Monday, 23 February 2009


Ken Berwitz

Happily, what you are about to read is not reflective of all Islamic clerics.  Sadly, however, it certainly is reflective of a good many.

The following transcript comes to us from the invaluable

Egyptian Cleric Zaghloul Al-Naggar: The Arab World Is Ruled By the Scum of the Earth and the Garbage of All Nations; I Am 'Absolutely' Calling to Wage Jihad Against the Jews, Who Are Devils in Human Form

Following are excerpts from an interview with Egyptian cleric Zaghloul Al-Naggar, which aired on Al-Rahma TV on January 6, 2009.

To view this clip, visit

"The West Wanted To Avenge Its Defeat In The Crusades, So It Gathered These Dispersed [Jewish] Communities... And Planted Them In The Heart Of The Arab World"

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "I have written about the conspiracy against the Palestinian people, and about how this abominable conspiracy was hatched by Britain and France, in collaboration with several Western countries. In our days, this conspiracy has been adopted by the U.S.

"This conspiracy has many causes. The West wanted to avenge its defeat in the Crusades, so it gathered these dispersed [Jewish] communities - the scum of the earth and garbage of the nations - and planted them in the heart of the Arab world, thus saying to us: 'We've returned, after you drove us out of this blessed land.'

"The Jews used to live a life of squalor and humiliation, and were fought and persecuted in Europe and the whole world. I lived in Britain from the early 1960s, and many stores and restaurants still had a 'no dogs, no Jews' sign. The Jews wanted to escape the humiliation imposed on them by the West, and to shift it to the Arab nation. In this case, two goals coincided: The Jews' goal was to have a state, which would protect them from their humiliation all over the world, and the goal of the West was to avenge its defeat in the Crusades, by returning to the region.

"This conspiracy began in the 17th century CE, when the Jews convinced the British to form the Zionist-Crusader Committee. This committee devised the general outlines of the conspiracy. Later, Europe, because of its hatred for the Islamic Caliphate, launched a fierce war of attrition against the Islamic countries, and the Caliphate eventually collapsed.


"In the tenth century CE, there was a kingdom called the Khazar kingdom, near the Caspian Sea, which was called the Khazar Sea back then. This kingdom was ruled by a tyrannical dictator, who fabricated lies about his neighbors, just as Israel does today. Throughout history, the Jews have excelled at getting close to rulers. They got close to Bulan, the king of the Khazars, and convinced him to convert to Judaism. King Bulan converted, and made Judaism the religion of the Khazar kingdom. Most of the people who belong to Judaism today are of Khazar origin. They come from Mongol Tatar races, which have nothing to do with the Arab region, or with Jacob, Abraham, and Moses. Therefore, the Jewish claim to a right to this land is totally groundless." [...]

I Am 'Absolutely' Calling To Wage Jihad Against the Jews

"The Jews have never been faithful to agreements."

Interviewer: "Right."

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "That is how they are described in the Koran. They are not faithful to treaties or agreements. They depend upon American and Western aid. We - the Arab states, governments, and officials - made a huge mistake in dealing with this as a political issue, when it is, in fact, a religious issue."

Interviewer: "An issue of faith."

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "The Prophet Muhammad said: 'If [the enemy] treads upon even an inch of Muslim land, Jihad becomes a duty, and a child should set out on Jihad even without his parents' permission, a wife without her husband's permission, and a slave without his master's permission.'"

Interviewer: "So are you calling to wage Jihad?"

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "Absolutely. There is no solution..."

Interviewer: "But who has the right to declare Jihad?"

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "Let me be clear. Jihad is the only way to resolve this issue. With the Jews, one cannot achieve anything by means of peace, or a settlement, or open borders, or diplomatic and commercial ties. They are devils in human form. Many people think that Judaism is a religion, but today's Jews are not really Jews, and have nothing to do with Moses and the Torah. They are a gang of evil thieves who stole this land. By nature, a thief who knows he has no right to the land imposes his presence by means of force, by bloodshed, by excessive massacres, by excessive killings, and by destruction, in order to prove that he has rights in this region."

Interviewer: "True."

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "This is the nature of thieves."

Interviewer: "Right."

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "It is inconceivable that we deal with this band of thieves as a state. We made a big mistake by treating them as a state. This is not a state. These are gangs of evil thieves and murderers..." [...]

