Wednesday, 19 May 2010


Ken Berwitz

Since the left, especially among its media people, has made such a big deal about incivility from the right being dangerous and possibly engendering extremism and violence - and since this has been echoed by top-echelon members of the Obama administration, including the President himself - I thought I would show you a couple of really disgusting examples.  Except they ain't from the right:

First we have dylan ratigan of MSNBC talking about Glen Beck, who wipes up the floor with MSNBC ratings-wise every day:

"The only problem here is that Glenn Beck and Goldline are largely snake oil salesmen and scumbags, trying to create money for themselves at the expense of everybody in this country." 

Then there is mike malloy, who seems to think the only way he will get ratings on his radio show is to say things like this, speaking of Rep. Michele Bachmann:

"You know Michelle Bachmann, this fruitcake from - no, that gives fruitcakes a bad name - this half-ass, this half-wit; this jerk-ward from Minnesota, Michele Bachmann

Yep, they do have a point.  I'll bet mainstream media, which happily reported the danger of this kind of language posed when it was from the right (whether real or imagined - think about those phony, non-existent racial slurs) will have these comments all over their papers and newscasts tomorrow.

Sure.  And 12 million illegal aliens will stream back to Mexico on Thursday, apologizing to Joe Arpaio as they cross the border.

Zeke .... .... MSNBC : .... Morons Screaming Nothing But Crap .... .... .... Do any of their few viewers actually LISTEN, or is it just background noise ...... (05/20/10)


Ken Berwitz

This incredibly sick report is excerpted from an article by Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller of ABC News:

Mexican President Felipe Calderon took the unusual step Wednesday morning of criticizing an American law while visiting the White House, saying cooperation is needed to fix the US-Mexican immigration issue but "such laws as the Arizona law that is forcing our people to face discrimination. If we are divided, we cannot overcome these problems."

President Obama welcomed Calderon and Mexican First Lady Margarita Zavala this morning with a hearty, bienvenidos during a ceremony on the South Lawn marking the start of a full days worth of events culminating in a formal state dinner this evening, President Obamas second.

The Arizona law has not yet taken effect, but the president has voiced repeated opposition to it and Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department is looking into how it will be implemented to ensure against racial profiling, though last week Holder told a congressional committee that he had not yet read the law. (A Justice Department spokesman later said that Holder had been thoroughly briefed on the law, which has since been amended.)

President Obama did not specifically mention his opposition to the Arizona law, though White House officials say it will be a topic of discussion during the two leaders closed-door meetings throughout the day at the White House.

Mexican-American families have been here for centuries, President Obama said, noting our proud tradition as a nation of immigrants, all of whom strengthen our American family and who join us today. Working together, we have built upon these bridges.  We've forged a new era of cooperation and partnership between our countries based on mutual interest, mutual respect and mutual responsibility.

How nice of President Obama to be so deferential to President Calderon of Mexico, a country in which over 10% of its entire population has fled to the United States, most of them illegally. 

How nice of President Obama to listen to, and apparently accept, a lecture on borders from President Calderon of Mexico, a country which immediately jails and then deports people who cross its borders illegally.

I have a great idea.  Maybe, just maybe, President Obama should find a reasonably diplomatic way of telling President Calderon to take his lectures and shove them straight where the sun don't shine.

Mexico is pathetic.  It has the financial strength to take care of its people, but does not.  How else do you account for the 12 - 15 MILLION of them who have fled over the border into the United States?  Do you think they do that because Mexico offers them opportunity?  Respect? 

But instead of telling Mr. Calderon to take care of his own people before giving us lessons in immigration, Mr. Obama is busy accepting the crap sandwich Calderon is serving, and apparently agreeing with him.

When does President Obama ever act like he thinks we are the good guys?  When does he ever not see us as the bad guys?  With a President like this, who needs enemies of the state?

Dear 2012 election:  Please try to get here faster.


Ken Berwitz

The disastrous outing of Richard Blumenthal as a liar who claimed to serve in Vietnam but never set foot there, continues.

Excerpted from James Hohmann's blog at

The commander of Connecticuts Veterans of Foreign Wars organization blasted Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal Tuesday, referring to his prior statements of service in Vietnam as outrageous.


Mr. Blumenthal was considered one of the best friends a veteran could have in Connecticut. It is a true shame that he let a false claim of Vietnam service change that, said Richard DiFederico, in a statement. Those who served in uniform during the Vietnam era also deserve our gratitude, which makes Mr. Blumenthal's claim to be something he is not so outrageous.


