Tuesday, 18 October 2011


Ken Berwitz

Terminal President:  hugo chavez is dying. 

Yeah, I know we all are, but I mean that he is dying quickly.  He has cancer and his doctor until a few months ago, Salvador Navarrete, thinks he will be gone within 2 years

Personally, I hope that his estimate is enormously generous.

Terminal Presidential Candidacy:  Leopoldo Lopez was one of the major candidates to be running against chavez in next year's Presidential election.  But the chavez-stacked Venezuelan supreme court has disqualified him from the race because of "corruption".  The problem?  The charges are being filed by the chavez government and there has been no trial, let alone a verdict.

Terminal Democracy:  Lamentably, the termination of Mr. Lopez's candidacy is another proof that Venezuela's democracy is also in a terminal status.  Today's Venezuela is whatever dictator chavez says it is. 

And please do not feed me any BS about chavez being an elected head of state.  He once was elected, that is true.  But since then, chavez has assured his continuance as head of state by systematically intimidating, and closing down, virtually all print and broadcast media whcih dared to criticize him.

However, there is hope.  Maybe cancer and whatever else chavez is afflicted with will take him down sooner rather than later.  Then there might be free elections and Venezuelan democracy again.

One successful termination, leading to the end of two others?  That is certainly something to hope for.


Ken Berwitz

Since the previous blog showed what a bunch of phoney-baloney hypocrites celebrities can be when it comes to left wing causes, I thought I'd show you how the New York Times - which supposedly is a venture in neutral journalism - is helping out.

In today's edition the "Letters to the Editor" section has a heading of "What Main Street Thinks About 'Occupy Wall Street'".  Under it are three letters.

Before showing them to you, let me give you the latest polling (USA Today/Gallup poll, just out), which indicates that, after a month of our "Accomplice Media" relentlessly promoting "Occupy Wall Street", it has about the same level of support - low-mid 20's - as the "Tea Party" movement, which has been ongoingly trashed by these same media for two years. 

That doesn't bode very well, does it?

In any event, given the above data you would expect that the three letters to the editor printed by the Times would at the very least, reflect a mix of opinions about it.  But that is only if you choose to forget this is the New York Times we're dealing with. 

Here are the letters.  See if you notice a lean in any particular direction:

To the Editor:

In In Private, Wall St. Bankers Dismiss Protesters as Unsophisticated (Business Day, Oct. 15), the views of one longtime money manager are summarized as follows:

He added that he was disappointed that members of Congress from New York, especially Senator Charles E. Schumer and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, had not come out swinging for an industry that donates heavily to their campaigns. They need to understand who their constituency is, he said.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, tells you everything you need to know about why I, and so many other people on Main Street, strongly support the Occupy Wall Street movement.

We want our elected officials to belong to us, not to wealthy campaign donors. We want economic and regulatory policies to be determined by whats good for the country, not by those who can spend the most obscene quantities of cash to buy the politicians and the media.

Fitchburg, Wis., Oct. 15, 2011


To the Editor:

I disagree with a bank executives assertion that its not a middle-class uprising. Whos unsophisticated here?

I am an upper-middle-class health professional with a masters degree, and I fully support Occupy Wall Street. Currently I have to work more than 60 hours a week, but if I had greater availability I would certainly be pounding the pavement with the protesters.

I strongly feel that the majority of the American middle class supports the ideals and goals of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Rockville Centre, N.Y., Oct. 15, 2011


To the Editor:

In lucidly explaining the plethora of reasons people are joining the Occupy Wall Street protests, Nicholas D. Kristof goes on to say theres a dollop of envy in those who are protesting (Americas Primal Scream, column, Oct. 16).

Envy of the high compensation of others is not the reason behind the protests. Rather, it is outrage, weariness and frustration toward those with the financial and political means who persistently manipulate the system in their favor, at the expense of and on the backs of the majority.

The majority simply wants a fair, level, democratic playing field rather than an unjust plutocracy.

New York, Oct. 16, 2011

Three letters, three statements of sympathy and support for "Occupy Wall Street". 

Gee whiz, if you didn't know better you would almost think that the New York Times is spinning its coverage in their favor.

But put that out of your mind.  The New York Times is a reputable journalistic venue that never would spin its coverage in favor of one side over the other.  Right?  I mean, right?

I wonder how much money the Times-owning Sulzberger family made last year.  I wonder if they realize that these protests are, in fact, against people just like them.  Evidently, as long as they are willing accomplices to the "Occupy Wall Street" protests, they're off the hook.  But, as the family surely knows, they better not ever give both sides of the story. 

Do they still wonder why people call them biased?

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!!