Friday, 25 April 2008


Ken Berwitz

Credit for the following story goes to Paul Mirengoff at  Read his piece and see for yourself:

Obama's bad luck with advisers continues

Gabriel Schoenfeld reports on the latest Obama foreign policy adviser who turns out not to like Israel very much. Add Joseph Cirincione to the list that includes Samantha Power, Robert Malley, Merrill McPeak, Zbigniew Brzezinski , and his spiritual adviser Jeremiah Wright. (Obama, of course, loves Israel; he's just unlucky with his advisers).

Last September, in response to reports that the site in Syria that Israel bombed was a potential nuclear facility being established with the help of North Korea, Cirincione insisted that the site was no such thing. "This story is nonsense," Obama's adviser on nuclear threats told Foreign Policy magazine's blog.

And not just ordinary nonsense. According to Cirincione, the reports were the product of two nefarious, agenda-driven groups: (1) Bush administration hardliners seeking to derail "the U.S.-North Korean agreement" and (2) Israelis who "want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria."

As with Samantha Power, the number one problem with Obama taking advice from Cirincione is not his view of Israel; it's that he's a fool. As Schoenfeld notes, the fact of North Korean involvement in the development of a Syrian plutonium plant appears indisputable; indeed, the evidence now includes videos taken inside the facility before it was destroyed. Yet Cirincione dismissed the reports out-of-hand because he didn't like the implications, including the adverse implications for Israel's longstanding enemy, Syria. In essence, Cirincione committed precisely the offense he accused the Bush administration and the Israelis of -- reaching a conclusion of fact based on an agenda, rather than the evidence.

It's rather frightening to think that Obama has turned for advice on nuclear matters to someone this grotesquely paranoid about our government and about the Israelis.

Every time you hear Barack Obama eloquently, slickly, assure you of his undying love for the state of Israel, match the words up against the anti-Israel staff he has assembled one after the other after the other.

Then ask yourself:  If he can sound this sincere when it is plain that he is lying to your face, how can you believe anything else he says with the same aura of sincerity?

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  I do not know how anyone who supports Israel, whether Jewish or Gentile, can vote for this man.


Ken Berwitz

I'll let Phillip Messing of the New York Post tell you about this human colostomy bag:



April 24, 2008 --

A man heckling First Lady Laura Bush and daughter Jenna outside the 92nd Street Y was arrested after he punched a wheelchair-bound girl whose parents had told him to shut up, authorities said yesterday. German Talis, 22, was shouting obscenities at the Bushes, who were leaving the building Tuesday, when he crossed paths with Wendy and John Lovetro and their daughter Maureen, 18, who has cerebral palsy.

PHOTO GALLERY: Maureen Lovetro

They had been in the audience to hear the Bushes talk about their children's book, "Read All About It."

"He began yelling about Iraq and Iran at Jenna Bush. She was waving at the crowd. I told the guy, 'What are you doing? Shut up. This is about a child and books,' " said John Lovetro. "He was unperturbed. I said, 'Get out of here! You're being a moron!' "

The next thing he knew, Talis was allegedly punching Maureen - a fan of the first lady since meeting her in 2004.

"I heard my daughter hysterical yelling, 'He's hitting me!' " said Wendy Lovetro.

"He punched her on the shoulder blades, but that wasn't enough," she said.

"My husband pushed the wheelchair away from him and he reached beyond my husband and began pounding my daughter in the thigh."

The two men fought as the president's family drove off. Cops broke them up and busted Talis on charges of assault and resisting arrest.

Maureen was not seriously injured.

Lucky for Maureen Lovetro that she escaped without serious injury.  Apparently the human colostomy bag is as inept with his fists as he is with his mouth. 

I don't know what the maximum penalty is for something like this, but I would be very gratified if he receives it.  I assume you feel the same way.


Ken Berwitz

Are you allowed to attack your opponent based on the company he not only keeps, but assures you he will continue to keep? 

I would think so.  But evidently John McCain does not.