"The Arab World is Ruled by the Scum of the Earth and the Garbage Of All Nations... Not a Single Arab Leader Understands or Implements Islam"

Interviewer: "Yes."

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "There is not a single Arab leader who understands or implements Islam

"By occupying the Arab and Islamic countries, the Western world has managed to exclude Islam completely from the decision-making. All kinds of impure scoundrels seized power. The Arab world is ruled by the scum of the earth and the garbage of all nations. We pray that Allah will guide them. Either that, or that He would relieve us of them all."

Interviewer: "Yes."

Zaghloul Al-Naggar: "There is not a single Arab leader who understands or implements Islam.


"I blame the Islamic countries as well, not just the Arab countries. I say to Iran: Where are your missiles? You raise the banner of Islam, but where are your missiles? Where are all the soldiers you parade in military marches? I say to Hizbullah: Where are your missiles? When will you use them, if not now? I say to Syria, part of whose land has been occupied for over 30 years: Where is your army? Where are your missiles?"

Egypt and Israel have had a peace - a tenuous, cold one - for over 30 years.  But make no mistake:  Egypt is chock full of hate-driven radicals just like this (the Muslim Brotherhood is, to say the least, alive and well there - among others). 

For that reason, when it comes to Israel and its Jews, Egypt is literally one heartbeat away from being Iran, .

Israel is a free, democratic country situated in a very dangerous neighborhood; one which teems with people like zaghloul al-naggar. 

The USA must never forget the importance of Israel in the Middle East.  I hope - with great trepidation - that this is understood by the current administration.


Ken Berwitz

Now that Barack Obama is in, are monkeys out?

Last week I attacked the New York Post for what, to me, was clearly a racist cartoon, which was published right after Barack Obama signed the so-called "stimulus" package into law.  It depicted a dead chimpanzee with bullet holes in its chest, and a police officer, holding the smoking gun while saying "it looks like someone else will have to write the next stimulus bill". 

While President Obama didn't write the bill, he had just signed it.  That cartoon came across as dead-on racist and I said so. But I certainly didn't think that newspapers were precluded from using chimps, or monkeys, or gorillas in their stories. 

Yet look at the hoops the Washington Post went through regarding an article they published last week.  The story comes to us from Ken Shepherd of

WaPo Gone Bananas with Political Correctness?

Incredibly ridiculous.

There's no other way to describe the over-the-top political correctness that leads a major newspaper to issue a prophylactic apology for an unoffensive cartoon in the anticipation that someone somewhere will raise a fuss.

Yet that's what the Washington Post did yesterday in a correction posted on page A2 of the Sunday edition (via Jossip):

So Gene Weingarten from The Washington Post wrote an article called "Monkey Business" about men and women and their sexual fluidity, based on that New York Times trend piece from a couple weeks ago. But since the title of the article had the word "monkey" in it, and the accompanying picture was of a cartoon monkey, WaPo needed to clear up any misconceptions vis-a-vis The Post cartoon and our current president.

The headline, illustration and text of "Below the Beltway," a column in The Washington Post Magazine today, may cause offense to readers. The magazine was printed before a widely publicized incident last week in which a chimpanzee attacked and badly mauled a woman in Stamford, Conn. In addition, the image and text inadvertently may conjure racial stereotypes that The Post does not countenance. We regret the lapse.

You know, it took the Post about 4 days to sorta-apologize for their monkey comic. WaPo's correction was printed the same day as the cartoon. That's how you know they printed it on purpose to drum up controversy.

For his part, Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz confessed on his Twitter page that he was confused as to why the Post felt it necessary to issue an apology (posted to his page shortly after 1:30 p.m. EST today):

Can someone tell me what the Washington Post is apologizing for?  I agree with Shepherd - I can't find a reason.

Is this how it's going to be for the next four years?  Is the Washington Post going to apologize for anything that could be construed as an offensive stereotype if it were used in a racial or religious way - even when it isn't used that way?  If so, I have some suggestions for additional apologies.  

The Washington Post should....

-Apologize to Jews for any story that mentions cheapness;

-Apologize to Muslims for any story that mentions terrorism;

-Apologize to Irish people for any story that mentions drunkenness;

-Apologize to Italian people for any story that mentions organized crime;

-Apologize to migets and dwarfs for any story that mentions a short-order cook;

-Apologize to amputees for any story that refers to slot machines as one-armed bandits;

Get the point?  Just because something is mentioned that could, in a certain context, be offensive to one group or another, doesn't mean that it is being used that way.   And the more examples you think of, the more ridiculous it gets, right?

