Friday, 25 May 2012


Ken Berwitz

Elizabeth Warren is on the warpath.

She is angry.  She is exasperated. 

Why?  Because she will not admit her native American heritage is a fantasy, so media keep asking her for some - any - proof of it.  And she has no proof to offer.

The latest explanation for maintaining her claim to Cherokee (or is it Delaware) indian heritage?  Mommy said so.  I kid you not, that is what she said.

Read this excerpt from MJ Lee's article at, and see for yourself:

An exasperated Elizabeth Warren told reporters Thursday that shes certain about her Native American roots because my mother told me so.

Surrounded by a group of reporters, the Democratic Massachusetts Senate candidate was repeatedly questioned about why she hasnt produced documentation to prove that she is part Native American. After several minutes of grilling, Warren said, I am proud of my family and I am proud of my heritage.

And does it include Indian background? one reporter asked, according to the first report by that was aired on several local Boston TV stations..

Yes! Yes! Warren said.

How do you know that?

Warren answered, Because my mother told me so. This is how I live. My mother, my grandmother, my family. This is my family. Scott Brown has launched attacks on my family. I am not backing off from my family.

Why is Elizabeth Warren so angry?  Why is she making war on the media?  What is the reason that, without any documentation of a native American background whatsoever, she keeps claiming one anyway, and hoping against hope that media will stop asking about it? 

Is there more to this than just perpetuating family lore?  You bet there is.

For decades, Ms. Warren has used her phony native American background to claim minority status. And within the academic world's bizarre, self-contradictory policy of  "we are against racial discrimination, but if you are a minority we move you to the front of the line", that status has moved her along faster than if she were just some White teacher from Oklahoma.   

It has also enabled the schools Ms. Warren has taught at, most notably Harvard University, to proudly make claims about the diversity of their faculty. 

If Elizabeth Warren's native American heritage does not exist, therefore, it means Harvard's use of Ms. Warren to show the diversity of its law school faculty has been a fraud.  How do you suppose the powers that be at Harvard would react to being made fools off all these years?  What do you think that would do for Elizabeth Warren's longevity as a professor there?

See, there is a lot at stake in perpetuating this lie.  And, evidently, Ms. Warren apparently thinks she is in too deep to admit the truth. 

Morally, she is dead wrong....though, politically, she does have a point (who ever associated morality with politics anyway?).

Sir Walter Scott said "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive".  Professor Elizabeth Warren might want to mention that to her mother the next time they chat.

And, as suggested in previous blogs, Ms. Warren might also want to think about how to do her Democrat cohorts a big favor, and withdraw her candidacy for the senate. 

Zeke Deceive .... as Sir Walter would write. ..... .... .... And yes, the Left is all about Deception and Deceit. .... ..... Truth is a useless affectation to these people. .... .... Voter ID, anyone ? ...... ..... (05/25/12)


Ken Berwitz

There is fantasy and there is reality.

Fantasy was Rex Nutting's piece at MarketWatch, which, to the delight of the left, suggested that Barack Obama is as tight with a taxpayer dollar as Ebenezer Scrooge.

The claim, of course, was preposterous.  And many venues - this one included - have already debunked Nutting's made-for-Democrats analysis.  But Investors Business Daily's editorial takedown goes a step further by providing information no one else offered, so I am posting this link for you to read it.

Here are a few excerpts:

 Nutting...made two significant mistakes that have the effect of hiding Obama's huge spending spree, mistakes that even Nutting's conservative critics missed.

The first is that Nutting apparently failed to understand how the government accounted for TARP in the federal budget.

Because Nutting didn't factor this in, he ends up greatly exaggerating spending under Bush in 2009 which Nutting counts as Bush's last budget since the first four months were on Bush's watch and undercounting Obama's real spending hikes in 2010. (We asked Nutting by email if he was aware of this oversight and have not heard back.)

In addition, Nutting failed to account for the fact that the government was also busy bailing out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, with the bulk of the bailout money going out in 2009, and then quickly tapering off in 2010 and 2011. That, too, artificially boosted spending levels in 2009.

Just how much of a difference does this make?

Nutting says spending under Bush shot up 17.9% between 2008 and 2009.

But when you subtract the effects of TARP, the Fannie/Freddie bailouts as well as the $115 billion in stimulus money Obama added in 2009, that figure drops to 6%.