Here is the first part of a Reuters story on McCain's reaction to the North Carolina Republican Party's intention to run an ad featuring jeremiah wright and concluding that Barack Obama, who calls wright his spiritual mentor is "too extreme for North Carolina" (you can read the entire article by clicking here ):

McCain says N.C. Republicans out of touch over ad

Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:44am EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican U.S. presidential candidate John McCain accused North Carolina's Republican Party of being "out of touch with reality" over its refusal to pull an advertisement criticizing Democrat Barack Obama.

In an NBC interview aired on Friday, the Arizona senator said he has done all he can to persuade the state party to cancel the television ad that criticizes Obama as "too extreme" because of controversial remarks made by his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

"They're not listening to me because they're out of touch with reality and the Republican Party. We are the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan and this kind of campaigning is unacceptable," McCain told NBC's "Today" Show.

"I've done everything that I can to repudiate and to see that this kind of campaigning does not continue," he added.

Asked if the state party's unwillingness to heed his call raised questions about his leadership, McCain replied: "I don't know exactly how to respond to that."

Let's start at the beginning:  There is NOTHING WRONG with this ad.  It presents jeremiah wright in his own words, in context.  And it ties him to Barack Obama, who said he would never abandon wright and therefore is tied to him. 

So why would John McCain adamantly oppose its being aired? 

I am sort of hoping against hope that this is just a clever political ploy -- that McCain is saying this so that when the North Carolina Republican Party runs the ad (they assure us they will do so with or without his blessing), it will not be associated with him.

But, frankly, I doubt it. This is the same man who gave us McCain-Feingold and the same man who, many years ago, was (if you believe him) an unsuspecting dupe in the Savings and Loan scandal. 

John McCain comes across to me as a decent man who is not at all visionary and who often makes bad decisions because he doesn't see what is in front of him.

Not a very good rsum for a President, is it?


Ken Berwitz

The reality checks on Barack Obama are coming with more frequency from more sources now. 

Happily, with the exception of a lot of mainstream media (which still treat Mr. Obama like a prized possession), you can find the disturbing truths about who Obama is, what he is and who he consorts with in a great many places.

But few can say it (or anyting else) as well as Charles Krauthammer.  So I am posting the relevant excerpt from his latest column below, in which he explains it for us with typical style and precision.  You can read his entire column by just clicking here, and I hope you do:

Obama understands that the real threat to his candidacy is less Hillary Clinton and John McCain than his own character and cultural attitudes. He came out of nowhere with his autobiography already written, then saw it embellished daily by the hagiographic coverage and kid-gloves questioning of a supine press. (Which is why those Saturday Night Live parodies were so devastatingly effective.)

Then came the three amigos: Tony Rezko, the indicted fixer; Jeremiah Wright, the racist reverend; William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist. And then Obamas own anthropological observation that bitter working-class whites cling to guns and religion because they misapprehend their real class interests.

In the now-famous Pennsylvania debate, Obama had extreme difficulty answering questions about these associations and attitudes. The difficulty is understandable. Some of the contradictions are inexplicable. How does one explain campaigning throughout 2007 on a platform of transcending racial divisions, while in that same year contributing $26,000 to a church whose pastor incites race hatred?

I don't envy the Democratic party its options this year.  Democrats will either field Barack Obama, who is crumbling like a sand castle at high tide, or Hillary Clinton, a serial liar who was arguably the single most polarizing figure in American politics before the fact that her nomination would irretrievably alienate countless Black voters.

But this is no bed of roses for Republicans either.  With John McCain, Republicans have a terribly flawed candidate.  He contradicts himself a great deal, either out of dishonesty or inconsistency (these two may be synonymous) and has put his name on some genuinely awful legislation in the past (McCain-Feingold is one example).  And this is before we get to the age issue and his emotional makeup, both of which have already become staple attack points of his enemies

But, as deficient as John McCain might be, it is hard to see him being compared unfavorably to these two. 

There was a very intense and very violent scene towards the end of the movie "A History of Violence" in which the main character, "Joey", turns the tables on two men who are supposed to kill him.  Joey kills one, knocks out the other and gets away instead.  His brother "Richie", who ordered the killing, is infuriated.  He says, with complete exasperation, "How could you $#*&$% that up?  HOW, could you $#*&$%  that UP?"

Every time I look at the Democratic Party's two choices to run against John McCain, this dialogue comes to mind.


