Wednesday, 04 August 2010


Ken Berwitz

In a previous blog I made it clear that I am fine with a Mosque near the site of the World Trade Center - so long as it is not tied to the people or groups that would favor the people who perpetrated 9/11.

Here is the key part of what I wrote at that time:

Personally, I do not object to a mosque being there.  I don't assume that all Muslims are responsible for the WTC bombing, and it is perfectly reasonable for a mosque to be built anywhere, including there.

But I strenuously object to this mosque being built by these people.

Want to build a mosque of normal dimensions in that area so that Muslims of good will can pray?  Be my guest..

Want to build a ridiculously oversized mosque there to lift the spirits of terrorists and USA haters everywhere?  Then go to hell, and take your mosque with you. 

I hope it is stopped cold.

Now we have this, excerpted from an article in today's New York Post:

Yesterday's unanimous vote by the city Landmarks Preservation Com mission cleared the last municipal impediment to construction of a 13-story mosque and community center just blocks from Ground Zero.


But important questions linger. CAIR had denounced opponents of the projects as "bigots and extremists."


That's pretty rich, coming from an organization that in 2007 was named an unindicted co-conspirator in connection with a plot to support the terrorists of Hamas -- and that has seen several of its former officials and staffers convicted on terror-related charges.


At first, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf insisted the funds would be raised entirely from the Muslim-American community.

But then he told an Arabic-language newspaper in Britain that funding would also come from Arab countries.


And it should be noted that Rauf's father was the long-time director of the Islamic Center of New York, which built the mosque on Third Avenue and 96th Street -- a project funded primarily by the governments of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim nations.


Now, the Saudis openly fund mosques abroad, spreading the radical Wahhabi strain of Islam, as a means of pacifying their own home-grown radicals.


So it would be particularly troubling if Rauf's funding comes from abroad -- particularly from Riyadh.

Especially given his own disturbing ties to figures like Hossein Mahallati, Iran's former UN ambassador and an unabashed supporter of Hamas.


Not to mention Rauf's own pointed refusal to label Hamas a terrorist organization -- and his statement, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, that "United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened."

One further point to be made:.  The mosque's intended name is "Cordoba House".  As detailed in the following excerpt from a June 2 article by's J. E. Dyer:

 Cordoba, in Islamic symbolic terms, means Islamic rule in the West.  It does not mean coexistence, unless coexistence is interpreted as referring to Islamic rule.  Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs cites the article (original in Arabic) published by Iraqi-American Khudhayr Taher on 18 May, in which Taher explains the following:

We must note that a hostile and provocative name [Cordoba] has been chosen for this mosqueChoosing the name Cordoba House for the mosque to be constructed in New York was not coincidental or random and innocent. It bears within it significance and dreams of expansion and invasion [into the territory] of the other, [while] striving to change his religion and to subjugate him

Add all these facts together, and the conclusion is unmistakable.

Stop the mosque.

free` There will be no stopping it, islam will have there victory mosque. (08/05/10)


Ken Berwitz

It's not like these are the first two demonstrations that the people of this country do NOT want the national health care, also known as "ObamaCare", that the President and his lopsidedly Democratic congress passed months ago.  But they are two of the most important:

1) In a Rasmussen poll this week, 56% of New Yorkers favor repealing ObamaCare;

2) In a statewide vote yesterday, Missouri voters rejected a mandate to purchase health care by the astonishing margin of about 3 to 1.

The New York poll is huge because, if it is accurate, it means that a decisive majority of voters in a reliably blue state are rejecting national health care.  But you can make the argument that it is only a poll and may not reflect reality

The Missouri vote - not poll, but vote - is another story.  Missouri is a swing state; a state that can go one way or the other.  And a 3 to 1 rejection of what most people would call the centerpiece of the Obama administration's legislative agenda is absolutely disastrous.

If this is how voters feel in  New York and Missouri, how do you suppose they feel elsewhere?  