Hey, here's an idea:  Maybe the Washington Post should apologize a second time for its monkey cartoon.  I'm sure there is a chimp or gorilla somwhere that feels hurt and left out......


Ken Berwitz

I agree that this probably isn't fair.  But a) it's more than a little interesting and b) importantly, if this were the Bush administration it would be a feature story in the media today - which, for Obama's people, it isn't.

From the Detroit News:

Monday, February 23, 2009

Auto team drives imports

Fed task force has few new U.S. cars

David Shepardson / Detroit News Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- The vehicles owned by the Obama administration's auto team could reflect one reason why Detroit's Big Three automakers are in trouble: The list includes few new American cars.

Among the eight members named Friday to the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry and the 10 senior policy aides who will assist them in their work, two own American models. Add the Treasury Department's special adviser to the task force and the total jumps to three.

The Detroit News reviewed public records to discover what many of the task force and staff members drove, but information was not available on all of the officials, and records for some states were not complete.

At least two task force members don't own a car, and there are still two open slots on the 10-member panel that will be filled by the secretaries of labor and commerce, who have not yet been appointed.

The co-chairs of the task force -- Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and White House National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers -- both own foreign automobiles.

Geithner owns a 2008 Acura TSX, registered in New York. He once owned a 1999 Honda Accord and a 2002 Acura MDX, according to public records.

Geithner is the president's designee for purposes of enforcing loan agreements with GM and Chrysler and must approve or reject any proposed transactions by either company that would cost $100 million or more.

His maternal grandfather, Charles Moore, was a vice president at Ford Motor Co. from 1952-63, according to Peter Geithner, the secretary's father. But Geithner wasn't very interested in cars growing up -- in part because he graduated from high school in Asia, his father said.

Summers owns a 1995 Mazda Protege that's registered in Massachusetts. He previously owned a 1996 Ford Taurus GL.

What other task force members drive:

Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag owns a 2008 Honda Odyssey and a 2004 Volvo S60. He previously owned a 1997 Jeep Grand Cherokee and 1982 Datsun.

Carol Browner, the White House climate czar, said earlier this month at the Washington Auto Show that she doesn't own an automobile. Public records show she once owned a 1999 Saab 9-5 SE.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu doesn't own a car, his wife, Jean Fetter, said in a telephone interview on Sunday. Cabinet officials are typically transported to and from work by security officials in government vehicles.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson owns a 2008 Toyota Prius and a Honda Odyssey minivan, she said Sunday. "It's great," she said of her Prius.

Vehicle information was not available for Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood or Christine Romer, head of the Council of Economic Advisers.

Here's what task force policy aides drive:

Austan Goolsbee, staff director and chief economist for the White House Economic Recovery Advisory Board, owns a 2004 Toyota Highlander.

Joan DeBoer, the chief of staff to LaHood, said in an interview Sunday she drives a 2008 Lexus RX 350. She doesn't consider herself "a car buff" and views her car as a way to get around town.

Heather Zichal, deputy director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change, owns a Volvo C30, according to public records and officials.

Gene Sperling, counsel to the Treasury Secretary, owns a 2003 Lincoln LS, and previously owned a 1993 Saturn SL2.

Edward B. Montgomery, senior adviser to the Labor Department, owns a 1991 Harley-Davidson and previously owned a 1990 Ford Taurus L station wagon, public records show.

Lisa Heinzerling, senior climate policy counsel to the head of the EPA, owns a 1998 Subaru Legacy Outback station wagon, according to her husband.

Diana Farrell, the deputy National Economic Council director, doesn't own a vehicle. Her husband, Scott Pearson, owns a 1985 Peugeot 505 S.

Dan Utech, senior adviser to the Energy Secretary, owns a 2003 Mini Cooper S two-door hatchback.

Rick Wade, a senior adviser at the Commerce Department, owns a 1998 Chevrolet Cavalier and previously owned a 1998 Toyota Corolla.

Jared Bernstein, Vice President Joe Biden's chief economist, owns a 2005 Honda Odyssey.

The White House declined to comment.

