Sunday, 30 January 2011

COMING SOON TO A BORDER TOWN NEAR YOU?

Ken Berwitz

Excerpted from an Associated Press article,  published in the Laredo Morning Times, which I just saw at freerepublic.com:

MONTERREY, Mexico The police chief and all 38 police officers of a northeastern Mexican town have quit following a series of drug cartel attacks, including the decapitation of two of their colleagues.

Soldiers, state and federal police had been deployed to patrol General Teran, a town along a notorious drug-smuggling route to the U.S. border, said Mayor Ramon Villagomez.

The police quit after the discovery Wednesday of the mutilated bodies of two officers who had been kidnapped by gunmen two days earlier.

The killings followed three attacks on the police headquarters since December. Gunmen hurled grenades and sprayed the building with machine-gun fire.

The drug-related murders are rampant. Mexico cannot stop them.

And the Obama administration's Department of Justice, under the disgraceful toady eric holder, would rather sue Arizona then try to secure our borders there, or in Texas, New Mexico and California..

Get ready.  Because, since there is no effort to prevent this from moving north of the border to the USA, there is no reason it won't happen here, and soon. 

How many will die?  Your guess is as good as mine. 

The 2012 elections cannot come fast enough.

Zeke .... .... ..... Mexico has absolutely no problem with criminal murders -- except for those committed by Mexican drug gangs. .... .... The illegals crossing the US border include many OTM's (other than Mexicans) -- including a large number of Muslims. .... ..... .... Jihad is coming to a location near you. ... .... Already happened in Russia, England, Spain, etc, etc, etc. Shoe Bomber, Underwear Bomber, Times Square Bomber, LAX bomber ... all caught OTJ ... Other Than Janet. (01/30/11)


ANOTHER TARGET FOR CHRIS MATTHEWS

Ken Berwitz

Earlier this morning I blogged about a stupid mistake Chris Matthews made - i.e. telling viewers, on Friday's "Hardball" show, that the Panama Canal is in Egypt.  I pointed out that, since Matthews loves to insult Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin for their real (and sometimes imagined) missteps, he richly deserved to be nailed for it.

But on the theory that Mr. Matthews prefers to attack people other than himself for their mistakes, I have a new source of material that I'm sure he will jump all over.

Excerpted from Abby Phillip's blog at politico.com:

Hit with a tough question about his administrations policy in Afghanistan and Iraq on Thursday, President Obama made a muddled mess out of his plans for withdrawing troops from the region.

Obama swapped Iraq for Afghanistan when he answered a question on YouTube about whether he still believes soldiers need to die in the wars there.

As I said, we will be out of Afghanistan by the end of this year, Obama said, a fairly significant misstatement of his administrations Afghanistan policy, which doesnt call for a troop withdrawal until 2014.

Go get'im, Chris. 

Be sure to call President Obama a bubblehead, a screamer and a near nutcase, like you did Ms. Bachmann. 

And don't forget to note that he is an ignoramus who doesn't know anything, the way you so often characterize Ms. Palin.

It's too bad no one asked Mr. Obama where the troops will be redeployed after leaving Afghanistan.  Maybe Chris could have suggested that they be sent to Egypt, to guard the Panama canal......

free` You can add chuckie schumer to the list, he listed the 3 branches of government as the senate, the house and the president. you can watch him here -- youtube.com/watch?v=fG0Jpu9geWY (01/31/11)

Ken Berwitz free - I just did. Hooooboy. Not for nothing does Mark Levin call him "Chuck the Schmuck". (01/31/11)


PRESIDENT OBAMA'S MIDDLE EAST FAILURE

Ken Berwitz

How it must gall the Obama lovers and Bush haters (very often one and the same) that Obama had it wrong about Egypt - and other Arab countries under the yoke of repression - while Bush had it right.

Elliott Abrams has written a terrific commentary about the events in Egypt and how they bear on President Obama's overall "philosophy" (if you can call it that) in today's Washington Post.  I urge you to click on the link I've provided and read every word.  But, for the moment, consider this excerpt:

All these developments seem to come as a surprise to the Obama administration, which dismissed Bush's "freedom agenda" as overly ideological and meant essentially to defend the invasion of Iraq. But as Bush's support for the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon and for a democratic Palestinian state showed, he was defending self-government, not the use of force. Consider what Bush said in that 2003 speech, which marked the 20th anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy, an institution established by President Ronald Reagan precisely to support the expansion of freedom.

"Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe - because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty," Bush said. "As long as the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation, resentment and violence ready for export."

This spirit did not always animate U.S. diplomacy in the Bush administration; plenty of officials found it unrealistic and had to be prodded or overruled to follow the president's lead. But the revolt in Tunisia, the gigantic wave of demonstrations in Egypt and the more recent marches in Yemen all make clear that Bush had it right - and that the Obama administration's abandonment of this mind-set is nothing short of a tragedy.