And let's remember that the poll and the primary vote occurred months after ObamaCare passed, during which time the administration has continually propagandized in its favor, while much of our wonderful "neutral" media have assured their readers/viewers that the tide is starting to turn and people have become more positively disposed towards it.

Now, one last question:  How do you suppose some of the Democratic congresspeople in competitive districts are going face their constituents during the upcoming election campaign and explain why they voted in favor of this monstrosity? 

Maybe they can claim that it was all Bush's idea......

Zeke .... .... Unfortunately, the citizenship does know how to add. .... ..... Adding 30 million (50 million?) more people to gub'mint health care, cutting $530 billion from Senior's Medicare will disrupt the health care of those presently dependent on private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid. ... ... .... Rationing, treatment denial because of age (no hip replacement for you, gramps), lowered standards (see the Nurse-Trainee, not the Board-Certified Specialist in Infectious Disease), longer waits, getting 'em out Quicker 'n Sicker. ... .... And, MUCH HIGHER TAXES, HUGE Federal Bureaucracy ...... ...... ...... Mr. Obama's Plan more accurately should be called the Bureaucrats Betterment and Retirement Act. ......` (08/04/10)

J Some people are just not willing to understand all the issues Cunningham noted that Prop C does present a conflict with federal law and the case will likey come down to a decision by the Supreme Court. She also noted that Prop C does not prevent Missourians from participating in the federal healthcare system, it simply gives them a choice. Trying to post some urls since people do not search for the whole truth (08/05/10)


Ken Berwitz

Earlier today I pointed out that Missouri voters rejected "Proposition C, a statewide mandate to purchase health care, by something like 3 to 1 (the final disparity was only slightly less vast, at 71% -29%).

But here's something I didn't know until I checked the actual vote counts a few minutes ago:  A total of 938,782 votes were cast on Proposition C.  And a total of 898,784 votes were cast for the US senate primaries, all three of them combined (Democrat, Republican, Liberal).

In other words, 40,000 more votes were cast to send ObamaCare packing than to nominate candidates for the US Senate.

How much must Missourians hate this legislation to show numbers like that?  A hell of a lot, that's how much.

And that is why so many Democrats are "debamafying" - my word for weaning themselves off of Obama and either hoping, asking or outright demanding that he avoid any association with them during the campaign.

Look at the bright side, Mr. President.  All that time freed up for more golf, vacations and ball games....

Zeke .... ..... Ken, just to clarify: ... the Missouri voters APPROVED Prop C. Prop C effectively prevents the 'government' from forcing people to buy health insurance. ..... ..... ..... .... @ J-Dude : .... you need to specify what 'suit' you refer to; there is no pending litigation as a result of Proposition C. .... The state of Missouri files lots of lawsuits .... enough to fully occupy the state's Attorney General and his staff. ..... ..... .... ..... We don't read minds here. .... .... Why, you could even be referring to a suit NOT filed by the STATE of MO, but rather one filed by Peter Kinder, the Lieutenant Governor .... nearly a month before Prop C was even voted on. (08/05/10)

Zeke .... .... From, last night, NONE of the three major networks reported the Missouri vote on Proposition C -- People cannot be compelled to buy health insurance. .... .... .... Lots of stuff about Obama's birthday, Michelle & 4 dozen of her nearest and dearest having a lovely time in Spain while Barack batches it in the US. ..... .... But, according to ABC, CBS, NBC .... an overwhelming beatdown of mandatory health insurance is just not news ..... (08/05/10)

j The Missouri suit is different from the rest as it names specific people and what they would loose under Obamacare. I am not sure it is all verified since the regulations are not written to date. Take some time and read it. (08/04/10)

J The state of Missouri has filed suite dude. Read some more dude. (08/05/10)