Ken Berwitz

How often have you been told that people in the United States are ignorant compared to Europeans?  It happens all the time, right?

Well, my sister just sent me this group of questions and answers from British quiz shows that, she is led to believe, actually went out over the radio and Telly.  If so, I think I'll be less inclined to accept the superiority of European people -- at least the ones on the British Isles -- from now on:

Examples of British Intelligence:

Here is a collection of trivia questions asked by Media personalities
together with answers given by their quiz show contestants!


Bamber Gascoigne: What was Gandhi's first name?

Contestant: Goosey?


Jeremy Paxman: What is another name for 'cherrypickers' and 'cheesemongers'?

Contestant: Homosexuals.

Paxman: No. They're regiments in the British Army who will be very upset
with you.


Jamie Theakston: Where do you think Cambridge University is?

Contestant: Geography isn't my strong point.

Theakston: There's a clue in the title.

Contestant: Leicester.


Stewart White: Who had a worldwide hit with What A Wonderful World?

Contestant: I don't know.

White: I'll give you some clues: what do you call the part between your hand

and your elbow?

Contestant: Arm.

White: Correct. And if you're not weak, you're...?

Contestant: Strong.

White: Correct - and what was Lord Mountbatten's first name?

Contestant: Louis.

White: Well, there we are then. So who had a worldwide hit with the song
What a Wonderful World?

Contestant: Frank Sinatra?


Alex Trelinski: What is the capital of Italy?

Contestant: France.

Trelinski: France is another country. Try again.

Contestant: Oh, um, Benidorm.

Trelinski: Wrong, sorry, let's try another question. In which country is the


Contestant: Sorry, I don't know.

Trelinski: Just guess a country then.

Contestant: Paris.


Anne Robinson:- Oscar Wilde, Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Archer have all
written books about their experiences in what:- Prison, or the Conservative

Contestant: The Conservative Party.


DJ Mark: For Pounds 10, what is the nationality of the Pope?

Ruth from Rowley Regis: I think I know that one. Is it Jewish?

GWR FM (Bristol)

Presenter: What happened in Dallas on November 22, 1963?

Contestant: I don't know. I wasn't watching it then.


Presenter: What is the name of the long-running TV comedy show about
pensioners: Last Of The ...?

Caller: Mohicans.


Phil: What's 11 squared?

Contestant: I don't know.

Phil: I'll give you a clue. It's two ones with a two in the middle.

Contestant: Is it five?


Q: Which American actor is married to Nicole Kidman?

A: Forrest Gump.


Leslie: On which street did Sherlock Holmes live?

Contestant: Er . . .

Leslie: He makes bread . . .

Contestant: Er . . ..

Leslie: He makes cakes . . ..

Contestant: Kipling Street?


Presenter: Which is the largest Spanish-speaking country in the world?

Contestant: Barcelona.

Presenter: I was really after the name of a country.

Contestant: I'm sorry, I don't know the names of any countries in Spain.


Question: What is the world's largest continent?

Contestant: The Pacific.


Presenter: Name a film starring Bob Hoskins that is also the name of a
famous painting by Leonardo Da Vinci.

Contestant: Who Framed Roger Rabbit?


Steve Le Fevre: What was signed to bring World War I to an end in 1918?

Contestant: Magna Carta ?.


O'Brien: How many kings of England have been called Henry?

Contestant: Er, well, I know there was a Henry the Eighth ... er ... er ...


Searle: In which European country is Mount Etna?

Caller: Japan.

Searle: I did say which European country, so in case you didn't hear that, I

can let you try again.

Caller: Er .... Mexico?


Paul Wappat: How long did the Six-Day War between Egypt and Israel last?

Contestant (after long pause): Fourteen days.


Daryl Denham: In which country would you spend shekels?

Contestant: Holland?

Denham: Try the next letter of the alphabet.

Contestant: Iceland? Ireland?

Denham (helpfully): It's a bad line. Did you say Israel?

Contestant: No.


Wood: What 'K' could be described as the Islamic Bible?

Contestant: Er . .. .

Wood: It's got two syllables . . . Kor . . .

Contestant: Blimey?

Wood: Ha ha ha ha, no. The past participle of run . . .

