Sunday, 09 May 2010


Ken Berwitz

Here is another instance of how imbecilic schools have gotten in creating and implementing rules.  It comes to us from KHOU in Houston, Texas:

Jolly Rancher lands Brazos ISD third-grader in detention for a week

by Gabe Gutierrez / 11 News

ORCHARD, Texas  A third-grader at Brazos Elementary was given a weeks detention for possessing a Jolly Rancher.

School officials in Brazos County are defending the seemingly harsh sentence. The schools principal and superintendent said they were simply complying with a state law that limits junk food in schools.

But the girls parents say its a huge overreaction.

I think its stupid to give a kid a weeks worth of detention for a piece of candy, said Amber Brazda, the girls mother. "The whole thing was just ridiculous to me."

Leighann Adair, 10, was eating lunch Monday when a teacher confiscated the candy. Her parents said she was in tears when she arrived home later that afternoon and handed them the detention notice.

According to the disciplinary referral, she would be separated from other students during lunch and recess through Friday.

Jack Ellis, the superintendent for Brazos Independent School District, declined an on-camera interview. But he said the school was abiding by a state guideline that banned minimal nutrition foods.

Whether or not I agree with the guidelines, we have to follow the rules, he said.

The state, however, gives each school discretion over how to enforce the policy. Ellis said school officials had decided a stricter punishment was necessary after lesser penalties failed to serve as a deterrent.

Ellis said failing to adhere to the states guidelines could put federal funding in jeopardy.

According to the Texas Department of Agricultures website, The Texas Public School Nutrition Policy (TPSNP) explicitly states that it does not restrict what foods or beverages parents may provide for their own children's consumption.

Brazos Elementary Principal Jeanne Young, said the problem, in this instance, was that the candy was provided by another student not the girls parents.

The girls mother said the incident has taught her daughter a lesson, but not the one her teachers intended.

 I told her, Leighann, unfortunately youre learning very young that lifes not fair,' Brazda said.

When I think of "possession" at a school, I think about the drugs that are rampant in some of them.  Stop the children from using drugs and you've accomplished something.

What I shouldn't be thinking of is an idiotic rule that has nothing to do with education:  i.e. forcing children to eat only what some bureaucrat thinks is ok.  And I also shouldn't be thinking about a teacher and a principal who are either so anal about rules or so scared of someone looking over their shoulders, that they give a third grade child detention because another third grade child gave her a piece of candy. 

But if I am not thinking about those things, evidently I am out of touch with reality - or at least reality as seen through the eyes of the powers that be at Brazos Elementary School (and, I'm sure, a bunch of others as well).

I have a great idea for them:  Why stop at punishing an 8 year old child for being in possession of a piece of candy?  Why not also have the police raid the school and arrest the child who gave it to her, as a pusher.  Heck, I bet if they did a strip search of the entire third grade they'd find a lot of candy.  Then they could all go on TV, maybe KHOU, and proudly show the stash they uncovered.

What a great triumph. Keeping an elementary school safe from Jolly Rancher candies.  Maybe the geniuses who devised this rule can give the teacher and principal medals, then recommend them for a raise and a promotion too.

I'd take a Jolly Rancher over an imbecilic educational system any day.


Ken Berwitz

Wasn't it bad enough that his Tennessee mansion used roughly 20 times the energy of an average home?  Or that he flies around in a private plane that guzzles energy and belches out pollution?

Does he really need another huge, energy-consuming house in California?

Excerpted from an article in the Los Angeles Times:

In a move that critics may cite as his own inconvenient truth, former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a house in secluded Montecito to their real estate holdings.

The couple spent $8,875,000 on a gated ocean-view villa on 1 1/2 acres with a swimming pool, spa and fountains, according to real estate sources familiar with the deal. The Italian-style house has high ceilings with beams in the public rooms, a family room, a wine cellar, terraces, six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms in more than 6,500 square feet of living space.

So tell me:  do you think that Mr. Gore really gives a rat's rear about energy consumption? 

The answer is yes.  YOUR energy consumption.  Not HIS.

If there is a bigger fraud than this guy, I have yet to find him.



Ken Berwitz

I just read a remarkable news story.  It was written by Nicholas Blanford of the Christian Science Monitor and talks about how hezbollah, the terrorist organization which essentially runs southern Lebanon, "fought Israeli troops to a standstill in southern Lebanon" four years ago, but now is now armed to the teeth, stronger than ever and, quite probably ready to fulfill their religious obligation (yes, that's what they call it) by attacking and decimating Israel..

Here are key excerpts (you can read the entire article by clicking here, and I recommend that you do).  See for yourself - and please pay special attention to the first and last paragraphs, which I've put in bold print:

Hezbollah says it's ready for fresh war with Israel and stronger now

Driving through Hezbollah's stronghold in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley, a veteran fighter says the militant group has made significant military advances since their last war with Israel in 2006: 'We have many other surprises for the Israelis.'

By Nicholas Blanford, Correspondent / May 7, 2010

Mashghara, Bekaa Valley, Lebanon


Nearly four years after Hezbollah fought invading Israeli troops to a standstill in south Lebanon, the militant Shiite group says it's prepared for a fresh conflict and confident of victory.


"We are ready for another war and we eagerly await it," says veteran Hezbollah fighter Abu Hadi on a drive through the Bekaa Valley. "We expect the next war to be short. The Israelis will not be able to endure what we will do to them."


Hezbollah's leadership insists it does not seek a war and that its military preparations are a defense against potential Israeli aggression. Yet, the inconclusive outcome of the 2006 war has stoked a feeling here that another war is inevitable.