And while Nutting claims Obama cut spending 1.8% between 2009 and 2010, when you fix Nutting's mistakes, it turns out that Obama jacked up spending 12% in 2010.

That sure looks like a "spending binge" to us.

Of course, much of the confusion about who's a big spender is easily resolved by looking at government spending as a share of GDP, which is the most reliable calculus since it measures government's claim on the entire economy.

In Obama's first term, federal spending will average 23.8% of GDP, according to the CBO.

For those keeping score, that's higher than it's ever been since World War II. And it's more than twice as high as it ever got during the Great Depression.

It's bad enough that we have to deal with Obama's constant efforts to distort his own dismal record. It's far worse when members of the mainstream press do his dirty work for him.

Remember, these are only excerpts.  I strongly urge you to read the entire piece so you can fully understand just how egregiously wrong Nutting was, and how egregious a spendthrift Barack Obama was, is, and almost certainly will be if we inflict him on ourselves for another four years.

In a previous blog I mentioned that I do not know Rex Nutting's political leanings.  But, somehow, I doubt that he will be a delegate to the 2012 Republican National Convention.......

Steve Schneider Nutting not Nutter. (05/25/12)

Steve Schneider Politifact concluded that Nutters assessment was mostly true. I thought politifact was non partisan am I wrong about them and am I missing something about Nutters result? My interpretation would give it 4 Pinochios. (05/25/12)

Ken Berwitz All you have to know is that Nutting put the "stimulus package" on Bush's side of the ledger, not Obama's. Game, set, match right there. (05/25/12)


Ken Berwitz

If Pulitzer created a category for "Talk show hosts who can dish it out, but can't take it", Chris Matthews would be in for the lifetime achievement award.

Matthews, as you probably know, is a man whose signature "attribute" (if you want to call it that) on MSNBC is viciously, offensively, personally insulting people he disagrees with - virtually always conservatives, of course - on a daily basis.  But what happens when Matthews is asked a simple question about a comment he himself made, which he now finds embarrassing? 

To explore this question, we first go back to February 12, 2008.  Then-Senator Barack Obama had just won the Democrat primaries in Washington DC, Virginia and Maryland, and made a victory speech.  Chris Matthews, who - then and now as well - is fond of claiming that he is "absolutley nonpartisan" (despite his long career working for Democrats such as Tip O'Neill and jimmy carter), had this to say about it:

"I have to tell you, you know, it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often."

Barack Obama gave Chris Matthews a thrill going up his leg?  You don't hear that kind of political assessment every day.   Not surprisingly, it has become a memorable indicator of Mr. Matthews' strong preference for Barack Obama.

Ok, now let's fast-forward to Tuesday, when Matthews was part of a panel at the National Television & Cable Communications convention.  One of the attendees, C-Span's Senior Executive Producer/Political Editor/Sunday show host, Steve Scully, asked Matthews if he still felt that way.

Here is a verbatim account of what happened.  The bold print is mine:

STEVE SCULLY: Im going to read this as a quote so I get this right. Im going to ask you a yes or no question. Chris Matthews, just yes or no, good luck, quote from 2008: I have to tell you its part of reporting this election the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obamas speech, my I felt this thrill going up my leg, I mean I dont have that too often. Is the thrill still there today?

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well, I had, actually if you had done your reporting over at C-SPAN, you would have checked that I said the exact same thing in 2004 after I heard his address up here in Boston.

SCULLY: This is 2012.

MATTHEWS: No, I said this in 2004.

SCULLY: No, but is it there today?

MATTHEWS: I know, I want to help you with your reporting first. I also said, thereafter in 2004, which you didnt pick up, when I said four years ahead of time weve just heard the first African-American President, which is on the tape as well, which you failed to mention, which makes me look a little sharper. But you didnt offer that...

And when he talks about it the way he did, thats my definition of American exceptionalism. Im thrilled as I speak about it now. I think this is the great country and Im thrilled by it and Im willing to say this, and I meant to say as part of my reporting because I felt it. A guy like Tom Brokaw wouldnt have said it. Im an un-traditional person, but I have traditional values and I love the country and I said so. Perhaps I shouldnt have said so because Ive given a lot of jackasses a chance to talk about it.

SCULLY: Thank you, Chris.