Contestant: (Silence)

Wood: OK, try it another way. Today I run, yesterday I . . .

Contestant: Walked?


Melanie Sykes: What is the name given to the condition where the sufferer
can fall asleep at any time?

Contestant: Nostalgia.


Presenter: What religion was Guy Fawkes?

Contestant: Jewish.

Presenter: That's close enough.


Wright: Johnny Weissmuller died on this day. Which jungle-swinging character

clad only in a loincloth did he play?

Contestant: Jesus.


Ken Berwitz

Does Ed Morrissey ever nail this one.

Writing at, Morrissey points out the clumsy, dishonest attempt by jeremiah wright and his buddies on the left to sanitize his hate-filled screeds on the grounds that they are being taken out of context.  Then Morrissey quotes ABC News (usually the most willing of the big three networks to present both sides), which gives us the context and proves that wright and his suck-ups are lying to your face.

Here, see for yourself:

The Wright Stuff: ABC provides the context

posted at 5:32 pm on April 24, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Barack Obama needs another eruption of the Wright Stuff like he needs another video of him making fun of embittered Bible-thumping bigots, but at least the former appears inevitable. ABC News responds to Jeremiah Wrights allegation that his words were taken out of context by providing the context. And guess what? The context makes it look just as bad:

Rev. Jeremiah Wright says his sermons were deliberately taken out of context by the news media for a political purpose and to paint me as some sort of fanatic.

When something is taken like a sound bite for a political purpose and constantly over and over again, looped in the face of the public. Thats not a failure to communicate, he told Bill Moyers in his first interview since ABC News Good Morning America first broadcast portions of his sermons. The Moyers interview will be broadcast tomorrow evening on PBS.

Wright says the use of the his controversial statements- -saying the US brought on the 9/ll attacks and that Black Americans should sing God Damn America instead of God Bless Americawere unfair and unjust and were used for some very devious reasons.

Once again, we have the complaint that quoting someone accurately amounts to devious behavior. Selectively quoting someone to remove context can be devious, but the only one doing that is Barack Obama, at least twice so far in the campaign. He flat-out misquoted John McCain in claiming that McCain said he would want 100 years of war, and he recently put out an ad that completely mischaracterized McCains view on the economy by cutting out a significant portion where he said that times had gotten tough recently. So far, Obama hasnt apologized for either, although he has stopped using at least the first claim lately.

So did Jeremiah Wright get the same treatment? Lets look at the fuller context of his more controversial remarks. The first is his infamous sermon delivered just five days after 9/11, when Americans crowded into churches for comfort and resolve. What did Trinity United Church deliver? Emphases mine:

I heard Ambassador Peck on an interview yesterday, did anybody else see him or hear him? He was on Fox News, this is a white man, and he was upsetting the Fox News commentators to no end. He pointed out, did you see him John, a white man, and he pointed out, an ambassador, that what Malcolm X said when he got silenced by Elijah Mohammed was in fact true, Americas chickens are coming home to roost. We took this country by terror, away from the Sioux, the Apache, the Arowak, the Comanche, the Arapahoe, the Navajo. Terrorism. We took Africans from their country to build our way of ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism. We bombed Granada and killed innocent civilians, babies, non-military personnel. We bombed the black civilian community of Panama with stealth bombers and killed unarmed teenagers and toddlers, pregnant mothers, and hardworking fathers. We bombed Qaddafis home and killed his child. Blessed are they who bash your childrens head against a rock. We bombed Iraq. We killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed a plant in Sudan to payback for the attack on our embassy, killed hundreds of hardworking people, mothers and fathers who left home to go that day not knowing that they would never get back home. We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye. Kids playing in the playground, mothers picking up children from school, civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day.

We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and Black South Africans and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. Americas chickens are coming home to roost.

In other words, we had it coming. We have no right to complain about terrorism when America is apparently the greatest terrorist state in history. Do you notice whom Wright never blames? The actual terrorists who had just murdered 3,000 of his countrymen. And talking about context, notice that Wright never provides any context for the actions against Japan, Libya, Panama, and Granada. In his speech, we just up and decided one day to murder Qaddafis child.

