said the findings showed humans were using "a remarkable share" of the earth's plant productivity "to meet the needs and wants of one species".

They also warned that the increased use of biofuels - such as ethanol and canola - should be viewed cautiously, given the potential for further pressure on ecosystems.

The scientists, from Austria and Germany, who publish their results today in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, analysed data on land use, agriculture and forestry from 161 countries, representing 97 per cent of the world's land mass.

This showed humans used 24 per cent of the energy that was captured by plants. More than half of this was due to the harvesting of crops or other plants.

The human use of the natural resource varied across the globe, ranging from 11 per cent in Oceania and Australia, to 63 per cent in southern Asia.

An agriculture professor at the University of Melbourne, Snow Barlow, said the paper showed humans were taking up too much of an important natural resource.

"Here we are, just one species on the earth, and we're grabbing a quarter of the renewable resources we're probably being a bit greedy." .

Got that?  We are overusing the sun.  An unlimited, entirely renewable resource, and we're "overusing" it.

I don't even begin to know where to go with this.  Maybe we can put a very large umbrella over beaches around the world so that we'll tan less.  Maybe we can have an affirmative action plan for sun use by other species. 

Or maybe we can send the "scientists" who came up with this looney-tune for observation, or at least a sobriety test.

I wonder how many of these nut jobs think Al Gore is a prophet too.  I have a sneaking suspicion we both know the answer.....

The most EVIL administration in the history of this nation

barry sinrod
We must move to indict all of these bastards after they leave office and send them to jail without pardons.
Impeachment will do nothing at this time. We need a super majority in both houses of congress and the Presidency to get these people and put them where they belong in JAIL.
 My son was wrongfully accused of a crime. He lost his job, his dignity, his career and most of his life. Then after two years the prosecutor found that the accuser 6 yrs old lied and the motivation was MONEY. The accuser and her mother are Brazilian and they are represented by an American Attorney who specializes in 'Scams" by the Brazilian community.
The Prosecutor would not drop the charges because "he might have done something" they said to CYA.
So they dropped it to adjudication witheld forever, meaning his 3rd degree felony will never be a conviction.
But his life will never be the same.  And now Libby or someone does a treasonous thing that is usually punished by death! at worst.   I am furious.

See what's free at AOL.com.

Ken Berwitz Barry, you're a friend and I love you. But you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Lewis Libby was convicted of lying about several conversations he had. The jury believed the journalists he conversed with instead of him. That's it. Nothing else. I don't know how to break this to you, but people aren't put to death for treason if they lie in conversations with journalists. You hate so much and so hard that you don't even try to grasp the actual facts you are writing about. That's terribly sad for you because I know you long enough to know you are a lot smarter than this. If you really care about the "treason" of leaking valerie plame's name, you would be demanding that RICHARD ARMITAGE, THE GUY WHO ADMITTED HE LEAKED IT was indicted and tried and convicted and "put to death" as you are so fond of saying. But you don't give a damn about him, even though he's the one who did it. You never even mention his name. I'm not even sure you are aware that he is the leaker. And the reason is because this isn't about treason or leaking valerie plame's name at all, it's about "getting" Republicans. It never has been about anything else. Here's a little unasked for advice: Stop listening to the leftwing lunatics and just parrotting everything they say without checking it. When you do that, it isn't you speaking, it's them speaking through you. They have your voice and you have no voice. (07/03/07)


Ken Berwitz

I very rarely watch keith olbermann's show, Countdown.  He never has anyone on who disagrees with him, which makes the show one-dimensional, predictable, boring and uninformative.  Plus, he has what my grandmother would have called a "farbissoner puss" - farbissoner is Yiddish for sour/unpleasant/uninviting/dour/you pick a similar word, you'll be right.

But today, while surfing through the cable news stations, I stopped for a minute, just to see what he was up (or down) to.  And the first thing I heard was a whiney attack (which is all I EVER recall from Mr. Congeniality), this time on President Bush, because he didn't pardon or commute 152 out of 153 death penalty cases as governor.

And I remembered that in Texas, at least when Bush was governor, he COULDN'T pardon a prisoner facing the death penalty.  Texas Governors cannot legally do so.  All he could do was give the convicted party one 30 day stay.

So I moved on, secure in the knowledge that not watching an unpleasant farbissoner puss who doesn't allow opposing voices on his show and - if tonight is any indication - doesn't know what he's talking about, was a good move.  

Four years on MSNBC, and olbermann still has less than one third the viewership of Bill O'Reilly.  Sometimes he doesn't even finish in second place;  Nancy Grace beats him out in his time slot, as they and Paula Zahn fight for what's left after the O'Reilly rollercoaster runs over them.

I wonder if it ever occurs to Mr. olbermann that his farbissoner puss, lack of any opposing views and overt ignorance (or just plain dishonesty, let's not count that out) may have something to do with how few viewers he draws after all this time. But I doubt it.


Ken Berwitz

Here is David Horowitz' take on the fact that all of the terorist suspects in the UK are either doctors or associated with the medical profession in some way.  He makes a very persuasive point about this;  see if you agree:.

So the Glasgow bomber who set out to massacre innocent men, women and children at random is a medical doctor who was committing these heinous crimes for Allah. What does that tell you about the Islamic crusade against the West? It is not about desperation; it is not about oppression; it is not about land in the Middle East. This war is a global war; it is not about Israel. It is not about the war in Iraq. It is not about George Bush or Tony Blair. Why do they hate us? Because they are religious fanatics on a mission to carry out the 1,500 year dream of Mohammed to force the entire world to submit to his religion. Fundamentalist Islam is a totalitarian political system whose prophet preaches death to infidels -- men, women and children. The apologists, shills and enablers for these monsters from Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan to the BBC and the New York Times, draw on a tradition that is only 250 years old, but no less dangerous in the context of this war. Ever since the French Revolution the political left has been at war with the democracies of the West. The only real political question we face is how many bombings, how many atrocities it is going to take for the majorities in the democracies to wake up.