President Barack Obama traded in his Chrysler 300C for a more fuel-efficient Ford Escape hybrid during the 2008 presidential campaign.

Joe Biden, the son of a car dealer, owns a 1967 Chevrolet Corvette -- a wedding present from his dad. He primarily commuted from Delaware to the Senate on Amtrak.

Ron Bloom, a special adviser to the Treasury Department who is also advising the task force, owns an aging Ford Taurus.

Well, at least the President and Vice President have US cars -- although it can be argued that the President may have pre-emptively gotten one, knowing he was running for national office (I'd love to know what his two previous cars were) and the VP's father gave him the car.

To Ron Bloom?  Congratulations. You're the guy they should send - by car - to the automakers' offices. 

Welllll, to Ford, anyway.


Ken Berwitz

Ok, fans, here is another episode of the ongoing series, "Guess That Party". 

First we have the article, which comes to us from the Associated Press, via

Pa. judges accused of jailing kids for cash

Judges allegedly took $2.6 million in payoffs to put juveniles in lockups

WILKES-BARRE, Pa. - For years, the juvenile court system in Wilkes-Barre operated like a conveyor belt: Youngsters were brought before judges without a lawyer, given hearings that lasted only a minute or two, and then sent off to juvenile prison for months for minor offenses.

The explanation, prosecutors say, was corruption on the bench.

In one of the most shocking cases of courtroom graft on record, two Pennsylvania judges have been charged with taking millions of dollars in kickbacks to send teenagers to two privately run youth detention centers. Ive never encountered, and I dont think that we will in our lifetimes, a case where literally thousands of kids lives were just tossed aside in order for a couple of judges to make some money, said Marsha Levick, an attorney with the Philadelphia-based Juvenile Law Center, which is representing hundreds of youths sentenced in Wilkes-Barre.

Prosecutors say Luzerne County Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan took $2.6 million in payoffs to put juvenile offenders in lockups run by PA Child Care LLC and a sister company, Western PA Child Care LLC. The judges were charged on Jan. 26 and removed from the bench by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court shortly afterward.

No company officials have been charged, but the investigation is still going on.

The high court, meanwhile, is looking into whether hundreds or even thousands of sentences should be overturned and the juveniles records expunged.

Among the offenders were teenagers who were locked up for months for stealing loose change from cars, writing a prank note and possessing drug paraphernalia. Many had never been in trouble before. Some were imprisoned even after probation officers recommended against it.

Many appeared without lawyers, despite the U.S. Supreme Courts landmark 1967 ruling that children have a constitutional right to counsel.

'I have disgraced my judgeship'
The judges are scheduled to plead guilty to fraud Thursday in federal court. Their plea agreements call for sentences of more than seven years behind bars.

Ciavarella, 58, who presided over Luzerne Countys juvenile court for 12 years, acknowledged last week in a letter to his former colleagues, I have disgraced my judgeship. My actions have destroyed everything I worked to accomplish and I have only myself to blame. Ciavarella, though, has denied he got kickbacks for sending youths to prison.

Conahan, 56, has remained silent about the case.

Many Pennsylvania counties contract with privately run juvenile detention centers, paying them either a fixed overall fee or a certain amount per youth, per day.

Ready for the contest?  I hope so, because it's time to play Guess That Party!!

Which political party do you think Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan belong to? 

Here's a clue:  Well, when an entire article fails to mention the party of a corrupt politician or judge, what party does the offender usually belong to?

Yep.  You guessed it.  Ciavarella and Conahan are DEMOCRATS. 

I used to be shocked by the blatancy of these omissions.  But now?  Heck, now it's a regular tradition. 

But listen to them squeal like stuck pigs if you call them biased.


Ken Berwitz

Donna Hanks is the Baltimore woman whose home was foreclosed, and then invaded by ACORN people full of righteous indignation that she was no longer in it.  They had a lot of anger and a lot of demands.

Did they have a point?