 

U.S. officials talked to Mubarak plenty in 2009 and 2010, and even talked to the far more repressive President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, but they talked about their goals for Israeli-Palestinian peace and ignored the police states outside the doors of those presidential palaces. When the Iranian regime stole the June 2009 elections and people went to the streets, the Obama administration feared that speaking out in their support might jeopardize the nuclear negotiations. The "reset" sought with Russia has been with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, not the Russian people suffering his increasingly despotic and lawless rule.

 

This has been the greatest failure of policy and imagination in the administration's approach: Looking at the world map, it sees states and their rulers, but has forgotten the millions of people suffering under and beginning to rebel against those rulers. "Engagement" has not been the problem, but rather the administration's insistence on engaging with regimes rather than with the people trying to survive under them.

When we think about foreign policy - not the knee-jerk diplomatic reaction and quick fixes, but the bigger picture - it is necessary to avoid two huge mistakes:  underestimating President Bush and overestimating President Obama.

As Mr. Abrams so clearly points out, President Bush had it right.  And he wasn't afraid to say it.  By contrast, after spending two years sitting on a fence and collecting splinters in his rump, President Obama, from a position behind rather than ahead of the curve, has voiced the kinds of clichd platitudes that carry no weight and command no respect.  The kind that, for decades, have atrophied the United Nations.  No wonder Mr. Obama has such regard for it.

When it comes to speaking of freedom in the Middle East, and the consequences of withholding it, George Bush gave us truth and vision.  Barack Obama is giving us meaningless blather.  Plain and simple.

Mavendetout Astounding how neocons can distort fact, in a procrustean fashion re-jiggering history. George w attempted force-feeding democracy in Iraq to aweful result. Mr. Obama 'let it happen' in Egypt to great result. Accidental? perhaps, But history is history. What happened, happened. Let the future be the judge. Bur for the moment--and possibly for posterity--Mr. Bush looks much more lame. (02/11/11)

free` Ken wrote: "Barack Obama is giving us meaningless blather." ------------- When hasn't he? His entire life has been nothing but meaningless blather. (01/30/11)


HOW OBAMA IS LOSING THE MIDDLE EAST

Ken Berwitz

The previous blog featured a commentary by Elliott Abrams, writing for the Washington Post.  This one features a commentary by Aluf Benn, writing for the (usually leftward) Israeli Newspaper Ha'aretz.

Here is the first part of Mr. Benn's piece.  See what you think:

Jimmy Carter will go down in American history as "the president who lost Iran," which during his term went from being a major strategic ally of the United States to being the revolutionary Islamic Republic. Barack Obama will be remembered as the president who "lost" Turkey, Lebanon and Egypt, and during whose tenure America's alliances in the Middle East crumbled.

 

The superficial circumstances are similar. In both cases, a United States in financial crisis and after failed wars loses global influence under a leftist president whose good intentions are interpreted abroad as expressions of weakness. The results are reflected in the fall of regimes that were dependent on their relationship with Washington for survival, or in a change in their orientation, as with Ankara.

 

America's general weakness clearly affects its friends. But unlike Carter, who preached human rights even when it hurt allies, Obama sat on the fence and exercised caution. He neither embraced despised leaders nor evangelized for political freedom, for fear of undermining stability.

 

Obama began his presidency with trips to Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and in speeches in Ankara and Cairo tried to forge new ties between the United States and the Muslim world. His message to Muslims was "I am one of you," and he backed it by quoting from the Koran. President Hosni Mubarak did not join him on the stage at Cairo University, and Obama did not mention his host. But he did not imitate his hated predecessor, President George W. Bush, with blunt calls for democracy and freedom.

 

Obama apparently believed the main problem of the Middle East was the Israeli occupation, and focused his policy on demanding the suspension of construction in the settlements and on the abortive attempt to renew the peace talks. That failure led him to back off from the peace process in favor of concentrating on heading off an Israeli-Iranian war.

Translation:  jimmy carter, feckless and failed as he was, at least talked about human rights.  Barack Obama, feckless and failed as he has turned out to be, didn't even do that - until Iran's freedom movement was crushed and Egypt's unrest grew into a revolution that is likely to force Hosni Mubarak out of office in a matter of days - maybe even today. 

And whose fault is this?  Sadly, it is ours. 

We elected a Chicago machine politician, with no qualifications to be President. And we handed him huge majorities in both houses of congress so that he, and his administration consisting almost entirely of left wing academics and political wonks without real world experience, could  push through as much of their agenda.as possible. 

Did we finally wake up?  Well, after two years of this fun and games, voters used the mid-term elections to blow Mr. Obama's congressional majority to smithereens.  Republicans are now solidly in control of the house.  In the senate, a 59-41 senate majority has shrunk to 53-47.  And Republicans now hold a solid majority of both governorships and state houses.

Will the revolution-in-progress in Egypt, which can have huge implications for the Middle East and the rest of the world, finally wake Mr. Obama up?  Maybe yes and maybe no.