Ken Berwitz

Janet Napolitano (D-Arizona) may be a female but, as governors go, she has one of the biggest sets of gonads in the country.

Read this (the bold print is mine):.

Governor OKs toughest migrant-hire law in U.S.

Napolitano cites inaction by Congress

Matthew Benson
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 3, 2007 12:00 AM

Gov. Janet Napolitano on Monday signed sweeping legislation against employers of undocumented workers, targeting the state's market for illegal labor with what she called "the most aggressive action in the country."

The penalty for violators: the suspension of a business license on the first violation and permanent revocation on a second, amounting to a death sentence for repeat offenders.

"It's monumental. It's a change from anything we've done in the past," said Speaker of the House Jim Weiers, R-Phoenix. "It's time for the states to start stepping up and stop waiting for Congress."

The law takes effect Jan. 1, significantly raising the stakes for more than a quarter-million undocumented workers believed to reside in Arizona and the businesses that employ them.

Between now and then, Napolitano hinted at calling legislators back to the Capitol for a special session this fall to amend flaws in the bill, including a provision that could force the closure of hospitals, power plants and other critical facilities if they're cited for making illegal hires. Her other concerns included "woefully" inadequate funding for enforcement and the lack of a non-discrimination clause to ensure it's enforced fairly.

Napolitano's signature comes just days after the failure of a comprehensive immigration-reform measure being considered by the U.S. Senate. She again lamented that proposal's collapse and blasted Congress anew in saying Arizona could no longer afford to wait.

"We're dealing somewhat in uncharted territory right now - uncharted territory because of the inability of the Congress to act," Napolitano said. "The states will take the lead, and Arizona will take the lead among the states."

But opposition to the new law was swift, led by Latino activists and the business community. Eight minutes after the governor's announcement that she had signed the bill, the Arizona Chamber of Commerce issued a statement calling it "a crippling blow to Arizona business."

That opposition coalesced in a Capitol hearing room where critics vowed a fight.

"We have five months for the business community to rally and come to the table and demand that the House and Senate come back to the table and work on this bill," said Mary Rose Wilcox, a Maricopa County supervisor and Hispanic activist. "People are just incensed about this. This will be disastrous for the state of Arizona."

A legal challenge regarding the constitutionality of the new law is already in the works.

Phoenix employment attorney Julie Pace said that challenge will assert that Arizona has overstepped its authority by moving into the arena of immigration law. The U.S. Constitution gives power over immigration policy to the federal government.

"I will make a prediction that sanctions will never be imposed because they can't ever become workable," said Rep. Ben Miranda, D-Phoenix. "It will never be implemented properly. It will never function."

Beginning Jan. 1, all Arizona employers will be required to check the legal status of their employees through a federal database known as the Basic Pilot Program. The accuracy of that database and its ability to handle 130,000 to 150,000 Arizona businesses that will now use it has been questioned. Napolitano sent a letter Monday to congressional leaders asking for improvements and federal investment to ensure Basic Pilot is up to the task.

But the day was one of relief for those who for years have asked for a set of state sanctions against businesses that dabble in illegal labor. Perhaps chief among them is Rep. Russell Pearce, a Mesa Republican who sponsored the bill and was at the forefront of numerous similar efforts in the past.

"Anyone worried about this bill ought to be worried about their hiring practices," said Pearce, who called the measure "the toughest yet fairest employer-sanction law in the country."

An even stricter set of employer sanctions waits in the wings, led by a citizens group that hopes to get its proposal on the 2008 ballot. That measure, which would revoke a violator's license on a first offense, loomed over the development of Pearce's bill and was again noted on the day of its signing. The hope among many lawmakers is that the new law will short-circuit an initiative some consider too drastic.

"The main concern is you've got an initiative out on the street that's growing momentum every day," Weiers said. "If it goes to the ballot, I suspect it'll win overwhelmingly."

The new law has problems of its own, Napolitano conceded. She has already spoken with Weiers and Senate President Tim Bee, R-Tucson, about the potential of a special session. Bee said he was open to the possibility. Weiers noted that any changes would have to be scripted in advance.

Issues that Napolitano says need to be corrected in the new law include:

Insufficient funding for enforcement.

Overbroad language that could cause a chain of businesses to be penalized if a single location was cited.

Lack of an exemption to ensure that critical facilities such as hospitals don't have to temporarily close their operations if undocumented workers are found among their staffs.

"For an immigration violation for hiring a nursing aide, are you going to close down a nursing home?" Napolitano asked.

Observing that "this is not a doorway for discrimination against anyone," Napolitano said she'd like lawmakers to add a non-discrimination clause to assure residents that they won't be targeted based on their race or ethnicity.

Those problems aside, Napolitano said she viewed it as better to move forward with a new law than back to Square 1 next session with a veto.
Someone finally took the leap and signed onto legislation that penalizes EMPLOYERS for hiring illegals. 
I don't know if this is going to work, I don't know if this is just a dog and pony show and will be pulled back later.  I don't know a lot of things.
But what I do know is that, at least as of today, there is a state doing something about illegals, and reminding them, in the only way it makes sense to, that they ARE illegal.   And it tells employers that there is a price to pay for hiring illegals.  A very, very stiff price. 
Now let's see if these are jobs no one else will do.  Or maybe, just maybe, we'll find out that when there isn't an illegal pool of workers willing to take half-wages, employers will pay a decent wage, thus making good and sure those jobs ARE worth taking by legals.
Thank you governor Napolitano, and may the other 49 watch and learn.

Buy Our Book Here!

Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, 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!!