Wednesday, 05 May 2010


Ken Berwitz

Another screwup under the Obama administration....and another excuse that it was someone else's fault.

Excerpted from Jake Tapper's blog at ABC News:

Obama administration says Emirates Airlines Dropped the Ball; 9/11 Commission Vice-Chair Says U.S. Govt Is Dropping the Ball

May 04, 2010 6:42 PM


Senior administration officials say that Faisal Shahzad was put on the no fly list on Monday at 12:30 pm ET.


So how was he able to board the Emirates Airlines flight to Dubai?


It takes a few hours for the airlines system to catch up, a senior administration official tells ABC news.

Another senior administration official adds that Emirates refreshes their system to update with US intelligence information periodically but not frequently.


In any case, the first official says that airlines were within minutes of Shahzad being put on the no-fly list told to look at a web-board and manually check its passenger manifest against the news on the web board.

That appears to not have happened the official says. For whatever reason there was a breakdown at the Emirates level.


When is it ever a lapse or a mistake of some kind by the Obamanites? 

And when do our wonderful "neutral" media start noticing that it's never their fault?

I will finish by posting a few selected comments from the readers of Tapper's blog which, sometimes a bit more colorfully than me, describe their dissatisfaction (but don't blame me for the grammar or spelling):

-They had his picture and his name at 11:00AM on Monday. He could have just as easily been planning to hijack or blow up that plane. Instead of spending a bunch of money on a blue ribbon panel or another commission, why don't they just fire a bunch of people like they should have after 9/11?

So, why are the airlines downloaing updated lists in the first place? Why dosen't the DHS computer system push down any changes to the airline databases real time?


-Why do the airlines need to manually check passengers against a no fly list? Computers are normally pretty good at searching. The reservation system should automatically check the no-fly list before booking.

Nice to know that our safty is entrusted to the most incompetent organization on the planet, our federal government.


-I think that the PERFECT ANALOGY for this guy living at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. is that he sends SWAT TEAMS to oil rigs, and MAMA LEONI to Homeland Security.
My favorite line, after this Street Hustler was elected by 60 Million FOOLS, was:"Now the GROWNUPS are in charge."
Yeah. The grownups. "It's not my fault. It's everyone else' fault. Don't look at me!"


-A day earlier, he was placed on that list for a reason. What?

He walked through airport security because they had no notice (that's the story). He wasn't removed by air marshalls or airport security, Feds stopped that plane. If they weren't following him the whole time how did they happen to be there? If they were following the whole time why weren't they in touch with airport security?

Somebody is lying. Who do you think it is?


-Napolitano must resign. She's a disgrace.

Zeke ... ... .... Mr. Obama says the Emirate Airlines is a bunch of Tea Drinkers. .... ... .... The description of the 'no fly' notification shows the computer systems (US Govt and individual airlines) are a patchwork of duplicate, poorly coordinated data bases. .... .... ... MANUALLY CHECKING ????? Gimmie a Break ! ! ! ... .... Airlines are operating deep in the Red ... They don't have the personnel sitting around to perform such a tedious, mind-numbing expensive operation. .... .... Psst: Computers are really good at comparing such things ... IF you have the time to PROGRAM such a check. .... .... And .. And .... Every time I fly, I have to go through TSA (Gub'mint) security BEFORE I get to the airline's boarding gate. .... .... .... Obama really needs to spend some time on the street ... ... ... his put-downs are so lame. .... .... Hey Barry .... If ugly wuz bricks, yo ears would be a housing project. (05/05/10)


Ken Berwitz

Did you hear the one about CBS TV's Chicago station refusing to cover the Republican senate candidate if he keeps talking about the Democratic candidate's ties to a failed, corrupt, family-owned bank?

If you think that is a joke, and you're waiting for a punch line, forget it.  It's no joke and there's no punch line. 