We better hope for a yes.

free` If these Middle East dictatorships fall and are replaced by radical islam [which at the moment looks probable], we all lose. Those peace treaties Israel has with Egypt and Jordan will be worthless. Israel will be surrounded again by countries ruled by those who want to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews. If we lose Israel we will lose much more than just a friend and ally. (01/30/11)


THE EXPLODING OBAMACARE WAIVER LIST

Ken Berwitz

A couple of weeks ago I blogged my outrage that, at that time, 222 different entities - companies and, of course, unions (a protected species under Barack Obama) were being given waivers so that they didn't have to take ObamaCare. 

At that time I asked why anyone would want to avoid this program, given that it is touted as providing superb care at lower cost.  Would you turn down superb care at lower cost?

Well, since I blogged about those 222 waivers, the actual number has grown....make that exploded.  The total has more than tripled -- and, so far as I know, it is still growing.

Excerpted from Dr. Milton R. Wolf's article in Friday's Washington Times:

If you would like to know what the White House really thinks of Obamacare, theres an easy way. Look past its press releases. Ignore its promises. Forget its talking points. Instead, simply witness for yourself the outrageous way the White House protects its best friends from Obamacare.

Last year, we learned that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had granted 111 waivers to protect a lucky few from the onerous regulations of the new national health care overhaul. That number quickly and quietly climbed to 222, and last week we learned that the number of Obamacare privileged escapes has skyrocketed to 733.

Among the fortunate is a whos who list of unions, businesses and even several cities and four states (Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio and Tennessee) but none of the friends of Barack feature as prominently as the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

How can you get your own free pass from Obamacare? Maybe you can just donate $27 million to President Obamas campaign efforts. Thats what Andy Stern did as president of SEIU in 2008. He has been the most frequent guest at Mr. Obamas White House.

Let me ask the question again:  why would anyone want to avoid this program, given that it is touted as providing superb care at lower cost.  Would you turn down superb care at lower cost?

We both know the answer, don't we?  It is that ObamaCare is an overpriced, subpar disaster.  That is why FOB's (Friends of Barack) are begging for - and being given - privileged dispensation, while the rest of us are stuck with it.

I challenge anyone who seriously believes ObamaCare is a superior, low-cost system, to provide any other explanation. 

C'mon.  Make my day.


HOMER SIMPSON'S DOUBLE

Ken Berwitz

Want to see an amazing Homer Simpson double?

Then click here.  And be forewarned:  it has a sexual component (sort of).

Anyone who doesn't laugh out loud after looking at this, must have had a sense-of-humorectomy.


CHRIS MATTHEWS' GEOGRAPHY LESSON

Ken Berwitz

The problem with someone tossing non-stop insults about the intelligence of others, is if  that person makes a stupid mistake he/she will be nailed for it big-time.  And rightfully so.

Enter Chris Matthews.

Matthews, in a never-ending effort to be more viciously, offensively insulting that keith olbermann (he'll never make it) has been skewering Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin for months, and (in Palin's case) years.  Neither woman can say a thing that isn't judged and judged negatively.  Even when they don't say or do anything (a la Ms. Palin and the Arizona shooting) Matthews' mouth is flapping out the pejoratives.

With this in mind, here is a partial transcript of Matthews "Hardball" show on Friday, which I read at Noel Sheppard's blog for newsbusters.org.  His stupid, funny as hell, mistake is in bold print:

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: You know, the great thing about Egypt is its its own country. It was always there before there was an America or Britain or anything, there has been an Egypt. Its like China. Its a real country. It wasnt just carved off the map or out of the map by the Europeans, like so many African and third world countries have.

Its got a real rooted history. Its not just an Arab country. It was a country long before it was an Arab country -- long before Islam, there was an Egypt. Will it see itself in this moment of chaos as joining a greater Islamic world or is holding to its national identity?

AMB. MARC GINSBERG, FMR. U.S. AMBASSADOR TO MOROCCO (via telephone)GINSBERG: Theres no doubt that the Egyptians view themselves as the center of culture in the Arab and the Muslim world and the center of Islamic learning. I studied there. I used to take classes at the al-Azhar University, which is considered to be the pre-eminent Islamic institution in the Muslim world, Chris.

MATTHEWS: Right.

GINSBERG: And the fact is that theres enormous pride going back to the history of the pharaohs. The Egyptians embrace their ancient culture. But theyre very dissatisfied with their current regime.

 MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you about the prospects were looking at as an American. Were looking at the map of the world right now and where Egypt sits in the world. Its so strategically located. It has, of course, the Nile River. It has, of course, the Panama Canal.

The Panama Canal is in Egypt?

How the hell did that happen?  Did they move the Suez Canal to Panama?

Matthews, of course, made a mistake.  A stupid, obvious mistake.  Just like we all do.  Just like I do very often in this blog, which is why I find myself frequently going back and fixing what I have written.

But Chris Matthews has no room for error here.  If Michele Bachmann is a bubble head, a screamer and a near nut-case for her (not entirely untrue) comments about the founding fathers fighting against slavery (some did), then what is Matthews for placing the Panama Canal in Egypt?

Maybe he thinks the country's head of state is Hosni Noriega too.

The moral of this story is very clear.  It has something to do with living in a glass house.  I bet you know it already.


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!!