Sunday, 07 April 2013

THE QUOTE OF THE DAY

Ken Berwitz

Today's quote comes from a commenter at deadline.com, who offered his/her two cents about Dominic Patten's article, which joins me in pointing out how weak Chris Hayes' "All In" show is (and says the same about the even more dismal "(Get To) The Point" panel show which debuted on, and is quickly being scrubbed by, CNN).

Using the screen name "Whatingodsname", he/she strongly disagrees with Patten - and almost all the other commenters - that Chris Hayes's show is bombing.  Here is his/her take on the matter:

"Honestly, everyone's so freaking off here its depressing. Quality-wise, Hayes' show just came off the best first week I've ever seen for a new show. If you can't see that I'm not surprised, the entertainment biz isn't known for its social/political/cultural cerebral cortex. This town is sadly interested it itself and that's it. Chris Hayes leading into Maddow is no small thing. Take a good look, we are all watching history. These two will go down as the best thinkers in cable news history."

Chris Hayes' show had the best first week ever?  He and Rachel "I'm just as left wing as you, Chris, and don't you ever forget it" Maddow are the two best thinkers in cable news history?

That comment deserves "quote of the day" honors just for the entertainment value it provided me - as physically evidenced by my jaw dropping, quickly followed by a belly laugh.

Thanks "Whatingodsname".  I needed that.


THE HAYES MISTAKE

Ken Berwitz

When it was announced that Ed Schultz was being removed from his prime time (8:00PM) weeknight show on MSNBC, to be replaced by mega-weenie Chris Hayes, I wrote that, although I am no fan of Schultz, this was a big mistake.  Like him or not, Schultz did at least sound like an everyday human being instead of a left wing university philosophy department's wet dream, and he did generate at least something of an audience against Bill O'Reilly.

Well, not surprisingly, MSNBC did not take my advice and, as of this past week Hayes's show "All In" is O'Reilly's competition.  So I thought I would take a look at the ratings and see how it's working out at this early date.

On Thursday - still in the first week of "All In", when you might expect it would get a rush of curiosity-seeking viewers to bolster ratings, O'Reilly trounces Hayes with almost 2 1/2 times the vewership among 25-54's (498,000 to 220,000), and massacres him among all viewers (3,006,000 to 655,000).

But, to be fair, we should look at more than one day.  So here's Wednesday:  Among 25 - 54's, it is O'Reilly at 353,000 to Hayes' 142,000, and among all viewers it is O'Reilly at 2,513,000 to Hayes' 585,000. 

Not only are Hayes' numbers lower than what Ed Schultz put up but, while Schultz held second place versus O'Reilly, Hayes - even in his first week with the curiosity-seekers (many of whom presumably will abandon him very quickly) is in third place, behind both O'Reilly and Nancy Grace on HLN. 

Meanwhile, Ed Schultz has been consigned to late-afternoon weekend (the equivalent of a restaurant seating you next to the kitchen door or the toilet), and, so far as I know, there is no start date for his new show (not that anyone is likely to notice).

Can the "brain trust" at MSNBC possibly have been this dumb? 

Well.............yep.


THE (SORRY) STATE OF THE UNION

Ken Berwitz

Victor Davis Hanson, of nationalreview.com, has written an excellent summary of the current state of the nation.

If we had anything that even charitably passed for neutral media, Mr. Hanson's piece would be an afterthought.  What he writes has been out there long enough so that, by doing nothing other than straight reporting, mainstream media should have indelibly imprinted it in our minds by now.

But, in the era of Obama and his Accomplice Media?  You have to work to find out anything at all is less than perfect.

For this reason I strongly urge you to read Mr. Hanson's analysis, which lays things out so clearly that even a hardline Obama supporter will have to stop and take notice. 

