Friday, 04 December 2009


 Ken Berwitz

No explanation needed on this one:

Zeke . . ******* ROTF, LMAO ******* . . (12/04/09)


Ken Berwitz

As the global warming scam continues to be lead-story news across the world, very much including London (where the hacked emails emanated from), I thought you might be interested to know that:

-The Today Show again had no coverage

-The New York Times again did not mention it in its news section.

It's not like this information isn't available.  The London papers have had it on their front pages for almost two weeks.  The Wall Street Journal, Fox News, and the Associated Press just yesterday, have featured stories about this enormous scandal.  But the "journalists" at Today and the New York Times (which ran one article a week ago and promptly buried it) somehow keep not noticing.

The only reason that makes any sense to me relates to the fact that these (and countless other) media venues have spent years touting global warming as an immutable fact.  Therefore, if it is true that scientists have suppressed a massive amount of information which refutes man-made global warming, they come across as gullible and ridiculous - not to mention incredibly partisan (if global warming were a Republican - driven issue, do you think they would have been a tad more skeptical? )

Here's an ugly thought:  maybe they're just trying to hold out until Copenhagen, in the hope that President Obama can commit us to fighting this bogeyman and somehow "edify" their journalistic malfeasance. 

If that's what they're doing, let's hope it doesn't work.

Zeke ... It seems ANY news story that does not fit the MSM metanarrative becomes invisible. The Duke Lacrosse Hoax, the continual shelling of Israeli towns near Gaza, reverse discrimination, government bloat and waste ... ... ... ... "Metanarrative", a post-modern word which replaces "Party Line" (12/04/09)

free` Ken, I usually agree with you, but not on this one. The media wouldn't have to take the blame, the scientists would. I think this has to do more with the leftist attitude we see in the MSM. For some reason they believe government control is a good thing. (12/04/09)


Ken Berwitz

I have more than a passing familiarity with Washington University. 

In 1963-64, when I was a student at Saint Louis University, I joined Hillel**** at Wash U (I couldn't get in academically, but they had a nice Hillel house).  Then, much later, I spent six-figures worth to have one of my sons educated there. 

But now, if what you are about to read is true, Washington University is shaming itself, as well as engaging in a sickening partisan witchhunt against students who have a different political view than the one which has permeated this school for so many years.

Here's both sides.

First, we have this from a group called Accuracy in Academia:

Wash U Targets Conservative Students

Allie Winegar Duzett, December 4, 2009

Washington University in St. Louis is charging conservative students over $800 for vandalism they did not commit.

Several red hammer-and-sickle images were found spray-chalked onto the campus sidewalks.  Campus Gulag reports:

The university, failing to find out exactly who is responsible for the spray-chalking, is holding the [Young Americans for Liberty] students responsible for it. The Campus cops have repeatedly used words like felonious property damage (because the damage is in excess of $750, which is a Class D felony in Missouri) in order to intimidate the students and are holding that over the heads of the students like the Sword of Damacles if the students refuse to pay up.

Essentiallysomeone defaced school property.  The school doesnt know who to blame, so theyve blamed the easy target: students who dont follow the university line.

Also from Campus Gulag:

There are several important points to keep in mind here, I think.

1) The students had nothing to do with the spray-chalking.

2) The students are ENTIRELY INNOCENT.

3) The university has ZERO evidence that the students sprayed anything. From what the students have said to me, the campus cops have a video of someone spraying, but they have checked it out and it is NOT any of the YAL students.

4) Spray-chalk is water soluable. And with the 5 straight days of heavy rains that came just days after the 9th, the images would have been naturally washed away. So, it was totally unnecessary for the university to wash them away.

5) The invoice is total CRAP. The workers who washed away the images with GARDEN HOSES were paid at best $8 an hour. For the bill to be in excess of $800 means that the university is claiming that the subs who washed it away took 100 man hours to wash the images away. 100 man hours is the equivalent of 2 and a half WEEKS of work for ONE man!!! Washing away some chalk takes SECONDS!

6) The university, in claiming such bogus damages is committing fraud. This behavior against powerless students is absolutely shameful.

7) The UNIVERSITY IS ENGAGING IN MALICIOUS, RETALIATORY ACTION AGAINST THE STUDENTS for their GULAG demonstration. The main lesson other students are to take away from this is that speech on campus which is contrary to the pleasure of the administration will be met with severe prejudice. This certainly will have a CHILLING EFFECT on student speech.

The university didnt even bother to give a line item invoice.  You can check it out at Gateway Pundit.