Here, via Larry O'Connor's blog at, are the truly astonishing facts, in a CBS reporter's own words (NOTE:  according to CBS's web site, it was not a beat reporter, but rather a CBS political producer named Ed Marshall.  You can hear the exchange by clicking here):

The Illinois Senate race is shaping up to be a high-profile and influential campaign that will have national implications.  Not only because Illinois is the most populated state in the mid-west, but also because the seat up for grabs is President Obamas former seat.  If Republican candidate Rep. Mark Kirk, were to win the seat it would be seen as an enormous PR loss for the White House.

The Democratic nominee, Alexi Giannoulias has been under fire because of the failiure of Broadway Bank and his direct connection to it.  Believe it or not, there are suspicions of corruption, incompetence  and graft with regard to a Democrat in Chicago.  Go figure!

Obviously, this is such a damaging story for Giannoulias that Rep. Kirk has been able to gain some serious traction in the race by continuing to focus on the issue.  Thats what a politician does when engaged in a tough campaign (Sen. John McCains Presidential campaign notwithstanding).

Now we have the spectacle of one of the major local stations in Chicago threatening not to cover the campaign if the Republican continues to discuss the most damaging aspect of his opponents record.  Is this the role of an FCC licensed station, entrusted with the role of serving the public interest in relation to a free-flow of information for the citizenry?  Maybe in Chicago it is.

REPORTER:  Channel 2s made a decision.  Were really not going to cover the Senate race, if its consistently only in your terms, is about Broadway Bank.  The banks been taken over by the government, Alexis been pilloried.  Tell me, what is your campaign going forward?  What are the issues you are going to tell the voters why they should vote for you?

I don't have the words to describe how incredibly outrageous this is. 

CBS is telling Mr. Kirk, in so many words, what issues he can and cannot run on.  If they don't approve of his choice, they will withhold coverage of his campaign.

Somewhere in the depths of hell, joseph goebbels must be grinning from ear to ear, and telling anyone who will listen, "see, that's  how it's done"!


Ken Berwitz

Eve Conant writes for (what is left of) Newsweek magazine, which seems to revel in acting as the umbilically-attached print arm of MSNBC.

So it must not have pleased her bosses very much when she filed a story that, while against Arizona's new laws regarding illegal aliens, is mostly sympathetic to the reasons those laws were put in place.

Read these excerpts from her article and see for yourself:

Arizona has outraged the nation with a new immigration law that obligates authorities to check the documents of anyone they believe is in the country illegally, based on a "reasonable suspicion" during a "lawful" stop. Some accuse lawmakers and the 70 percent of Arizonans who support the bill of acting like Nazis, or of turning Arizona into an apartheid state. But spend some time in Arizona, and you may come to see why so many Arizonans want this.

 It's terrifying to live next door to homes filled with human traffickers, drug smugglers, AK-47s, pit bulls, and desperate laborers stuffed 30 to a room, shoes removed to hinder escape. During a month's reporting with police and other law-enforcement agents in Arizona last year, I met many scared people. One man who lived next to a "drop house" for Mexican workers slept with two guns under his bed, his children not allowed to play in the backyard. The sound of gunshots was not uncommon. "Four years ago this neighborhood was poodles and old ladies," he said, too frightened to give his name. "Now it's absolutely insane." That morning, authorities had raided the drop house. When the neighbor told me how his kids had been evacuated behind riot shields, he began to cry. Others, too, were unhappy: the undocumented workers taken from the house were exhausted, sweaty, and dead quiet as they sat on a curb with their hands cuffed, waiting to be taken away.

Within 24 hours I witnessed another bust, this one prompted by a tip from Tennessee authorities. They reported a threat to kill a kidnap victim, and a ransom demand for $3,500. Sheriff's deputies went to a pleasant house with a two-car garage. Inside, they found dozens of immigrants crammed into unfurnished bedrooms, the windows boarded from the inside, shoes and belts piled up in the closet. The search also turned up a Taser-like device, a sawed-off shotgun, and two pistols. Another day, I watched the Phoenix police break up a "stash house" filled with guns and hundreds of pounds of marijuana. An hour later they raided a McMansion adorned with hunting trophies and Scarface posters; a white SUV jammed with 300 pounds of marijuana was parked out front. (Sixty percent of all the marijuana that reaches the U.S. transits Arizona.) Again, the house was in a high-end development, nowhere near the border.