But, in the meantime, I'll give you just one paragraph - which, due to its legnth and content, probably could stand by itself as an entire blog on the subject:

The thousands of columns written in the last four years warning that Obama's therapeutic foreign-policy approach would eventually lead to a Carter-like, 1979-80 reckoning are now proving true, whether we look at the implosion in Egypt, the lunatic North Korea action, Iran's continual trajectory to the bomb, the reset/reset with Russia, the rising tensions between Japan and China, and the bewilderment of our allies - the common denominator being that most observers abroad assume the U.S. will talk loudly and offer moral sermons continually, and that's about it: no worse friend, no better enemy. The perpetual Obama campaigning, the endless "pay your fair share" boilerplate, the courting of the 1 percent fundraising elites, the appointment of insider grandees such as Jack Lew, and the presidential aristocratic lifestyle in hard times have made the reformist, egalitarian sermons of 2008 a cruel joke. Utopian dreams of U.N. intervention in arms sales, radical reform of the way food aid is purchased and dispensed, and opposition to Keystone and new federal oil and gas leases have bewildered a lot of Democratic Senate and House members. All of the above takes place in an economy that officially got out of recession almost four years ago, but is in a permanent rut of chronic high employment, continual massive deficits, ballooning debt, radical spikes in entitlement costs, and near-zero percent interest rates.

Is Mr. Hanson wrong?  Does he exaggerate?

This is the USA under Barack Obama.  The real one, not the sugar-coated fantasy world portrayed by so many in our supposedly "neutral" media. 

And, yes, this is the man who, with massive help from that same media, we re-elected for another four years.  Enough of us saw what was in front of our eyes and believed the carnival barkers posing as journalists anyway.

We have no one to blame but ourselves.


PRESIDENT OBAMA'S NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TEST

Ken Berwitz

He didn't call it a national intelligence test, he called it his weekly radio address.  But it has to be a test.

Read this excerpt and you'll see why:

"My budget will reduce our deficits not with aimless, reckless spending cuts that hurt students and seniors and middle-class families - but through the balanced approach that the American people prefer, and the investments that a growing economy demands.  Now, the truth is, our deficits are already shrinking. That's a fact. I've already signed more than $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction into law, and my budget will reduce our deficits by nearly $2 trillion more, without harming the recovery. That surpasses the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction that many economists believe will stabilize our finances."

Is it not obvious that this is a test?

An "already shrinking" deficit?  When Barack Obama  took office, the last Bush budget (prior to Mr. Obama's so-called "stimulus package") showed a deficit of slightly over $400 billion dollars...which was awful.  By contrast, every Obama budget - including the ones projected for years and years from now - shows a deficit of well over $1 TRILLION dollars.  This, we are being told, is a shrinking deficit.

A "recovery"?  We have virtually no GDP growth, along with an unemployment rate that spent four years in the stratosphere and is just now down to where it was the day Mr. Obama won the presidency - only because so many people have dropped out of the workforce altogether (the worst in 31 years).  Without these millions and millions of dropouts, unemployment would be closer to 10% than its current 7.6%.  And that is before we get to the huge increase in food stamp recipients....nearly 20 million more users since Mr. Obama  took office.

So this must  be a test, mustn't  it?   This must be a test to see if we are so stupid, so ignorant, and/or our memories are so faulty, that we do not realize that he is handing us a hot steamy load of what Bulls produce after meals.

The sad part is, that there are people - and plenty of them - who are going to buy every word Barack Obama said.  

Please, please, for your own sake,  do not be one of them.

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

CORRECTION:  This blog makes the claim that worforce participation is at its lowest in 31 years. 

It turns out that is incorrect.  In fact, we currently have the lowest worforce participation since May, 1979 - 34 years ago, not 31.

I apologize to Barack Obama for underestimating how many people have given up looking for work and dropped out of the workforce since he took office.  Given that this is one of his major accomplishments as President, I should have reported it more accurately.