Zeke .... J-Dude ...... what "suit" are you talking about ? .... ... The blog item was about a state REFERENDUM. .... .... No court involved (until it is challenged). .... .... No 'parties' are involved .... No INDIVIDUALS or ORGANIZATIONS/Companies are mentioned .... No other state has YET had such a referendum. .... .... ..... >>>>> ... .... BALLOT MEASURE: ...... .... Shall the Missouri Statutes be amended to: ..... ..... * Deny the government authority to penalize citizens for refusing to purchase private health insurance or infringe upon the right to offer or accept direct payment for lawful healthcare services? .... ..... * Modify laws regarding the liquidation of certain domestic insurance companies? It is estimated this proposal will have no immediate costs or savings to state or local governmental entities. However, because of the uncertain interaction of the proposal with implementation of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, future costs to state governmental entities are unknown. Fair Ballot Language: ... .... A “yes” vote will amend Missouri law to deny the government authority to penalize citizens for refusing to purchase private health insurance or infringe upon the right to offer or accept direct payment for lawful healthcare services. The amendment will also modify laws regarding the liquidation of certain domestic insurance companies. .... ..... ..... A “no” vote will not change the current Missouri law regarding private health insurance, lawful healthcare services, and the liquidation of certain domestic insurance companies ..... ..... If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes. ------------- ------------- ..... Full text of Prop C: .... ballotpedia *dot* org/wiki/index *dot* php/Missouri_Proposition_C_%282010%29,_full_text ..... ..... (08/05/10)


Ken Berwitz

As the USA continues to suffer through these awful times of recession/depression and high unemployment, I have two quick questions:

-Was it really such a great idea to throw a wedding bash for Chelsea Clinton that is estimated to have cost 3 to 5 million dollars?  Especially when the father of the groom, former congressperson Edward Mezvinsky, was convicted on 31 counts of bank, mail and wire fraud and served five years in a federal prison? 

If Mezvinsky had paid restitution to the people he defrauded, that would be one thing.  But according to newspaper accounts, he still owes 9.4 million to his victims. 

I wonder how much of it was used for the Mezvinsky's part of this wedding;

-Was it really such a great idea for Michelle Obama to hop on Air Force 1 and take her 9 year old daughter Sasha to one of the most exclusive, expensive hotels in Marbella, Spain - the Villa Padierna - for a little vacation? 

White House Press Secretary Robert "Baghdad Bob" Gibbs claims, or at least intimates, the Obamas are paying for this jaunt out of their own pocket.  But does that include the plane and its staff and the security detail?  You know the answer to that as well as I do.

Now:  just suppose this were the Bush wedding, or it was Laura Bush and one of her two daughters off to Spain?  Do you think our wonderful "neutral" media would have commented a bit differently about it? 

As a basis for your opinion, remember what these media said when Bush dared to spend working vacations at his own property in Crawford, Texas.  And then think about what more they'd have said if it were during horrible economic times.

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

Zeke ..... IIRC, non-official passengers on Air Force 1 pay standard airline ticket prices. Michelle and daughter probably covered less than 1% of the cost to the taxpayers -- IF they paid anything. (08/04/10)

j You do not believe a US airplane was used for Laura and kids...better google........... The groom is not his father...and you have no idea who paid for what and the bride and family pays for most. By the way, did Bush 41 and 43 pay the government back for the mess of the Silverado Savings and Loan caused by Bush 41's son and 43's brother if we are going to play these games??? (08/04/10)

J Did you make the same comments when Jenna Bush was marred at the Bush Ranch while Bush was still president? The wedding is private money and who cares what the father of the groom is, was he at the wedding and he is divorced? Did you make the same comments when Mrs Bush was traveling around the world with daughters? I would rather have an elite as POTUS than some trash type, get the drift? There is no balance in this blog. (08/04/10)

Zeke ... the last post is mine ... sorry for the name omission. (08/04/10)