DiFedericos statement came after Blumenthals dramatic and defiant press conference Tuesday at a VFW hall in West Hartford, an event which took place in response to a New York Times report that the Connecticut attorney general had on more than one occasion said he had served in Vietnam, although his time in the Marine Corps Reserve was in fact spent in Washington and Connecticut


Blumenthal is not a member of the VFW, and national leaders noted that he wouldnt meet the eligibility requirement if he tried to join because he didnt actually serve in a theatre of combat. The groups bylaws also do not allow any level of the organization to endorse political candidates.

I have to believe that, however many instances of Blumenthal lying either directly or by implication about his "service" in Vietnam we currently know of, there are more.  The man has been in and out of public service for over 30 years.  It stands to reason that someone who lied several times about his military career that we already know about would have done so other times as well.  And if there are other such instances, you can count on them being squirreled away by Republicans so that his eventual opponent can use them to maximum benefit during the general campaign.

Yesterday, I wondered if the revelations about Blumenthal's military service (or non-service if you wish) would force him to bow out as the Democratic Senate candidate.  I would have to say that Commander DiFederico's condemnation increases that possibility.

ZekeTT .... .... Bill Clinton was a man who would climb a tree so he could tell a lie; even though standing still and telling the truth would serve him better. .... .... .... All this guy had to do was say, "I served in the Marines during Viet Nam, but not in that country". That seems much more honorable than what that lying, scum-bucket draft-dodger did in Arkansas. (05/19/10)


Ken Berwitz

I know it won't happen, at least not because of this.  But it should, damn it.  It should.

Here is Investors Business Daily's latest editorial on the national disgrace that is eric holder, posted this evening.  It stands by itself, no need for me to elaborate.

Read what IBD says, and  you'll understand why:

Eric Holder Vs. Black Panthers

Civil Rights: The Justice Department explains that it dropped a Black Panther voter-intimidation case because of lack of evidence. Pay no attention to the thugs outside the polling place. Yet another reason Eric Holder must go.

On Election Day 2008, New Black Panther Party members King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Sha-bazz and Jerry Jackson were charged in a civil complaint with civil violations by "allegedly" violating the Voting Rights Act through intimidation, threats and coercion as they stood outside a Philadelphia polling place.

It was what Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, called "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen" Black Panthers dressed in paramilitary garb, one brandishing a nightstick and saying things like, "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!"

In January 2009, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit charging violations of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. When none of the defendants filed a response or showed up at a subsequent hearing, we'd have thought DOJ would have won its suit by default.

Instead, in May 2009, it let two of the three walk and issued a weak injunction against Shabazz forbidding him from showing up at another Philadelphia polling place with another nightstick and intimidating other voters for the next three years, an action that was already illegal. He is presumably free to do the same thing in, say, New Jersey in 2012.

No real explanation of this outrageous decision was forthcoming, and DOJ refused requests for its documentation on the case. On Tuesday, J. Christian Adams, a career DOJ attorney in the Voting Rights Section, resigned, citing his personal exposure in the DOJ's refusal to honor Civil Rights Commission subpoenas.

Last Friday, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission held a hearing on the matter to which DOJ sent Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for civil rights, to explain why DOJ dropped a case it had won. He testified that "the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the federal criminal civil rights statutes." Say what?

"After reviewing the evidence, the department concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the party or Malik Zulu Shabazz violated Section 11(b)," Perez said in his testimony.

Perhaps Perez or Holder has not seen the YouTube video of the Panthers doing exactly what they were charged with doing or saw the statements of witnesses.

Last August, Gerald A. Reynolds, chairman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, told the Washington Times, in a bit of an understatement, that the Justice Department had been offering "weak justifications."

"If you swap out the New Black Panther Party in this case for neo-Nazi groups or the Ku Klux Klan, you likely would have had a different outcome," he said.


At an April 23 commission hearing, witnesses testified to how the Black Panthers acted in concert, threatening black Republicans and whites who showed up. Two witnesses testified that they saw some would-be voters turn back and leave without voting after seeing the nightstick and being called "white devils."


As we recently noted, Eric Holder's Justice Department refuses to enforce U.S. law as written but bends it and shapes it to serve the purposes of the administration's political agenda. Tea Party members who protest the administration's policies are racists; Black Panthers threatening voters are no threat at all.


Holder will not enforce federal immigration law to protect our borders while railing against an Arizona version he has not read. He wants to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed minutes from the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, having given him the same rights as the thousands he murdered. The crotch-bomber from Yemen is Mirandized minutes after failing in his attempt at a "man-caused disaster."