MATTHEWS: So I hope you feel satisfied that you raised the most obvious question that is raised by every horses ass right winger I ever bump into. And usually they say tingle, which tells me about their orientation, but thats alright.

Nasty.  Arrogant.   Self-congratulatory.  Viciously insulting.  All the MSNBC food groups.

And how did you like that sneering reference to the "orientation" of anyone who would dare ask a yes-no question of The Great And Powerful Matthews?  What would he have said if Mitt Romney, or any other Republican, ever made a similarly homophobic crack?

You may gather from this that I don't have much regard for Chris Matthews.  If so you would be right. 

At one time I admired Matthews as a very smart guy who was excellent at turning a phrase.  Now he is just a nasty, vituperative joke.

Tingle on that, Chris.


Ken Berwitz

Question:  What kind of judge would fine, and jail, a 17 year old girl - one of three children abandoned by their parents, who is working at two jobs to support her siblings while still managing to be an honor student - for missing too many classes? 

Answer:  An absolute idiot. 

This is not a hypothetical either.  From CBS News - Houston:

A 17-year-old high school honor student who works two jobs and financially supports her two siblings is heading into summer on a sour note after spending a night in jail for being too tired to attend school.

Diane Tran was arrested in open court and sentenced to 24 hours in jail Wednesday after being repeatedly truant due to exhaustion. KHOU reports that Tran, a junior at Willis High School, was warned by Judge Lanny Moriarty last month to stop missing school. When she missed classes again this month, Moriarty wanted to make an example of Tran.

If you let one (truant student) run loose, what are you gonna do with the rest of em? Let them go too? Moriarty asked, according to KHOU.

Tran told KHOU that in addition to taking advanced and honors classes, she works full-time and part-time jobs in an effort to try to support her older brother at Texas A&M and a younger sister in the Houston area. After Trans parents divorced, they both moved away from the honor student and her two siblings.

Tran was also fined $100.

I wish I could say what you just read is nothing more than a tasteless sick joke.  It certainly is tasteless.  It certainly is sick.  And, in ironic terms, it certainly is a joke. 

Incredibly, however, it is all too real.

This idiot has decided that a teenager taking on an impossible burden on behalf of her family - and still managing to stay an honor student - is running loose and has to be made an example of.   

If there is a judge in Houston who has a brain - lanny moriarty obviously excluded - he/she should be trying to find out how to get the parents of these children to start supporting their family.  At the very least they should be sending money to them (if I were one of those children, I'd never want to physically see my parents again -- what kind of mother and father would divorce, then abandon their family?)  

Fortunately, there is at least somewhat of a happy side to the story:

-According to another article, this one from KHOU-TV, One of Diane Trans employers is allowing her and her sister to live with them.  That's very decent.

-Also according to this article, now that Diane's situation has become known to the public, many offers of help are pouring in.  That is very decent as well.

But I have a request.  When those decent people are finished helping the Tran children, maybe they can sign a petition to remove lanny moriarty from the bench.  If ever a "man" was less suited to being a judge, this idiot is the one.

Roy bean this guy is a disgrace to Texas & the bench.We cant remove him soon enough!!!!! (05/27/12)

Ariane I wholeheartedly agree with you. That judge is a piece of work. It is he who should be spending the night in jail on account of his poor decision making. What a twit! (05/26/12)

Roy bean this guy is a disgrace to Texas & the bench.We cant remove him soon enough!!!!! (05/27/12)

maxine howard I will sign the petition have this judge removed, gladly. (05/26/12)

Mr. Hate Judge Lanny Moriarty Basically, this man has no feelings, no sympathy, nothing. He is like a robot, who follows the command of one thing: penalizing hard working students. This man doesn't deserve to be a judge. You need morals and capability to think. This man can't do either. He knows nothing about "exceptions" and that this girl might just be trying hard to live. Obviously, hes just stupid. I hope this man gets fired. Rather than upholding the freedom we fight for as americans, this man comes and destroys it. Judges are technically right at all accounts. This man doesnt deserve that privilege. If he doesn't get fired, I hope he at least stays in jail. (05/26/12)

Chris There's already a petition started to remove Judge Lanny Moriarty from the bench - I can't post a URL here but if you search change dot org or google for it, you will find it. (05/31/12)

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!!