(Anon) J-Dude ..... .....1) None of the six children of GHW & Barbara Bush were invited to Chelsea's wedding .... What relevance does that have .... other than "Blame Bush". ........... 2) Neil Bush & Silverado : No Criminal Charges ...... ..... Settled the civil part for $50,000 ..... ..... which is less than a divorce lawyer would charge for a trial. .... Could you explain what this has to do with the price of potatoes? .... .... ..... 3) Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky (mother of the groom) is a college professor & chair and founder of the advocacy training Women Campaign International , former 1-term congresswoman, and before that, broadcast journalist. Comfortable, presumably, but not necessarily rich. 4) Please note that your replies are rather deficient in FACTS. ..... Just the FACTS, dude. .... ..... 5) No need to dig up Abraham to see if he is rolling in his grave. .... .... 6) This discussion has wandered off the topic --- Great Gatsby Wedding --- and frankly, the Blame Bush meme is more than a pathetic stretch. .... .... Unless you have something of substance to add, I'll consider the exchange to have wound down. You may, should you wish, have the last word. (08/04/10)

Zeke ...... .... J-Dude : ....... 1) ..... "you look it up" = " I can't provide any facts to refute your argument or support mine " ..... .... 2) .... ..... Parents of the Groom often contribute to the wedding : ...... Photographer, Liquor, Flowers, perhaps Transportation, Security, Entertainment. ..... ..... 3) .... Misdirection and wild tangents are not cogent arguments. .... (08/04/10)

Zedke ..... J-dude - ..... ..... 1) I don't believe Laura and daughters used Air Force 1 for travel jaunts to Europe while hubby stayed in the US . .... 2) Chelsea's father-in-law, Edward Mezvinsky plead guilty in 2001 31 charges of bank fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud and served 5 years in the slammer. He still has to make restitution of $9.4 million. So, yes, a Great Gatsby wedding splash is in rather poor taste for that reason, and in general, given the desperate economic times for so many Americans. ..... 3) Neither Chelsea nor Hillary is POTUS ..... but, I can see your point that WJC is definitely trailer trash. .... ..... .... (08/04/10)

j You did not answer the question about the Bush Family and Neil Bush and his problems with Silverado Savings and Loan. Did Bush 41 and Bush43 pay back the sins of a fellow Bush? The groom's family is the mother as well who is wealthy. It is hard to believe what the GOP is these days, Lincoln is flipping in his tomb! (08/04/10)


Ken Berwitz

As any reader of this blog knows, I don't have much regard for the Obama presidency.  But I certainly respect Mr. Obama as a man, and greatly respect the office he holds.

That is why this story, excerpted from the Allentown (PA) Call-Record, is so completely disgusting to me:

The president of a Hellertown-based amusement company apologized Wednesday for a target shooting game depicting the image of a black man that appears to be President Barack Obama.

Irvin Good Jr., president of Goodtime Amusements, said he did not intend to offend anyone by offering the game, called "Alien Attack," which recently appeared at the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Big Time Fair in Roseto and sparked a complaint.

"I guess we made an error in judgment and we apologize for that," said Good, who has had the game for about six weeks. "I voted for the man. It wasn't meant to be him. If they took it that way, we apologize."


The game depicted a black man dressed in a suit holding a rolled up piece of paper labeled, "Health Bill." The man also sported a belt buckle fashioned after the presidential seal. Participants shot darts at targets, located on his head and heart, to score points and win a stuffed animal prize.

It wasn't meant to be President Obama?  A target-shooting game featuring a Black man, holding the health care bill, with a presidential seal on his belt buckle wasn't meant to be President Obama?  That would insult the intelligence of an effing amoeba.

This is a disgrace, and Irvin Good Jr. is either a brain-dead moron, one of the least clever racists in US history or both.

Personally, my vote is door #3.

Zeke ..... I heard that it is not RACE that makes people despise Obama. Besides his lying on positions, (keep the medical insurance I have, no additional taxes for under $250K income, etc), it is a matter of COLOR. .... .... He is Green on the Outside and RED on the Inside. .... .... Obama is a Watermelon. (08/05/10)

J I cannot even imagine how many people despise the POTUS because he is mixed race. This is the type of situation that makes me crazy. I did not vote for him, I respect him and the office and want him to be successful because our country will be successful. The hatred in this country is escalating! (08/04/10)

J Enjoy watermelon, perhaps you are a cantalope, dude! (08/05/10)

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!!