Michelle Malkin has done terrific work in ferreting out the real story about Ms. Hanks (and, unfortunately, the same old story about ACORN).  Here is the real Donna Hanks; the one our wonderful "neutral" media somehow didn't get around to telling us about:

Document drop: The truth about ACORNs foreclosure poster child

By Michelle Malkin    February 23, 2009 10:10 AM

On Feb. 18, I warned about the ACORN civil disobedience mob working in ideological tandem with Barack Obama to bully Washington into passing a massive new foreclosure prevention/mortgage entitlement scheme. On Feb. 20, I noted that ACORN garnered nationwide media attention for breaking and entering into a foreclosed home in Baltimore at 315 South Ellwood Ave. ACORN vows to use any means necessary to stop foreclosures. Baltimore police have taken fingerprints at the break-in site and the current owner, William Lane, says he will sue ACORN. The home was sold in June 2008 for $192,000. This morning, ACORN official Louis Beverly will face a burglary charge. Look for the Left to turn him into a martyr.

It is not your home, ACORN.

Here is what the MSM wont be telling you about the so-called victim in that case, ACORN worker Donna Hanks all based on public records and court documents.

According to real property data search information, Hanks bought the two-story home in the summer of 2001 for $87,000. At some point in the next five years, she re-financed the original home loan for $270,000.

Question: Where did all that money go?

The house initially went into foreclosure proceedings in the spring of 2006. In July 2006, Hanks filed for bankruptcy and agreed to a Chapter 13 plan which was served to the following creditors: Americas Servicing Co, Bank Of America, Chase, Covahey, Boozer, Devan & Dore, and Discover. She agreed to repay $10,500 in arrears, which resulted in a halt to the 2006 foreclosure.

In September 2006, the bankruptcy court ordered Hanks employer to deduct $340/month from her salary as a bartender to pay down the debt (total net monthly take home pay of $1,228):

Hanks Schedule I showed additional monthly income of $1,625 for a second and third claimed jobs, plus pro-rated tax refund income.

Hanks did not comply with the plan. In December 2007, the servicer issued a notice of default on nearly $7,000 past due.

In February 2008, Baltimore City Circuit Court records show a second foreclosure action was filed.

She had two years to pay what she owed. She failed to comply.

When she told local TV station WJZ that her evil bank raised her mortgage by $300 (The mortgage went up $300 in one month), shes talking about the amount in arrears that she agreed to pay back.

While she was reneging on her mortgage IOUS, she managed to collect rent on her basement (for which she was taken to court) and rack up a criminal record on charges of theft and second degree assault:

In the Huffington Post, ACORNs Bertha Lewis crowed about the nationwide MSM attention their Baltimore break-in received:

In Baltimore, ACORN member Donna Hanks re-took her home. Foreclosed on last fall, the house has stood empty since then, a stark reminder of the failure of the system. But Donna joined with 30 ACORN Home Defenders to liberate her home from the bank. Her act of civil disobedience was covered by 2 radio stations, 2 TV stations, the Baltimore Sun, and the Huffington Post.

Donna used bolt cutters to break the lock to the door and re-enter the home. Unfortunately, in the six short months since the home was seized, it has been extensively damaged, essentially partially gutted. The toilets are missing, and the upstairs ceiling is badly damaged. The greatest tragedy here is that Donna worked for months with ACORN sister organization ACORN Housing Corporation to try to get the bank to modify the loan so it could be affordable, but they refused, taking the home and now allowing it to be a haven for squatters and a target of looters.

Bullcrap. The house was sold seven months ago after two years of court-negotiated attempts to allow Hanks to dig herself out of her debt hole. The only squatter here is Donna Hanks. The only looters here are the ACORN racketeers. The foreclosure is not the criminal act. This is:

And now you knowthe rest of the story.


Now, look at this puff piece featuring Hanks in the Washington Post from October 2008. Will the reporter follow up or let the propaganda lie?

I disagree with Michelle Malkin that the Washington Post commentary on Hanks was specifically a "puff piece".  But I 100% agree that it left out all of the information which Ms. Malkin found out from the public records - information which gives us a wholly different view of Hanks than the Washington Post writer is leading us to (hey, maybe it is a puff piece after all).

If Michelle Malkin can find this, it stands to reason that the Post, or other media could as well.  So how come she wrote about it and they didn't? 

Are they lazy?  Are they incompetent?  Are they unprofessional?  Do they intentionally edit the facts in order to manipulate you into erroneous conclusions?

See if you can eliminate any possibilities from that list. 


Ken Berwitz

The redoubtable Steve Gilbert of has provided both a video and a written transcript of this exchange between Stuart Varney of Fox News Channel and Bertha Lewis of ACORN. 