War drums have been beating faster in recent weeks amid allegations that Syria has supplied Hezbollah with Scud ballistic missiles a development that has enraged Israel, forced Lebanese leaders to seek international support, and complicated a gradual US-Syria rapprochement. On May 3, President Obama renewed sanctions on Syria for a year because of its "continuing support for terrorist organizations and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and missile programs."


Hezbollah's strongholds in the Bekaa Valley are likely to be one of several front lines during another war with Israel a war that threatens to be far more destructive than the one in July 2006. Hezbollah says lessons learned from that conflict have been implemented, including new battlefield tactics and the acquisition of improved weapons systems, surface-to-surface rockets, and possibly advanced antiaircraft missiles.


'Too much at stake'


Many analysts believe that the next war will not be confined to Hezbollah and Israel but will also draw in Syria and possibly Iran in a regional conflagration. Hezbollah's leaders say that it would be of sufficient scale and intensity to change the geopolitical balance in the region. "That kind of war would change every parameter in the Middle East," Hezbollah chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said recently.


The stakes for both sides are so great that the military preparations of Israel and Hezbollah to some extent serve as a mutual deterrent against rash action.


"I don't believe there will be [war]. I think there is too much at stake to lose for all the parties," says Michael Williams, the top United Nations official in Lebanon, after an April 28 meeting with Prime Minister Saad Hariri. "I think tensions have been high the past few days. But I hope these will lower now."


Tensions flared when Israel accused Hezbollah of having Scuds and US officials voiced alarm at the increasingly sophisticated weaponry allegedly crossing the border from Syria to Lebanon. In late April, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Hezbollah had "far more rockets and missiles than most governments in the world.... This is obviously destabilizing for the whole region," he said following talks with his Israeli counterpart, Ehud Barak.


Who needs Scuds when you have M-600s?

Syria's Scud-D rockets have a range of 435 miles, which would bring all of Israel within range of Hezbollah's strongholds in the northern Bekaa Valley.

The US has condemned Syria's "provocative behavior" in sending Hezbollah arms, but says it cannot confirm that Scuds have been smuggled into Lebanon. Lebanese, Syrian, and Egyptian officials have all dismissed the reports for lack of evidence.

Some military analysts question the claims, too, asking why Hezbollah would need Scuds, which are liquid-fueled (lengthening launch preparation time) and usually require firing from large-wheeled launchers, which would also need to be smuggled into Lebanon. Hezbollah is believed to already have Iranian-designed and Syrian-built M-600 rockets that are more concealable and quicker to fire.

Most Lebanese dread another devastating war with Israel, especially as Lebanon's economy improves amid a boom in construction and tourism. Such concerns garner little sympathy from Hezbollah combatants, who say they are fulfilling a religious obligation in confronting Israel. "The atmosphere [among Hezbollah cadres] is very spiritual," says Hassan, a burly university student. "In our belief, we are waging jihad and that places us in a very pleasant state of mind."

I have often blogged that, to hate-filled, religiously fanatical terrorist groups like hezbollah and hamas (its counterpart among palestinian Arabs), a cessation of fighting does not mean a chance for peace.  It means they have to accumulate enough weaponry to fight again.  This is another case in point, isn't it?

In any case, let me explain why I find the article remarkable.  There are two major reasons:

-The first is Mr. Blanford's ludicrous contention that Israel fought hezbollah "to a standstill" four years ago.  "A standstill" implies that neither side was able to breach the other's line or enter its territory. 

In point of fact, Israel entered southern Lebanon and moved northward almost to Beirut virtually at will.  Yes there were sporadic instances of  heavy fighting at times.  But never did Israel fight to a standstill.  hezbollah did nothing but retreat northward, away from Israel's troops.  And while it was happening, hezbollah's "brave" leader, sayyid hassan nasrallah, went into hiding like the scared, cowardly little pissant he is. 

That is not fighting to a standstill, Mr. Blanford.

-The second is that Blanford wrote an entire article about a hezbollah accumulating weapons and Syria supplying them, without any mention of the country that is providing the money and weaponry to both of them:  Iran.

The one and only mention of Iran is buried in the 12th paragraph, and is nothing other than a passing reference to one of the weapons being "Iranian-designed". 

What a pal Nicholas Blanford is to Iran, as he literally absolves it of any responsibility or involvement in a potential war it has organized, bankrolled and is now orchestrating.  And what a booster he is for hezbollah, giving it credit for a military success it did not achieve.

Sadly, however, I am not shocked or even surprised by this.  How many rewrites of history do you have to read before just accepting that it happens regularly?

Then they wonder why more and more people bypass mainstream media and look to the internet for their information...

Zeke ... .... ... The 15,000 UN troops (aka Boy Scouts with Blue Beanies) placed in Lebanon at the conclusion of the 2006 war did not enforce the 'no new munitions for Hizbulloh' provisions of the UN resolution. .... .... .... So, in effect, the UN has set the stage for the next round of war. .... ... A war with greatly enhanced weapons. ... ... In 2006, Israel went to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. ... ... If Israeli cities are attacked with Scuds, restraint might not be the policy. .... .... The most effective way to counter a Scud attack would be carpet bombing. ... .... .... Seems the UN's wimping out of its responsibilities has ensured a more lethal war. (05/09/10)


Ken Berwitz

See that title above?  It is real.  And it is insane that this man is paid by US taxpayers to influence students.

See for yourself at  No words I can write here will be more clear than his own words on the video.

PJ Hope he lost his job for doing this. (05/10/10)

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!!