Thursday, 01 July 2010

JAN BREWER'S BETTER IMMIGRATION SPEECH

Ken Berwitz

President Obama made a speech about immigration today.  It lasted over a half hour and offered a lot of words.  But there was precious little in the way of specifics.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer commented on the speech afterwards.  She spoke very briefly;  just a few sentences.  Here is the meat of what she said, as reported by Jim Cross of KTAR-Phoenix:

PHOENIX -- Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer says President Barack Obama's speech on immigration reform provided no answers to the problem.

"What a helpless speech," Brewer told News/Talk 92.3 KTAR by phone from Sedona, where she had a speaking engagement Thursday.

"Where's the action?" Brewer asked. "He described perfectly my opinion of the complete failure of the federal government, something that has been failing the people of America for a decade or more."

She added, "The bottom line is that we are a nation of laws and they have to be complied with. And, if they are not, we will fall. We have chaos in Mexico, and we are beginning to experience the same kind of chaos in Arizona."

She said, "The system is broken, the border is broken. We all know what we need... People in Arizona have made it very, very clear. Let's talk about the problem that is at hand. Let's secure the border."

Thank you, Governor Brewer.  You said what had to be said and specified what has to be done. 

You may not be the speechmaker Barack Obama is (not many are).  But content-wise?  You blew him away.


OBAMA'S IMMIGRATION SPEECH

Ken Berwitz

I just watched a little of President Obama's speech (currently in progress) which is primarily about immigration.

In the past few minutes he has compared the illegals of today with Einstein, Tesla and Carnegie, and he has blamed Republicans for the border conditions that caused Arizona to pass its new immigration laws.

I can't wait to hear what the talking heads have to say about this.....

=========================================================================

UPDATE:  Oh, brother.  Now Mr. Obama has told us that his administration has dramatically improved border security (Really?  How come this same administration put up signs warning people to stay out of parts of Arizona because they are so infested with illegals?). 

He is also floating the "comprehensive reform" idea of making illegals into legals (thus voters, thus - out of appreciation for the administration's effort on their behalf - Democratic voters).

Initially, at least, this sounds like a mother lode of Obamian BS.  But maybe I'll feel differently after hearing other people's analyses.  So I'll give it a day or two and get back to you.

=========================================================================

FURTHER UPDATE:  Obama ended by reading Emma Lazarus' poem,"The New Colossus", which is immortalized at the Statue of Liberty.  The problem?  He misquoted it.  Unless, that is, its line about "The wretched refuse of your teeming shore" was scratched out this morning.


GIBSON: THE APPLE DOESN'T FALL FAR FROM THE TREE

Ken Berwitz

hunter gibson is a sick hate-filled jerk.

And, apparently he has taught his son very well.

From today's New York Daily News:

More evidence that Mel Gibson's tongue is a "Lethal Weapon."

The bad boy actor was reportedly caught on tape launching into a racist, profanity-laced tirade aimed at his ex - the latest and ugliest development in the couple's bitter legal battle.

"You're an embarrassment to me," Gibson tells Oksana Grigorieva, according to gossip site RadarOnline.com. "You look like a f---ing pig in heat, and if you get raped by a pack of n---ers, it will be your fault."

On the tapes, Gibson repeatedly refers to Grigorieva as a "whore," "c--t" and "b----h," the Web site says.

The audio clips are also laden with sickening threats.

"I am going to come and burn the f--king house down," Gibson reportedly tells her. "How dare you act like such a bitch when I have been so f--king nice?"

Gibson, 54, and Grigorieva, 40, have filed restraining orders against each other. The couple, who have a 7-year-old daughter, has been warring ever since they split in April

This isn't the first time Gibson's mouth has gotten him into trouble.

In 2006, the "Braveheart" star ranted against Jews when he was arrested on drunken driving charges in Los Angeles.

"F-----g Jews. The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world," Gibson told a cop.

Later, he turned his attention towards a female officer.

"What do you think you're looking at, sugar t-ts?" Gibson yelled.

It has been a very long time since I paid money to see anything mel gibson did.  Be assured this will continue to eternity.