FYI, I just removed a word from the previous paragraph.  I called it a "remarkable" exchange, but have pulled that back.  Lamentably, this being ACORN, there is nothing remarkable about it at all.  It is the organization's philosophy:

ACORN: People Have A Right To Housing

February 23rd, 2009

In case you missed this testimonial from Fox News via Heritage New Media Partners, NMATV:

ACORN Claims A Right To Housing

Stuart Varney: Do you think you got a right to these houses?

Bertha Lewis: I think the homeowners have a right to stay in those homes until the administrations plan can be implementedyes I do.

Stuart Varney: They got a right to the house even though they havent paid their bills?

Bertha Lewis: They have been paying their billsI think its a false thing to say that people havent been paying their bills.

Stuart Varney: No, their delinquent on their mortgages.

Bertha Lewis: Well, they maybe delinquent on their mortgages but there are people still do that.

Stuart Varney: They havent been paying their bills

Bertha Lewis: There are millions of millions of people who are

Stuart Varney: Doesnt matter, they havent been paying their bills.

Bertha Lewis: Being foreclosed on every day and so we have a plan in place and people need to stay there..

Stuart Varney: What right do you claim to stay in a house that you cant afford and you cannot pay the bills and what right do you have to get my money to pay for you? Ive read the constitution, I dont see that right

Bertha Lewis: Well, I dont see the right that banks have to get 700 billion dollars to get bailed out

Stuart Varney: No, no, thats a different thing

Bertha Lewis: Thats all part of the same thing

Stuart Varney: No its not

Bertha Lewis: Every 13 seconds, Stuart, people are getting foreclosed on and they have the right to protect their homes and to protect their communities. Its the most American thing you can do to protect your community.

Stuart Varney: ACORN is well known for looking at banks and saying give us a loan,.they dont give you a loan so you scream racism you then invade their offices and demonstrate outside the private homes of bank executives, you embarrass the banks and you force them to give you loans on favorable terms, nowthose loans cannot be repaid, you will not leave those homes and your claiming a right to stay in them and have a right to my money to make sure you stay in them, againI come back to it Bertha, they may be be foreclosing every 13 seconds but you have absolutely no right to that house.

Bertha Lewis: Well banks dont have a right to discriminate.

Stuart Varney: Again, your taking a parallel track you see.Where is the right?

Bertha Lewis: I wish we could force banks to our will but.

Stuart Varney: Where is the right? Where is the right to my money? You are demanding money from me.

Bertha Lewis: Were not demanding money from you.

Stuart Varney: Yes you are.

Bertha Lewis: Were demanding that the banks renegotiate these loans

Stuart Varney: It is taxpayer money in this plan, which you propose to bail out your people to stay in the homes they cannot afford. You are demanding my money and your saying you have a right to my money. It is no excuse to go on a parallel track and say well the banks have no right to 700 billion dollars, thats not the point madam. You are demanding my money directly to your people. And thats wrong.

Bertha Lewis: First of all these are not my people, these are millions and millions of hardworking homeowners who are paying their bills, paying.

Stuart Varney: They are not paying their bills.I cant believe your getting away with this.they are not paying their bills.

Bertha Lewis: Well I know people who are.

Stuart Varney: They are delinquent on their mortgages thats why they are being foreclosed on.

Bertha Lewis: Theyre paying their bills, theyre paying their taxes.

Stuart Varney: They are not paying their mortgage bills and you know it.

Bertha Lewis: Yes they are.

Stuart Varney: No, if they were paying their mortgage bills they would not be foreclosed on, they would not be leaving the home.right?

Bertha Lewis: First of all, you are wrong because millions of millions of people are (ineligible), they are late on their mortgages

Stuart Varney: They are delinquent on their mortgages

Bertha Lewis: And that means late.

Stuart Varney: They have not paid their mortgage bills and you know it

Bertha Lewis: They have been foreclosed on and people need to be able to stay into their homes and so that they can take advantage of the Presidents new plan.

Stuart Varney: So you invade these homes with a lot of guys. Youre not going to leave, youre gonna protect these people, were gonna stay in the home.Youre a nice lady, your a gentle and a nice lady

Bertha Lewis: No Im not

Stuart Varney: But I put it to you.this is political thuggery.

Bertha Lewis: Well, Im a very determined lady, I dont think its political thuggery and I think its thuggery when you put out hard working members of home owners from their homes..heres the thing.