If youd like to get involved with Campus Gulag, please email campusgulag @ gmail . com.

Now for the Washington University version of this incident:

In the interests of giving both sides a fair shake I called Washington University, was connected with security, and spoke with a Lt. Roth. 

Lt. Roth, not surprisingly, has a different view of this incident.  He told me that the defacement was done with paint, not chalk.  And, while he could not be more specific since the investigation is ongoing, he said that the school would not be asking Young Americans for Liberty to help pay for the cleanup if it didn't have a reason for doing so.  That's pretty tantalizing.

Ok, there's both sides, as best I can get them.  I'll be checking back to find out how this progresses.


****Hillel is a Jewish campus organization

free` Whats with the ****'s in ****Hillel ? (12/04/09)

Zeke ... The YAF do not love The-One. Therefore, they must be guilty of felonious graffiti, overtime parking, intentional reading of Ann Coulter. (12/04/09)

Allie Hey, Mal at AIA told me you were looking to contact me about this. Hopefully you can get my email without my posting it in this box. Also, I'd like to point out that the blog entry from AIA does explain that the marks were spray-chalked, which is different from mere chalk. Still, it is a form of temporary paint, and should be gone naturally within 4 weeks. Anyway, I hope to hear from you soon. I've enjoyed reading your work! (12/08/09)


Ken Berwitz

Here is the terrific editorial from today's Washington TImes, on Chris Matthews' consummately idiotic insult to our military - and how much company he has on his side of the aisle:

EDITORIAL: The enemy at West Point 

Liberals continue their assault on our armed forces


Insults against West Point by MSNBC pundit Chris Matthews are part of a pattern of left-wing denigrations against Americans serving in uniform. It's a motif indicative of an anti-military mind-set that is as dangerous as it is rude.

Discussing the West Point audience's response to President Obama's speech about Afghanistan, Mr. Matthews quipped on Tuesday: "I saw a lot of, if not resentment, skepticism. I didn't see a lot of warmth in that crowd out there that the president chose to address tonight. And I thought that was interesting: He went to maybe the enemy camp tonight to make his case. I mean that was where Paul Wolfowitz used to write speeches back in the old Bush days. That's where he went to rabble-rouse the 'we're going to democratize the world' campaign back in '02. So I think it was a strange venue."

So, when did our brave military cadets become "the enemy camp"? If Mr. Bush or Mr. Wolfowitz went to West Point to "rabble-rouse," does that make the cadets a rabble? And why would it ever be a "strange venue" for any president to go to the U.S. Military Academy to talk about a war?

Mr. Matthews at least apologized to cadets for his stupid comments the next day without weasel words, but it's troubling that he even expressed such sentiments - which are shockingly common among some liberal Democrats. In 2006, Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq." At another point, the obtuse Mr. Kerry accused American soldiers in Iraq, in the "dead of night," of "terrorizing kids and children, you know, women. . .."

In 2005, Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, compared U.S. treatment of prisoners to that "by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others - that had no concern for human beings." In 2006, Rep. John P. Murtha, Pennsylvania Democrat, falsely accused Marines in Haditha of "murder" and said there was "no doubt in my mind" about that judgment. In 2007, there was the notorious "General Betray Us" ad from criticizing Gen. David H. Petraeus, which continued a leftist routine of verbal assaults on our fighters that goes back to Jane Fonda's slur that our soldiers in Vietnam were war criminals.

To set the record straight for confused Democrats, our armed forces are not criminals and not the enemy. They are heroes. Back to you, Chris ...


free` All one has to do is look at this comment from obama to know what he thinks about our brave soldiers. Obama to the troops: "You guys make a pretty good photo op" Any questions on what he thinks? (12/05/09)


Ken Berwitz

Here's another "you can't make this stuff up" entry - and an amazing one at that.  It comes to us from

Homeless brothers in line to inherit billions


Hungarian cave-dwellers could split grandmothe's $6.6 billion fortune

updated 6:44 p.m. ET, Thurs., Dec . 3, 2009

BUDAPEST, Hungary - Talk about a reversal of fortunes.

Two brothers who are so poor they live in a cave on the outskirts of Budapest and get by selling scavenged junk are in line to receive a $6.6 billion inheritance from a long-lost grandmother, the U.K. Daily Telegraph reports.

Zsolt and Geza Peladi have been informed that they are entitled to the fortune, along with a sister who lives in the United States , the newspaper reported Wednesday.

Charity workers in Hungary passed on the good news to the brothers after being contacted by lawyers handling the estate of their maternal grandmother, who died recently in Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany, the Telegraph said.