Zeke ..... ..... ...... Honey, I Shrunk the Budget ! ! ..... . . . . . . Oh, wait. ...... ...... ..... Honey, I Shrunk the Economy ! ! ! ...... .. ....... ..... (04/07/13)

Zeke ..... ..... ...... Honey, I Shrunk the Budget ! ! ..... . . . . . . Oh, wait. ...... ...... ..... Honey, I Shrunk the Economy ! ! ! ...... .. ....... ..... (04/07/13)


KIM JUNG-UN: SOMETHING TO SNICKER ABOUT

Ken Berwitz

With a tip of the hat (if I ever wear one) to our pal Public Relations Ann, we have this:

Photo

Who knew there could be anything funny about this idiot?  But there it is.

And with that:  good night!

 

 


OBAMACHAOS

Ken Berwitz

Just how disastrous is ObamaCare?  Just how much harm will it do to pretty much everyone -- other than the takers in our country (currentlya huge number of people, and growing every day)?

Peter Ferraro, writing for forbes.com, has laid out the carnage in an absolute must-read piece that will make you wish you never heard the term "ObamaCare". 

Here are a few excerpts from Mr. Ferraro's analysis.  To paraphrase the great poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, look on Mr. Obama's works,  ye privately insured taxpayer, and despair:

Most supporters of Obamacare embraced it because of a principled belief that everyone should have access to essential healthcare.  But even the establishment, still Democrat dominated, CBO admits that after 10 years of implementation, Obamacare will still leave 30 million uninsured.

Just wait until the broad realization dawns that the harsh reality of Obamacare is that tens of millions will lose their employer provided insurance because of the perverse incentives under the program. 

Obama campaigned in 2008 on a promise that Obamacare would reduce the cost of health insurance by $2,500 for average families.  But since Obamacare passed, the cost of an average family policy has already increased by $3,000. 

Does that look like the right health care system for this country?  For any country?  Little wonder that virtually every poll shows most people want it either dramatically changed or repealed altogether.

Yet this is what Obama & Co. are desperately trying to shove down our throats.  And we, the voters, have given him four more years to do it. 

Earlier, I mentioned Percy Bysshe Shelley.  Let me end by noting that his wife, Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin Shelley, wrote Frankenstein. 

It occurs to me that, if the main character of that work - a doctor, let's remember - were alive today, he would probably be a prime advocate for ObamaCare. 

One look at what this monstrosity of a "plan" entails, would have sold him but good.


OBAMACHAOS

Ken Berwitz

Just how disastrous is ObamaCare?  Just how much harm will it do to pretty much everyone -- other than the takers in our country (currentlya huge number of people, and growing every day)?

Peter Ferraro, writing for forbes.com, has laid out the carnage in an absolute must-read piece that will make you wish you never heard the term "ObamaCare". 

Here are a few excerpts from Mr. Ferraro's analysis.  To paraphrase the great poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, look on Mr. Obama's works,  ye privately insured taxpayer, and despair:

Most supporters of Obamacare embraced it because of a principled belief that everyone should have access to essential healthcare.  But even the establishment, still Democrat dominated, CBO admits that after 10 years of implementation, Obamacare will still leave 30 million uninsured.

Just wait until the broad realization dawns that the harsh reality of Obamacare is that tens of millions will lose their employer provided insurance because of the perverse incentives under the program. 

Obama campaigned in 2008 on a promise that Obamacare would reduce the cost of health insurance by $2,500 for average families.  But since Obamacare passed, the cost of an average family policy has already increased by $3,000. 

Does that look like the right health care system for this country?  For any country?  Little wonder that virtually every poll shows most people want it either dramatically changed or repealed altogether.

Yet this is what Obama & Co. are desperately trying to shove down our throats.  And we, the voters, have given him four more years to do it. 

Earlier, I mentioned Percy Bysshe Shelley.  Let me end by noting that his wife, Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin Shelley, wrote Frankenstein. 

It occurs to me that, if the main character of that work - a doctor, let's remember - were alive today, he would probably be a prime advocate for ObamaCare. 