JANET DALEY EXPLAINS BARACK OBAMA

Ken Berwitz

Janet Daley is an American expatriot, educated at Berkeley, who has lived for many years in the UK.  Ms. Daley writes political commentary for London's Daily Telegraph.  And, today, her commentary is on the vast difference between what President Obama has to offer us and what we actually need.

Here is how she sees it.  See what you think:

Why has Barack Obama been such a disappointment as president? The weaknesses of his leadership have now gone past the point where they can be overlooked even by the people who had been wildly excited and inspired by his election.

A brilliant article in the Washington Examiner by Noemie  Emery captures the moment of disillusion perfectly. Quoting the innumerable comments of  despairing media commentators, she points to a consistent theme: Barack Obama was the intellectuals dream president. He was simply  too brilliant to fail, embodying as he did all those virtues of the academic class and the liberal elite which had been awaiting their moment for so many years. Now the dream had come true: intellect was in the ascendancy, and the crass action-man mentality of the Bush era was put to flight. 

So what happened? Obama staked his political credibility on importing the Big State politics of Europe with its unsustainable welfare programmes and centralised controls at just the moment at which Europe was discovering that such a philosophy was a route to sovereign bankruptcy and social demoralisation. The perverse consequences of Big Government and the wrong-headedness of the benevolent intentions with which it was established are old news in Europe but among the Leftwing intelligentsia of the US, this lesson seems not to have reached home.

But it is the nature of Obamas brilliance itself which is now under useful examination: what exactly does this amount to? Ms Emery maks the observation that it consists almost entirely of verbal facility a trait much prized in academic (and journalistic) circles but of rather less relevance to the real, concrete world of oil spills and military incursions. I recall saying early on in Obamas presidential campaign that he and his followers would eventually discover that politics was not an endless seminar. That day seems to have arrived rather sooner than I expected.

As you can see, Ms. Daley makes a very persuasive case. 

But don't cheat yourself:  be sure to click on the link she has provided to Noemie Emery's piece in yesterday's Washington Examiner, which is every bit as worthwhile. 

To give you a taste, Ms. Emery defines Barack Obama is "a seminar leader who's out of his element. And more and more out of his depth".

Now there's something you won't hear on the network news or the morning shows....


GRAMPA DEUTSCH AND HERMAN GEIST

Ken Berwitz

I have been watching television for something like 55 years.  And until today I thought that, other than toons, the two dumbest TV characters I ever saw were Grampa and Herman Munster**.

But this morning they may well have been displaced by Donnie Deutsch and Willie Geist.

Read this transcript of Deutsch's comment about the war in Afghanistan, followed by Geist's reaction, and see what I mean:

DONNY DEUTSCH:  "People weren't clear why were there in the first place, so the opposition story is not clear.  This is not a clear story-line war

WILLIE GEIST:  Well it was clear in the first months after 9/11, but after that the argument kind of fell apart

Is it possible, even conceivable, that these two could be dumber?

Now I don't know who is reading this.  So, in fairness, I suppose you may be one of the, oh, 2 or 3 people in the country who forgot that the USA was attacked on September 11, 2001 by the osama bin laden-led terrorist group, al qaeda.  And that the taliban, which ruled Afghanistan, was not only harboring al qaeda but was allowing them to run training camps where they learned how to perpetrate the 9/11 attack - and, presumably, other attacks in the future.

When then-President Bush ordered the invasion of Afghanistan, his poll numbers soared over 90%.  Does that sound like "people weren't clear why we're there in the first place...." to you? 

Evidently it does to Donnie Deutsch;  why else would he have made such an unbelievably dumbass comment.

Next we have Willie Geist.  He started off well, gently reminding Deutsch of the reason by saying  "well, it was clear in the first months after 9/11...".  But  then he went straight into Herman Munsterland with "...but after that the argument kind of fell apart". 

What happened after the first months, Willie?  Did bin laden go back in time and unperpetrate 9/11?  Did the taliban go back in time and remove the al qaeda training camps? 

The objectives of President Bush's Afghanistan invasion were to remove the taliban from power, shut down al qaeda's training camps, make damn sure that neither of them regained the presence they had prior to 9/11, and to kill or capture as many al qaeda as possible (we did not get bin laden or zawahiri, but we did get most of the rest of al qaeda's "leadership").  All of which he accomplished.  Which of those fell apart under George Bush's watch, Willie?