The iconic statue showing a lady holding the scales of justice while wearing a blindfold is meant to show that justice should be blind. In the case of Eric Holder, she is hiding her shame that it isn't.

Zeke .... .... .... The guilt of the New Black Panther Thugs was not an issue, as they did not appear at the trial. ... It was a default judgment .... .... Therefore, only the penalty phase remained. ..... ..... Before the judge could slam his gavel and say, "Five Years up the River", Holder's posse said, "Let 'em walk". .... ... They THREW AWAY a Valid Conviction. ... ... .... Seems like there is One Law for Barry's Boyz, and another for the rest of us. ... ... This is INCREDIBLY divisive for the country. ... ... (05/19/10)


Ken Berwitz

Ever hear of Dale Peterson? 

He is running for Agricultural Commissioner in Alabama.  So, unless you live there, you probably don't know about him at all.

But a man who puts up a political ad like this?  In the words of Willie Loman's wife Linda, "Attention must be paid".

Watch it by clicking here, and you'll see why.  Believe me.


Ken Berwitz

For those of you following the saga of this @*&#$%@ bird that spent almost a week waking us up at 5:30AM by bouncing itself off the window over our bed......

That greenish plastic cover I put over the window worked!!  The bird has not bothered us for two mornings!!

Ok, ok, I admit it might be a coincidence, the bird's eggs might have hatched and they're all gone.  But I don't know that one way or the other.  So I prefer to think that covering the window did it. 

You got a problem with that?  If you do, see the bird.


Ken Berwitz

Holy mackerel (and I do not mean mackerel).

Remember that cheerleading squad of military veterans Richard Blumenthal surrounded himself with, to conjure up an aura of credibility? 

Well, it seems that at least one of them looks to be as fraudulent as Blumenthal.

From the web site, which tracks phony vets and vets who exaggerate their accomplishments, we have this:


ACTUAL - National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Combat Action Ribbon, Purple Heart w/1*.  Served 11 Oct 1968 to 30 Jan 1970 as a USMC rifleman (MOS 0311). Has enlisted service number (not officer's). Most likely discharged an E-2 or E-3.

aka Elliott Storm


  • Claims 2nd Lt, Claims

  • Wears 3 Purple Hearts, 2 Bronze Stars w/V. 
     The jacket in EARLIER pictures boasted 8 ribbons. 
    This NEW pic has more and includes V device on Bronze Star and 2nd Lt bars.

  • Claims he worked with Ollie North.

  • Reported to have an officer's ID card for 100% disability.

  • Noted as a Disabled American Veteran,
    commissioned officer 01, Marine Corps.


So we see that Trumpower/Storm did serve in Vietnam per se.  But apparently he decided to significantly embellish his accomplishments there, probably to sell his book (I won't provide its name - if you want to find out you'll have to do it on your own).

Just like Richard Blumenthal served in the military during the Vietnam era, but significantly embellished his accomplishments by claiming to have fought in Vietnam when he never set foot there.

What's that old saying about birds of a feather?


Ken Berwitz

Who is J. Christian Adams?  Why would he be a problem to Barack Obama - and even moreso to Attorney General eric holder?

In answer, let me post Jennifer Rubin's piece from  Read it and, believe, me, you'll have your answer:

DOJ Trial Attorney on Black Panther Case Resigns

Jennifer Rubin - 05.19.2010 - 7:32 AM


Wow. We may finally learn the inside story of the New Black Panther case. This report explains:


A trial attorney with the Department of Justices Voting Rights Section has resigned, citing concerns about the governments refusal to prosecute a case involving voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party. A letter of resignation obtained by The Washington Examiner from a former Justice Department employee makes clear DOJ has refused to allow attorneys in the Voting Rights Section to testify before the congressionally-chartered bipartisan U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, despite subpoenas that could result in their being held in contempt.


In his letter of resignation, J. Christian Adams writes:


On the other hand, the events surrounding the dismissal of United States v. New Black Panther Party, et al., after the trial team sought and obtained an entry of default, has subjected me, Mr. Christopher Coates, and potentially at some point, all members of the team, to a subpoena from the United States Commission on Civil Rights. The subpoena is based on an explicit federal statute and seeks answers about why the case was dismissed.


I have incurred significant personal expense in retaining a number of separate attorneys and firms regarding this subpoena in order to protect my interests and advise me about my personal legal obligation to comply with the subpoena. Over the last few months, one of my attorneys has had multiple communications with Federal Programs regarding the subpoena. My attorney suggested to them that the Department should file a motion in district court to quash the subpoena and thereby resolve conclusively any question about my obligation to comply.