The overwhelming majority of Mexicans who come here are not criminals. Most are just desperate for honest work. But clearly something needs to be done about the traffickers who bring them to the U.S. Last year the U.S. marshal for Arizona, David Gonzales, told me he had some 200 active warrants for Mexicans in and around Phoenix engaged in organized crime. Last week he told me he had 324, and even more in Tucson. So what's the solution? Gonzales favors an approach backed by many other law-enforcement and immigration specialists: the federal government, he says, must step in to make the border more secure and to amend the system so more Mexicans can enter the country legallywithout the "help" of criminal cartels.

Ok, I admit there are problems with Ms. Conant's commentary.  One is the blatantly false claim that "Arizona has outraged the nation".  Every major poll shows a majority of respondents are concerned about illegal immigration and/or support the new laws. 

In other words, Arizona hasn't outraged the nation, the flood of illegal aliens has.

Also, though it is not in the above excerpts, Ms. Conant indicates that she does not like Arizona's new laws (hey, she has to toss something to her editorial masters, doesn't she?)

But, in the main, this article shows a very different account of why Arizona felt it had to act than what you see in most mainstream media. 

Good for you, Ms. Conant.  Unlike most of your "journalist" counterparts you have given a serious look to both sides of this issue.

I hope you keep your job.

Zeke ... .... .... Thousands of pounds of weed? .... .... dozens of people crammed into one house ? .... .... using automatic weapons to shoot police ? .... .... ... Clearly, that is work that US Citizens don't want to do. .... .... We NEED illegal aliens to bring in dope, overcrowd housing and kill police officers. ... ... ... Note to people in the country illegally : .... Do not sell your dope where you sign up to vote Democrat. (05/05/10)


Ken Berwitz

For a guy who took tons of money from British Petroleum (BP) Barack Obama sure does crap on the company when it is politically convenient.  Just like he crapped on Goldman Sachs.

Excerpted from Erika Lovley's article at -- and please pay special attention to the remarkable (even by Obama administration's standards) lie that I've put in bold print:

While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama and members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions theyve taken from the oil and gas giant over the years.


BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the companys political action committees $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals.


On top of that, the oil giant has spent millions each year on lobbying including $15.9 million last year alone as it has tried to influence energy policy.


During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.


An Obama spokesman rejected the notion that the president took big oil money.


President Obama didnt accept a dime from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists during his presidential campaign, spokesman Ben LaBolt said. He raised $750 million from nearly four million Americans. And since he became president, he rolled back tax breaks and giveaways for the oil and gas industry, spearheaded a G20 agreement to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and made the largest investment in American history in clean energy incentives.


In Congress, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who last week cautioned that the incident should not be used inappropriately to halt Obamas push for expansion of offshore drilling, has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of BPs largesse. Her comments created some blowback, with critics complaining that she is too blas about the impact of the disaster, even though she was among the first lawmakers to call for a federal investigation into the spill.


As the top congressional recipient in the last cycle and one of the top BP cash recipients of the past two decades, Landrieu banked almost $17,000 from the oil giant in 2008 alone and has lined her war chest with more than $28,000 in BP cash overall.

Simply stated, if the line "liar, liar, pants on fire" were real, President Obama's bottom half would consist of a few smoldering cinders.  And the article's Mary Landrieu subtext is no surprise either.


My thanks to Ms. Lovley and for reporting this - in the absence of any such reporting from the mainstream media sources I try to monitor every day.


Do you think they'd have buried this money trail if it were President Bush and Senator Vitter?