We knew our mother came from a wealthy family but she was a difficult person and severed ties with them, and then later abandoned us and we lost touch with her and our father until she eventually died, Geza Peladi, 43, was quoted as saying by ATV television in Hungary.

If this all works out it will certainly make up for the life we have had until now all we really had was each other no women would look at us living in a cave, said Geza Peladi.

But with money, maybe we can find a partner and finally have a normal life. We dont know yet if she even told our grandmother about us. I understand it was only while they were carrying out genealogical research that lawyers found we existed.

Under German law, direct descendants are automatically entitled to a share of any estate. As the grandmothers daughter is dead, the money goes to her grandchildren.

The brothers said they are trying to track down their mother's death certificate to prove relation to their grandmother before traveling to Germany to claim the fortune.

The newspaper report didnt say how the grandmother, whose name was not made public, amassed the fortune.

Maybe she made the money selling insurance.......

And maybe the caveman brothers will use some of it to pay that unbelievably annoying gekko enough to retire and never do commercials again.


Ken Berwitz

onomatopoeia - 1 : the naming of a thing or action by a vocal imitation of the sound associated with it (as buzz, hiss...)

If onomatopoeia is when a word is created from the sound something makes, is it also onomatopoeia if someone's name is the thing he/she does?

The reason I ask relates to an obituary notice in today's New York Times - which not only would qualify, but is our latest entry in the "you can't make this stuff up" file:

Hugh Hurt Jr., Engineer Who Studied Motorcycle Accidents, Dies at 81


Published: December 3, 2009


Hugh H. Hurt Jr., a safety engineer who in 1981 did the first meticulous study of motorcycle accidents, emulating air-crash investigations to zero in on when cycle accidents were likely to occur, died on Sunday in Pomona, Calif. He was 81.

An 81 year old guy who studied accidents, with the name Hugh Hurt Jr.?  That's not only his name, but probably what he said to the people he studied.  I can just hear his conversation with a victim:

"You hurt, junior, but it will feel better soon.  Try to be more careful in the future, son"  "Thanks, pops.  What was your name again"  "Hugh Hurt, Jr."  "Yeah, I know, you already told me that.  But what's your name"  "Hugh Hurt, Jr."  "Hooboy.  Ok, nice talking to you.....someone get me outta here!"

There you go. Onomatopoeia of the name.

(By the way, apropos of nothing in particular, was there ever a word less likely to be misspelled than onomatopoeia?  A common word is easy to misspell because when you're proofreading you might gloss right over it.  But a 12 letter word with 8 vowels?  You'll check it every time.)


Ken Berwitz

From Steve Gilbert at

Poll:  Stupid People Support Public Option

December 3rd, 2009

From those push-pullers at Reuters:

Thomson Reuters Survey: Most Americans Support Public Option in Healthcare Reform Legislation but Are Skeptical Healthcare Will Improve in 2010

ANN ARBOR, Mich., Dec. 3 /PRNewswire/ A majority of Americans support a "public option" in healthcare reform legislation, but most lack confidence that the cost, quality, value or accessibility of medical care will improve in the next year, according to a survey released today by Thomson Reuters.

Sixty percent of survey respondents said they believe a public option should be included in final healthcare reform legislation. Only about one in five, however, believes the cost, quality or value of care will improve in the next 12 months. Twenty-three percent said they expect access to care to improve.

The results are from a telephone survey of 2,999 households conducted from November 9-17 a segment of the Thomson Reuters PULSE Healthcare Survey, the largest and longest-running survey of its kind. Each year, PULSE polls more than 100,000 U.S. households about healthcare behaviors, attitudes and utilization.

Here are the key findings:

  • 18 percent of survey respondents said they expect to spend less on healthcare a year from now.
  • 21 percent believe the quality of care will improve in the next 12 months.
  • 18 percent believe the value of care delivered will be better in a year.
  • 23 percent believe it will be easier for people to receive the care they need a year from now.
  • 60 percent of Americans believe a public option should be included in final healthcare legislation. There are sharp divisions, however, along party lines: 86 percent of Democrats support the public option versus 57 percent of Independents and 33 percent of Republicans.

The survey is nationally representative and the margin of error is 1.8 percent.

How can anyone who has been sitting up and taking notice for any of the last fifty years believe that anything would be cheaper, better and easier once the government takes it over?

And why should we care what such amazingly uninformed people think?

All this poll shows is that most obdurately stupid people want the government to take care of them.

What else is new?

All I've got to say is that, as much as I love democracy, it is appalling that people like this cancel out my vote.

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!!