There you go.  Two of the stupidest comments you will ever hear on TV.  Thank you Donnie and thank you Willie.

Hey, maybe somebody can put a billboard within eyeshot of MSNBC's studios, with Grampa and Herman, and the words "Miss us yet?"

====================================================================

** Fascinatingly, Grampa Munster was played by Al Lewis, who claimed to have a doctorate in Child Psychology from Columbia University and Herman Munster was played by Fred Gwynne, who was a Harvard graduate.


A NOMINATION FOR THE "FAMOUS LAST WORDS" COMPETITION

Ken Berwitz

I have a nomination for 2010's "Famous last words" competition - i.e. the comment most likely to be regretted by the person it refers to.

It comes to us from Ms. Kalee Kreider, a spokesperson for Al Gore, and relates to Portland Oregon's police re-opening the case involving allegations by massage therapist Molly Hagerty that Mr. Gore sexually molested her:

Further investigation into this matter will only benefit Mr. Gore

Yeah, Kalee.  Sure.  Very credible.  Al Gore is no doubt ecstatic over the fact that this case is back from the dead and - albeit belatedly - being reported by mainstream media..

I'm sure he just can't wait to reap the benefits.


DID ERIC HOLDER DROP THE BLACK PANTHER CASE FOR RACIAL REASONS?

Ken Berwitz

Is eric holder, the current Attorney General of the United States, a racist whose decisions are motivated by skin color?  Did this racism evidence itself when the Department of Justice dropped the voter intimidation case against members of the new Black panther party even though the case was won?

Here, excerpted from an article at Fox News, is a statement from the attorney who resigned over this incident.  Read it and judge for yourself:

A former Justice Department attorney who quit his job to protest the Obama administration's handling of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case is accusing Attorney General Eric Holder of dropping the charges for racially motivated reasons.

J. Christian Adams, now an attorney in Virginia and a conservative blogger for Pajamas Media, says he and the other Justice Department lawyers working on the case were ordered to dismiss it.

"I mean we were told, 'Drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party,'" Adams told Fox News, adding that political appointees Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division since 2003, ordered the dismissal.

Asked about the Justice Department's claim that they are career attorneys, not political appointees, Adams said "obviously, that's false."

"Under the vacancy reform act, they were serving in a political capacity," he said. "This is one of the examples of Congress not being told the truth, the American people not being told the truth about this case. It's one of the other examples in this case where the truth simply is becoming another victim of the process."

Adams claimed an unnamed political appointee said if somebody wants to bring these kinds of cases, "that' not going to de done out of the civil rights division."

Adams also accused Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez of lying under oath to Congress about the circumstances surrounding the decision to drop the probe.

The Justice Department has defended its move to drop the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations while dismissing charges against the others "based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law."

But Adams told Fox News that politics and race was at play in the dismissal.

"There is a pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases," Adams told Fox News' Megyn Kelly.

Adams says the dismissal is a symptom of the Obama administration's reverse racism and that the Justice Department will not pursue voting rights cases against white victims. 

"In voting, that will be the case over the next few years, there's no doubt about it," he said.

The Obama administration won a default judgment in federal court in April 2009 when the Black Panthers didn't appear in court to fight the charges. But the administration moved to dismiss the charges in May 2009. Justice attorneys said a criminal complaint, which resulted in the injunction, proceeded successfully.

The department "is committed to comprehensive and vigorous enforcement of both the civil and criminal provisions of federal law that prohibit voter intimidation. We continue to work with voters, communities, and local law enforcement to ensure that every American can vote free from intimidation, coercion or threats," Schmaler said Wednesday.

But the Justice Department's explanation has failed to appease the United States Commission on Civil Rights, which is probing the department's decision, or Republican lawmakers who say the dismissal could lead to an escalation of voter intimidation.

Adams also says that after the dismissal, Justice Department attorneys were instructed not to bring any more cases against racial minorities under the Voting Section. 

Adams told Fox News that the New Black Panther case was the "easiest I ever had at the Justice Department.

"It doesn't get any easier than this," he said. "If this doesn't constitute voter intimidation, nothing will." 

There is what Mr. Adams has to say.  You decide.