One look at what this monstrosity of a "plan" entails, would have sold him but good.


FRANK LAUTENBERG: WILL HE BE REPLACED?

Ken Berwitz

Senator Frank Lautenberg, the stalwart left-wing Democrat from New Jersey, has spent little time at his job in recent months, will not be there next week, and has offered no indication of when he will return...or if he will return at all.

Mr. Lautenberg, who has said he will not seek re-election next year, is 89 years old and apparently in frail health. 

If he is forced to retire, it will be Republican Governor Chris Christie who picks his successor -- which means, with about 99% certainty, that New Jersey will find itself with a Republican Senator, and almost two year to establish his/her credentials for the 2014 election.

Stay tuned.....


THE HAYES MISTAKE

Ken Berwitz

When it was announced that Ed Schultz was being removed from his prime time (8:00PM) weeknight show on MSNBC, to be replaced by mega-weenie Chris Hayes, I wrote that, although I am no fan of Schultz, this was a big mistake.  Like him or not, Schultz did at least sound like an everyday human being instead of a left wing university philosophy department's wet dream, and he did generate at least something of an audience against Bill O'Reilly.

Well, not surprisingly, MSNBC did not take my advice and, as of this past week Hayes's show "All In" is O'Reilly's competition.  So I thought I would take a look at the ratings and see how it's working out at this early date.

On Thursday - still in the first week of "All In", when you might expect it would get a rush of curiosity-seeking viewers to bolster ratings, O'Reilly trounces Hayes with almost 2 1/2 times the vewership among 25-54's (498,000 to 220,000), and massacres him among all viewers (3,006,000 to 655,000).

But, to be fair, we should look at more than one day.  So here's Wednesday:  Among 25 - 54's, it is O'Reilly at 353,000 to Hayes' 142,000, and among all viewers it is O'Reilly at 2,513,000 to Hayes' 585,000. 

Not only are Hayes' numbers lower than what Ed Schultz put up but, while Schultz held second place versus O'Reilly, Hayes - even in his first week with the curiosity-seekers (many of whom presumably will abandon him very quickly) is in third place, behind both O'Reilly and Nancy Grace on HLN. 

Meanwhile, Ed Schultz has been consigned to late-afternoon weekend (the equivalent of a restaurant seating you next to the kitchen door or the toilet), and, so far as I know, there is no start date for his new show (not that anyone is likely to notice).

Can the "brain trust" at MSNBC possibly have been this dumb? 

Well.............yep.


CNN: TWO SMART DECISIONS

Ken Berwitz

It has been a long time since I have been able to blog positive news about CNN.  But, to its credit, the network has now made two very smart decisions, and they should be noted.

The first was when it coaxed Jake Tapper away from ABC News.  Tapper is an excellent newsperson, and one of the relatively few who are willing to see more than one side of an issue. 

And now it is reported that the network is bringing back "Crossfire", the contentious, often raucous left-right battle royal it aired from 1982, when Cable was in its infancy, to its cancellation in 2005. 

The first co-hosts of "Crossfire" were Pat Buchanan on the right and Tom Braden on the left.  They had been doing a sort of "Crossfire" format on radio and CNN brought them aboard. 

In my personal opinion, that show, as much as anything, propelled CNN to the top of Cable News.

Now that it is scraping the bottom viewership-wise and needs an upward jolt, the new "Crossfire" show - if the hosts are good and CNN doesn't screw it up by toying too much with the format - might be just what the doctor ordered.  In any event, I credit CNN with enough smarts to give it a try. 

Maybe they can wrest Ed Schultz from MSNBC to be their left-wing debater, and put the show on head-up against Chris Hayes.  I have no idea if Schultz is capable of this kind of format (he avoided having conservatives on his show like Dracula avoiding the cross, so who knows if he can debate them) but, if he is, that, by itself, might make it worth watching.

It's certainly better than what MSNBC has in store for him, isn't it?


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!!