Months ago, my attorney advised the Department that a motion to quash would be welcome, and that I would assert no objection to the motion. Further, my attorney has explicitly sought to ascertain whether Executive Privilege has been invoked regarding the decisions of individuals not in the Voting Section to order the dismissal of the case. If Executive Privilege has been asserted, or will be, obviously I would not comply with the subpoena. These options would provide some conclusive legal certainly about the extent of my obligation to comply with a subpoena issued pursuant to a federal statute. Instead, we have been ordered not to comply with the subpoena, citing a federal regulation. [emphasis in original]


All this suggests that once he is free from the constraints of his superiors, Adams intends to tell his story. When he does, I expect we will hear that attorneys placed in political positions came up with fraudulent reasons for dismissing the case. I also think well hear more about the role of the NAACP. Stay tuned. Fireworks coming forthwith.

Our wonderful "neutral" media have done their level best to bury this scandal - and, make no mistake, it is a scandal of major dimensions.  They have given it the one-day-and-out treatment, as though giving a free pass to racists who intimidate voters at the polls - and don't even think it is necessary to put up a defense  when they are charged with doing so (that's what you do when you know the fix is in)- is nothing, nothing at all.

But if Ms. Rubin is right about J. Christian Adams, the scab is about to be ripped off of this festering boil.  If that happens, even the "journalists" who have given it up for Mr. Obama and holder may not be able to look the other way any more.

Boy do I hope that's what happens.  And the sooner the better.

Zeke ..... You can fool ALL of the People, Some of the time. ... You can fool SOME of the People, All of the time. ... But, you Cannot fool All of the People, All of the Time. ..... ..... ..... Abraham Lincoln. (05/19/10)


Ken Berwitz

Now that the May 18th primaries are over, a few thoughts: 

-Arlen Specter got what he deserved.  I used to have a lot of respect for Mr. Specter as an independent-thinking Republican.  But last year, when it became clear it would be tough for him to defeat Pat Toomey in the 2010 primary, he changed parties a month or so after stating definitively he would not do so.  Why?  Because, as he himself said, it would give him a better chance to win again.  


That blunt explanation of why he lied to us the month before, irrevocably destroyed Specters credibility.  In fact, the most effective ad his winning opponent, Joe Sestak, ran was the footage of Specter saying he changed parties to get re-elected.


-One other thing:  Barack Obama supported Arlen Specter in this primary, and even approved the campaigns usage of video footage in which Mr. Obama said I love Arlen Specter.  That is four in a row for Obama:  Governor of Virginia, Governor of New Jersey, Senator from Massachusetts and now Pennsylvania primary for Senate. 


Do you recall any other sitting President being more damaging to his party than Barack Obama?  Even Bush, at the end of his second term, was not as toxic as Barack Obama is now.


-Rand Paul did not only win in Kentucky, he romped in Kentucky.  This at least partially answers the question Do Tea Partiers and/or Sarah Palin have any real influence?  Both supported Paul.


In terms of the man himself, I will withhold judgment until I am 100% sure.  But if he is a carbon copy of his father, which I am led to believe he is, I will support the Democrat.  


Ron Paul may come across to some as a principled conservative, but his voting record and his sordid history tell me that he is perfectly comfortable with racists and anti-Semites.  That is why I reject him completely, as should any decent person.


If Rand has broken away from his father in these areas, I will consider supporting him.  But I need proof.


-I expected Mark Critz to beat Tim Burns for John Murthas vacated congressional seat.  It was no surprise for two reasons: 


1) Whether honestly or dishonestly, Critz positioned himself as a conservative, so there was not a lot of difference between him and Burns,


2) Burns was fighting a two-front battle:  He was running against Critz in the special election, but he was also engaged in an intense primary fight to decide who the candidate would be for the regular election in November (the win last night gives Critz this seat only through December).  


Burns lost the special election, but won his primary against William Russell (who immediately said he would support Burns).  Since Burns will be running only against Critz in the regularly scheduled election, and now has support from the Russell people, there may be a very different result in November.


-Finally, I am so tired of hearing our wonderful neutral media tell me that we are not seeing anger at Democrats, just generic anger at incumbents of both parties.


Tell me:  which Republican incumbents lost their primaries yesterday?  Can you name any?


Arlen Specter lost.  Alan Mollohan lost in West Virginia.  Blanche Lincoln, a two-term senator, could not get even 50% of the primary vote in Arkansas and now has to sweat out a runoff election in three weeks.  But those three are all Democrats.  Where is the evidence that this anger extends to Republicans too? 

Then they wonder why people call them biased, and seek out alternative sources for their news?  Oh, brother.

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!!