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


Ken Berwitz

With friends like this, who needs enemas.

These excerpts were just squeezed out by Fox news today, about 33 years after anyone should care - if they should have cared even then:

It has been widely reported that Elvis Presley died in 1977 from cardiac arrhythmia, an irregular heartbeat, possibly brought on by drug dependency, obesity and a weak heart. But the music legend's longtime friend and physician, Dr. George Nick Nichopoulos, has put pen to paper for the first time and revealed his belief that it was chronic constipation that actually killed the King of Rock and Roll.

After he died we werent sure (of the exact cause of death) so I continued to do some research and I had some doctors call me from different places and different med schools that were doing research on constipation and different problems you can get into with it. I just want to get the story straight it all made sense with the new research that was done, the now retired Memphis M.D told Pop Tarts. "Dr. Nick" was by Presley's side for the last twelve years of his life and tried to resuscitate him the day he died. He recently released the book The King and Dr. Nick about his time with The King, and his theory on the death that shocked America.

We didnt realize until the autopsy that his constipation was as bad we knew it was bad because it was hard for us to treat, but we didnt realize what it had done," the doctor explains of Elvis' condition. "We just assumed that the constipation was secondary to the meds that he was taking for his arthritic pain and for his insomnia. 

Thanks, Dr. Nick, for loosening up a 33 year blockage. What a friend you are, to leak out what "The King" was doing (or not doing) while he was on "the throne".

But, personally, I'm not surprised at all.  I always suspected bowel play.


Ken Berwitz

Did British Petroleum (BP) get a free pass on environmental safeguards from the relevant federal agencies?

Well, read this, excerpted from an article at the Washington Post, and judge for yourself:

The Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year, according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely.

The decision by the department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) to give BP's lease at Deepwater Horizon a "categorical exclusion" from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on April 6, 2009 -- and BP's lobbying efforts just 11 days before the explosion to expand those exemptions -- show that neither federal regulators nor the company anticipated an accident of the scale of the one unfolding in the gulf.

I've read and heard numerous claims that this was entirely BP's fault.  I've even read and heard a couple of claims that it is George Bush's fault because he was instrumental in partial deregulation of the oil industry.

But it seems to me that the Obama administration was in office on April 6, 2009.  And there was a lopsidely Democrat-majority in both houses of congress then.  And Democrats had controlled congress for well over two years.

And when the oil rig exploded two weeks ago, almost 16 months after Barack Obama took office, and almost  3 1/2 years since Democrats took over both houses of congress?  There still were no efforts put on the books to increase protection against such an accident.

Which administration do you blame for this?  The Bush administration, which has been out of office for almost a year and a half?  Or the Obama administration which has been in office for all that time, along with a congress that has been controlled by Democrats for almost 3 1/2 years?

Now grow old waiting for the Obamans to admit any culpability - and for most of our wonderful "neutral" media to pin it on them.


Ken Berwitz

As our media continue, with great enthusiasm, to tell us of the protests and boycotts against Arizona because they dared to recognize the illegality of illegals, we have this from Fox News in Phoenix:

Arizona Sun Company Sees Benefits of 'Buycott'

Updated: Tuesday, 04 May 2010, 10:45 PM MDT
Published : Tuesday, 04 May 2010, 10:45 PM MDT

SCOTTSDALE - As the firestorm around SB 1070 picks up speed, a company called Arizona Sun is weathering the storm. But the reaction is different than expected.

Bob Wallace runs the million-dollar skin care and hair care product business out of Scottsdale. The company supplies to thousands of locations across the United States.

He was worried about a backlash, but Wallace says something odd is happening. While some are emailing that they will boycott Arizona Sun products just because of the Arizona connection -- others are buying products just to support the company.

One Maryland woman is calling it a 'buycott.'

"The majority of people calling and writing in are ordering products that have never heard of us before and have gone out of their way to purchase an Arizona Sun product," he says.