Next up is the 2003 sermon in which he tells his flock to sing God Damn America in 2003:

The British government failed, the Russian government failed, the Japanese government failed, the German government failed, and the United States of America government, when it came to treating her citizens of Indian descent fairly, she failed. She put them on reservations. When it came to treating her citizens of Japanese decent fairly, she failed. She put them in internment prison camps. When it came to treating her citizens of African descent fairly, America failed. The government put them in chains. She put them on slave quarters, put them on auction blocks, put them in cotton fields, put them in inferior schools, put them in sub-standard housing, put them in scientific experiments, put them in the lowest paying jobs, put them outside the equal protection of the law, kept them out of their racist bastions of higher education, and locked them into positions of hopelessness and helplessness. The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three strike law, and then wants us to sing God Bless America no, no, no

Not God bless America, God damn America. Thats in the Bible, for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating her citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme. The United States government has failed the vast majority of her citizens of African descent. Think about this, think about this.

For every one Oprah, a billionaire, youve got 5 million blacks who out of work. For every one Colin Powell, a millionaire, youve got 10 million blacks who cannot read. For every one Condoskeeza Rice, youve got 1 million in prison. For every one Tiger Woods, who needs to get beat, at the Masters, with his cap, blazin hips playing on a course that discriminates against women. God has his way of bringing you up short when you get to big for your cap, blazin britches. For every one Tiger Woods, we got 10,000 black kids who will never see a golf course. The United States government has failed the vast majority of her citizens of African descent.

The government gives blacks drugs? This is the conspiracy theory that the Reagan administrations CIA acted to flood American cities with crack cocaine so that the wave of violence it inspired would give the government an excuse to imprison black men. Somehow in that same thought, the government has conspired to keep black kids from golf courses. While its mostly true about illiteracy in 2003, it would have been closer to 7 million than 10 million Hispanics had a far higher illiteracy rate (44% to 23%) and illiterate whites were double the number of illiterate blacks (over 14 million).

Wright is a conspiracist, a demagogue, and at heart someone who doesnt much like America. Like William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, he spends his venom on the US and embraces dictators like Fidel Castro and terrorists like Hamas, whose screeds he publishes in Trinitys weekly newsletters. Far from absolving Obama, the context once again forces Obama to answer for the company he keeps.

Morrissey is right on target.  Obama needs another dose of wright about as much as he needs an advanced bowel virus.  And now that wright is going public (he will be making several speeches) the compare/contrast opportunities will be available to everyone. 

"Look, see how reasonable he seems now?  Well that is a lie because here is the real jeremiah wright (show church footage)"

What an albatross he is for Barack Obama.

Ken Berwitz Paul...................I'm sorry I haven't responded to your comment sooner. While I respect your sincerity I think you've got this dead wrong. First of all, it is not just one sermon we are talking about. It is a series of sermons in which wright has made one vile, hate-filled comment after another. Secondly, the basis of wright's entire ministry - according to him, not me - is the james cone concept of "Black liberation theology". Cone, in his own words, makes it clear that Black liberation theology is entirely pro-Black and anti-White. That might impress some (far from all, I would hope) of the congregants at TUCC, but I assure you it is just as racist as a hal turner or don black or david duke ranting out hatred of Blacks. And from a political perspective, I don't know how you can possibly deny that every time wright opens that mouth of his Barack Obama loses votes. The best thing that could happen for Mr. Obama is wright taking an extended sabbatical to a distant place with no media coverage until the last day of what would be Obama's last term in office. (04/28/08)

Paul B. Mr. Berwitz, You are still missing the point. Rev. Wright is not blaming America for 9/11 (In fact, many members of his congregation had loved ones who died in the attacks). He is giving a sermon about, and against, vengeance. The sermon is based on Psalms 137 which attempts to show how oppressed people, in their anger, want vengeance not only against their oppressors but against the entire group to which the oppressors belong, including their children; thus, the quote "Blessed are they who bash your children's heads against the rocks." His comments about America's past sins are only an elaboration of what Ambassador Peck (former ambassador to Iraq and a member of President Reagan's anti-terrorism task force) said on Fox News immediately after 9/11 criticizing American foreign policy. The comment about America's chickens coming home to roost is, in fact, lifted directly from Ambassador Peck. (04/26/08)

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!!