Wednesday, 24 February 2010


Ken Berwitz

How bad a job is congress doing?  Here are the data and analysis from Rasmussen research:


Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters
February 19-20, 2010

How would you rate the way Congress is doing its job?










 Voter unhappiness with Congress has reached the highest level ever recorded by Rasmussen Reports as 71% now say the legislature is doing a poor job.


Thats up ten points from the previous high of 61% reached a month ago.


Only 10% of voters say Congress is doing a good or excellent job.


Nearly half of Democratic voters (48%) now give Congress a poor rating, up 17 points since January. The vast majority of Republicans and voters not affiliated with either party also give Congress poor ratings.


Seventy percent (70%) of voters say Congress has not passed any legislation that would significantly improve life for Americans, up 10 points over the past month and the highest level of dissatisfaction measured in regular tracking in over three years. Only 15% say Congress has passed such legislation.


Forty percent (40%) of voters nationwide now say it is at least somewhat likely Congress will seriously address the most important issues facing the nation. Thats down from 59% last March. Only 9% say it is Very Likely Congress will address these issues.

If these data are correct, and I were a congressperson from anywhere but a very safe seat, I would be scared excrementless.

And let's remember that most people understand the current congress is owned and operated by Democrats.  So if I were a Democrat in a competitive district I'd be scared twice as excrementless.

But, in the face of this unprecedented rejection of congress, President Obama, Senator Reid and Representative Pelosi are essentially asking congressional Democrats to walk the plank for them on health care - which virtually every poll shows the country does not want.  Will they do it? 

This gets more interesting by the day.

free` "And let's remember that most people understand the current congress is owned and operated by Democrats." I would bet you are wrong in this assumption. (02/24/10)


Ken Berwitz

Here it is, short and sweet.

olbermann did a "special comment" tonight in which he graphically described his extremely sick father's medical issues.  He then exploited his father's illness to make a phony point about "death panels", by equating a discussion he had with his father's doctor, to the life and death policy decisions that might have to be made by bureaucrats if tens of millions of new patients forced us to ration health care.

There is something wrong with this man.


Ken Berwitz

The Obama administration, and their media toadies seem incredulous that people have turned against "ObamaCare".  After all, it has produced estimates that we will save a bundle of money if it is implemented.

With that in mind, here - courtesy of my pal Bob - is some oil field math from the "Cash for Clunkers" program those same media toadies extolled as such a success:


 A 15 mpg clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year uses 800 gallons of gas a year.

A 25 mpg vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year uses 480 gallons a year.

So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.

They claim 700,000 clunkers were turned-in, so that's 224 million gallons saved per year.

That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.

5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption.

More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars

So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.

We spent $8.57 for every dollar we saved.

I'm pretty sure they will do a great job with our health care, though.

Man oh man, what a deal THAT was. 

And now, the administration is parlaying this great "success" with the following health care presentation:

-We will insure an additional 30 - 50 million people (the number varies from day to day depending on which administratoin member is talking);

-This increase will disproportionately be among people who cannot pay for health insurance, and high-risk people who cannot get insurance because of their condition:  both of which must inherently increase costs;

-The number of doctors, nurses and hospitals will not suddenly jump higher to accommodate this huge influx of patients - there will be the same number of each available, but they will be expected to handle health care for 30 - 50 million more people;

These factors, we are told, will result in no difference at all in the quality of health care.  And, as an extra added attraction, the cost of health care will be lower too.

Does that sound credible to you?

Wait: before you answer, let's remember the most important part:  The promise of identical health care at lower prices is being made by.......our government.  Those nice folks who have never come anywhere near budget for anything.  The ones who gave you "Cash for Clunkers".

And media wonder why the people don't believe in ObamaCare?  God help them.

Zeke .... .... I saw an estimate that 2/3 of the Clunkers turned in would have been disposed of without the C4C program. The rest were just turned in a few months EARLIER than would have occurred without the program. .... .... .... However, as previously stated, C4C saved 32,000 automotive jobs ... in Korea, Japan, Germany. (02/24/10)

The Badger If you continue with the math-you are saving money in the long run. It states that you are saving 350 million per year which means that after 9 years you break even and after that you are saving money. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, saving 1 gallon of gas per 100 miles saves 20 pounds of carbon dioxide, which is approximately 1 ton of carbon dioxide every 10,000 miles of driving. So not only are you saving money with the program, you are also saving the environment! (03/11/10)


Ken Berwitz

For one day I felt like a presidential candidate during the campaign.

In the past 24 hours I have been from Newark, NJ to Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Charlotte, NC and back to Newark, NJ. Not for politics (mercifully), but for business reasons.

But I just took a shower and now I'm completely rejuvenated.

Now back to politics.

Ken Berwitz Zeke - Nope, I refused to check it in. But given that I was on US Airways for part of this little adventure, the potential was always there. (02/24/10)

Zeke ..... ...... and your baggage is in Bolivia ? (02/24/10)


Ken Berwitz

To his credit, Donny Deutsch has apologized for calling Florida's Republican candidate for governor, Marco Rubio, a "coconut" (a racial insult, meaning he is dark-skinned on the outside but White on the inside).  He said:

"In discussing Mr. Rubio, I used a word intended to describe his inexperience on the national stage.  I now realize the word has connotations as an ethnic slur, & is therefore inappropriate. I apologize to Mr. Rubio & to anyone else I have offended."

Speaking as someone who was offended, I suspect Deutsch truly did not know it was an ethnic slur and am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

But one thing I would love to know:  What did Deutsch say about Governor George Allen, when he called a Democratic opposition guy of Indian descent a "macaca" - and made exactly the same claim of not knowing it was an ethnic slur. 

Wouldn't you?


Ken Berwitz

I am so sick of our wonderful "neutral" media jumping on any piece of good news to extol the wonders of President Obama. 

For the last month we have been sold a bill of goods on how much better the economy is and how well along it is to economic recovery.  In particular, The New York Times, which I read every day (I'm starting to think of this as penance of some kind) has done article after article about how indications have turned positive.

I only wish they were right, instead of just flakking for the Obama administration

Yesterday we had this, which I pulled from (it is on countless other web sites as well):

Consumer confidence fell off a cliff. Expectations for the future dropped to a 10-month low, and hopes for the near future are at their lowest point in 27 years, according to a new study from The Conference Board, an industry group. Lynn Franco, director of The Conference Board Consumer Research Center, cited "concerns about current business conditions and the job market," where the unemployment rate is 9.7 percent. Stocks tanked on the news.

And today we have this, which I pulled from Reuters:

Sales of newly built U.S. single-family homes unexpectedly fell to a record low in January, according to government data on Wednesday that hinted at potential trouble for the fragile housing market recovery.

The Commerce Department said sales dropped 11.2 percent to a 309,000 unit annual rate, the lowest level since records started in January 1963, from an upwardly revised 348,000 in December.

It was the third straight month that new home sales  fell and the percentage decline in January was the largest in a year.

Does that look like a recovery is in progress to you? 

If so, maybe you work for the Times, or MSNBC, or one of the network news venues. 

If not, you certainly must have a different way of gauging it than a lot of those folks.  But if it's any consolation, I see it the same way you do.  Our economy is in the toilet -- after we went almost a trillion dollars in hock with the "stimulus package" which was supposed to turn it around.

How sad that, according to so many in what passes for journalism these days, saying as much makes me either an unthinking dolt or a racist.

Well, I am neither.  I don't have to be a dolt or a racist to see what is in front of my eyes.

I hope against hope that things will all turn around; and the sooner the better.  But with the current administration in place, I have no confidence at all that this will happen.

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!!