Happy for the business, Wallace keeps plugging along, hoping Arizona Sun can take the heat of the latest controversy.

"Arizona Sun is not about politics, it's not about ethnicity. Arizona Sun is about helping people stay out of the sun and be protected by the sun and enjoy the sun, while they're here on vacation or other places in the United States." 

A "buycott"?  I love the term.  And I'm glad it is happening as well.

Fox has certainly reported about the protests and the boycott efforts.  But they're also reporting on the other side of things, aren't they?

If you're wondering when the rest of media will report that there are people "buycotting", though, forget it.  They're too busy telling you how one-sided Fox is.

Montana I saw Jay Leno at Correspondent Dinner his best line was; “That was my favorite story (this year) Republicans and a Lesbian bondage club. It’s ironic, Republicans don’t want lesbian getting married but they do like watching them “tie the knot”. So I thought that was interesting.” You can say the same about Tea Party (they are haters not debaters or as others have dubbed them screamers not dreamers), they say they respect the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence but they do not mind passing laws, through weak Governors (no one voted for this crazy) who only care about getting reelected on the backs of undocumented workers, that will not pass Constitution muster, just like Arizona’s House Bill 2779 from two years ago and your MLK Day ban, keep passing them Arizona and the rest of us will continue to challenged them in a court of law and you will fail again (and yes we will Boycott Arizona). Their phony patriotism is sickening; they are just racists going by another name. We all know you are just itching to put a sheet on their head? Let’s face it the Republicans had eight years to deal with health care, immigration, climate change and financial oversight and governance and they failed. It appears that the Republican Party is only good at starting wars (two in eight years, with fat contracts to friends of Cheney/Bush) but not at winning wars as seen by the continuing line of body bags that keep coming home. The Republicans party will continue turned inward to their old fashion obstructionist party (and their Confederacy appreciation roots) because they continue to allow a small portions (but very loud portion) of their party of “birthers, baggers and blowhards” to rule their party. I will admit that this fringe is very good at playing “Follow the Leader” by listening to their dullard leaders, Beck, Hedgecock, Hannity, O’Reilly, Rush, Savage, Sarah Bailin, Orly Taitz, Victoria Jackson, Michele Bachmann and the rest of the Blowhards and acting as ill programmed robots (they have already acted against doctors that perform abortions). The Birthers and the Tea party crowd think they can scare, intimidate and force others to go along with them by comments like “This time we came unarmed”, let me tell you something not all ex-military join the fringe militia crazies who don’t pay taxes and run around with face paint in the parks playing commando, the majority are mature and understand that the world is more complicated and grey than the black and white that these simpleton make it out to be and that my friend is the point. The world is complicated and people like Hamilton, Lincoln, and Roosevelt believed that we should use government a little to increase social mobility, now it’s about dancing around the claim of government is the problem. The sainted Reagan passed the biggest tax increase in American history and as a result federal employment increased, but facts are lost when mired in mysticism and superstition. For a party that gave us Abraham Lincoln, it is tragic that the ranks are filled with too many empty suits and the crazy Birthers who have not learned that the way our courts work is that you get a competent lawyer, verifiable facts and present them to a judge, if the facts are real and not half baked internet lies, then, and only then, do you proceed to trial. The Birthers seem to be having a problem with their so called “facts”. Let’s face it no one will take the Birthers seriously until they win a case, but until then, you will continue to appear dumb, crazy or racist, or maybe all three. I heard that Orly Taitz now wants to investigate the “Republican 2009 Summer of Love” list: Assemblyman, Michael D. Duvall (CA), Senator John Ensign (NV), Senator Paul Stanley (TN), Governor Mark Stanford (SC), Board of Ed Chair, and Kristin Maguire AKA Bridget Keeney (SC), she wants to re-establish a family values party, that’s like saying that the Catholic Church cares about the welling being of children in their care, too late for that. Yee Haw! (05/05/10)

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!!