Stuart Varney: And its not when you invade a bank managers office so you shout racism? Thats not political thuggery?

Bertha Lewis: Well, it is true.

Stuart Varney: It is.thats exactly what it is

Bertha Lewis: Well you dont want to tell a lie and a lie doesnt make it the truth

Stuart Varney: You are operating on taxpayer money. Youve received ACORN has received since 1998 thirty one million dollars of taxpayer money, three million dollars a year, you are doing this with my money.

Bertha Lewis: You want to know what weve done? Weve counseled 2,300 people to stay in their homes, renegotiation their mortgages, andheres the thing. Every single penny we competed for and we can tell you this, if the industry had listened to us ten years ago when we said this was coming we wouldnt be in this crisis. So now heres what were gonna do.

Stuart Varney: Listened to you? Youve invaded their offices

Bertha Lewis: No we didnt

Stuart Varney: you are political thugs, you embarrass banks to give them loans which they could not afford to repay and now they cannot afford to repay them and your claiming the right to my money to stay in those homes and you will have big burly guys who say were not going to leave here no matter what!

Bertha Lewis: No, we have homeowners who are protecting their homes.

Stuart Varney: Your a nice lady.come on!

Bertha Lewis: Im a nice lady and Im very determined lady to tell the truth and the truth is this

Stuart Varney: You are not telling the truth

Bertha Lewis: Heres the thing

Stuart Varney: Your telling me these homeowners have paid their bills and they have not

Bertha Lewis: We cannot force anybody to do anything.heres the thing, you know who are the thugs? The thugs are the banks, the thugs are the mortgage brokers who bilk people so they are delinquent and they deserve to be helped just like big banks and institutions are we intend to stay.

Stuart Varney: And they have not paid their mortgage bills and they have no right to those housesthat is my last word. Bertha Lewis.

Bertha Lewis: Housing is a right.

Stuart Varney: It is not a right.

Bertha Lewis: Yes it is.

Stuart Varney: Ive read the Bill of Rights, Ive read the Constitution, no where does it say that housing is a right.

Bertha Lewis: Yes it is.

Stuart Varney: Can you show me? Which page? Which line?

Bertha Lewis: Well we have the right to the pursuit of happiness.

Stuart Varney: You have a right to a house? Where does it say that?

Bertha Lewis: If your a hard working American and you pay your taxes and you do the right thing you do have a right to protect your home.

Stuart Varney: I tell you what Bertha, we have a Constitutional lawyer in a few minutes, Ill ask him if there is a line in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights that spells out a right to a house which you claim.

Bertha Lewis: Thats good.good.

Stuart Varney: But Bertha, weve run way over our allotted time..

Bertha Lewis: Have we, well you have to have me back and we will show you how many homes we have defended.

Stuart Varney: Defended? Invaded and stolen but thats another story entirely. Thanks Bertha.

Look at the language Ms. Lewis uses.

And bear in mind that ACORN is a 501c3 taxpayer supported charity.

They are prohibited by the IRS from breaking the law or even encouraging others to break the law.

But of course those strictures will never be enforced.

They have bought themselves a privileged position with the Democrats and this administration.

They have nothing to fear.

Steve saved me the trouble of bold-printing that passage about home ownership being a right.  Unbelievable.

Varney is clearly astonished both by Ms. Lewis' ignorance and by her apparently sincere belief that home ownership is some kind of legal guarantee - not to mention her inability to connect taxpayer money with those rectangular green pieces of paper with former presidents and a secretary of the treasury on them.

But, since ACORN's benefactors are in full control of the country, what does it matter that she doesn't know what she's talking about?

We have two years of this before voters get a chance to show how they feel about what they did last November.   It can't pass too soon.


Ken Berwitz

When then-Senator Obama was running for the presidency, he promised a very quick, very significant stimulus to the economy.

-On election day the Dow Jones average closed at 9,625. 

-The day afterwards, when it was apparent that Barack Obama won and would be our next President, it closed at 9,139.

-The day before Barack Obama was inaugurated, it closed at 7,949.

-The day Barack Obama signed the so-called "stimulus package" it closed at 7,552.

-Today, 6 days after the signing, it closed at 7,114.

I won't write any last line here.  You fill in your own.

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!!