Oh, one other thing:  Is anyone but Fox News offering significant coverage of this story?  If the answer is "no", that just might be worth remembering the next time one of the networks not covering this story sneers out an insult about Fox's claim to be fair and balanced.

Zeke .... ..... Mr. OilBama has been quite truthful and open. He's told us, " I WON. I am the One. " .... .... Next on his economic program is to unlock the doors of Fort Knox and wheel out the contents. ..... .... (07/01/10)


THE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS STRATEGY

Ken Berwitz

How desperate are Democrats to avoid an electoral disaster this November? 

Desperate enough so that they are lying to, and about, people whose unemployment benefits are running out.  Desperate enough so that they determined to leave these people without benefits at all, in order to glean votes by pretending that Republicans, not them, are the cause of it.

Steve Gilbert at www.sweetness-light.com gives us the specifics (the bold print is his, not mine):

Democrats Demagogue Jobless Benefits

July 1st, 2010

From an outraged (at Republicans) Associated Press:

1.3 million unemployed wont get benefits restored

By Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer

July 1, 2010

WASHINGTON More than 1.3 million laid-off workers wont get their unemployment benefits reinstated before Congress goes on a weeklong vacation for Independence Day.

An additional 200,000 people who have been without a job for at least six months stand to lose their benefits each week, unless Congress acts.

For the third time in as many weeks, Republicans in the Senate successfully filibustered a bill Wednesday night to continue providing unemployment checks to people who been laid off for long stretches. The House is slated to vote on a similar measure Thursday, though the Senates action renders the vote a futile gesture as Congress prepares to depart Washington for its holiday recess.

A little more than 1.3 million people have already lost benefits since the last extension ran out at the end of May.

"It is beyond disappointing that Republicans continue to stand almost lockstep against assistance for out-of-work Americans," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

This is political grandstanding of the worst kind. The Republicans have repeatedly said that they would extend unemployment benefits if the Democrats would strip out all the other things they have larded up the bill with. That is to say, the Republicans have said they would vote for a stand-alone unemployment extension.

But the Democrats refuse present such a bill because they think they can score political points by claiming that the GOP opposes extending benefits for those out of work.

Unable to deliver more stimulus spending for President Barack Obama, Democrats in Congress had hoped to at least restore the jobless benefits.

What media bias?

Obama has urged lawmakers to spend about $50 billion to help states pay for Medicaid programs and to avoid teacher layoffs, but Democrats in Congress have been unable to come up with the votes.

Many Democrats see state aid and unemployment benefits as insurance against the economy sliding back into recession. However, many Republicans and some Democrats worry about adding to the growing national debt.

Some Republicans offered to support the unemployment bill if it was paid for with unspent money from last years massive economic recovery package. Democrats rejected the offer, saying the money was needed for jobs programs.

Translation, Republicans say that the still unspent 43% of the stimulus funds could be used to pay for unemployment benefits. But the Democrats want to hold on to that to use to save their jobs in November.

Oh, and never mind that the the Congress is supposed to be bound by its own self-imposed PAYGO legislation, which requires them to pay for whatever new spending they pass.

"The only reason the unemployment extension hasnt passed is because Democrats simply refuse to pass a bill that doesnt add to the debt," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, said, "My concern is that the Democrats are more interested in having this issue to demagogue for political gamesmanship than they are in simply passing the benefits extension."

The unemployment bill would have provided up to a total of 99 weekly unemployment checks averaging $335 to people whose 26 weeks of state-paid benefits have run out.

The benefits would be available through the end of November, at a cost of $33.9 billion. The money would be borrowed, adding to the budget deficit.

Through the end of November being the operative phrase here.

Disgusting.  Despicable.  Digraceful. 

But also a potential vote-getting issue.  So consider it done.

If you like this kind of politics, you certainly know who to vote for in November.  And if you don't like this kind of politics, you certainly know who to vote for in November too.

Your call.

Zeke .... .... How about, instead of Unemployment Benefits, which will be needed by 92% of the workforce .... instead, we have a Jobs Program. .... .... Each former or future recipient will instead take in their neighbors laundry, which they will do for a govt mandated fee. ... Bingo ! Full Employment. .... and clean clothes, besides. .... .... (07/01/10)


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, 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!!