Friday, 28 June 2013

THE LIE-RS SCANDAL (CONT.): CONTEMPT CHARGES?

Ken Berwitz

Here's some good news about the Lie-RS scandal - if you care about honest government, that is.

lois lerner, the present or former (depending on who you believe) head of the IRS tax exempt division - she's the one who essentially told the house Oversight and Government Reform Committee, along with the rest of the USA, to go to hell, by refusing to testify about her division's targeting of conservative/religious groups - may be forced to haul her sorry butt back in that committee room and either start talking or be held in contempt.

Excerpted from Kim Dixon's article for Reuters:

An IRS official effectively waived her right not to testify about the tax agency's targeting of conservative groups, a Republican-led congressional committee concluded on Friday in a vote that cleared the way for Congress to hold her in contempt.

Lois Lerner, former head of the Internal Revenue Service's tax-exempt division, angered Republicans last month when she invoked her constitutional right not to answer their questions at a hearing.

 

By reading a statement telling lawmakers that she did "nothing wrong" before invoking her Fifth Amendment protections, some Republicans said that Lerner waived her rights.

The Oversight and Government Reform Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives approved on a party-line vote a Republican resolution on Friday saying that Lerner did waive her Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.

The vote could clear the way for Republicans to haul Lerner back before the committee, where she would likely again invoke her Fifth Amendment rights. That would likely lead to a vote to hold her in contempt of Congress, Republican aides said.

A contempt of Congress vote could lead to her being prosecuted in a court and subject her to a maximum $1,000 fine and potential 12-month prison sentence. Lerner is now on administrative leave and has been replaced in her post.
 

If we had neutral media in this country - i.e. media which report on facts, instead of selectively deciding what we should and should not know about this administration - I believe they would be outraged by lerner's disgusting performance; and doubly outraged by the fact that, immediately afterward, lerner was put on "administrative leave" - i.e. no work but full pay. 

But since we have an Accomplice Media, perfectly content to either downplay this huge scandal or bury it altogether on behalf of Obama and his fellow Democrats, many if not most of them probably don't even know that these events are taking place.  

Unbelievable.  These frauds claim there is no money to run tours of the White House for schoolchildren.  But they can find plenty of money to reward a reprehensible excuse for a government employee like this one.

How dare lois lerner claim she is innocent...and then refuse to answer any questions, like some kind of mafia hood  And how dare every Democrat on this committee bend over to support her obvious cover-up.

I cannot tell you how much I am rooting for her to be back in that chair.  I cannot wait for her to try this again - which she will no doubt do, since there is no good explanation for the crap she pulled on behalf of Obama & Co. - and be held in contempt.

Bring it on.  lerner certainly deserves it, and people interested in honest government should demand it.

free` Ken, Your definition of Accomplice Media is proven in the 2nd paragraph of the report. notice how it says "angered Republicans" -- I was and am angered by it and I am not a Republican. I would be willing to bet others that aren't Repubs are angry about it also. (06/28/13)


ABORTION AND WOMEN'S HEALTH

Ken Berwitz

I read National Review's Jonah Goldberg a lot, and often - not always, but often - agree with what he has to say.

That said, Mr. Goldberg's latest column, on abortion as a "women's health care" issue, may well be the single best thing I have ever seen from him.

I almost hesitate to post excerpts, because it might dissuade some folks from using the link and reading every word.  But, with the plea that you do read it all, I will put up several of his points:

...the right to have (an abortion) is not synonymous with a woman's health.

But don't tell that to the liberal group Think Progress. On Twitter, it recently teased some shocking news: "Why 2013 is shaping up to be the worst year for woman's [sic] health in modern history."

When I followed to the linked story, there was nothing about a spike in cervical or breast cancer rates. Nothing about occupational safety for female workers and no mention of female life expectancy either. Instead, the story was about how the ACLU says anti-abortion laws are on the rise across the country.

Under the headline "Losing the Global Fight for Women's Health," Luisita Lopez Torregrosa, the "Female Factor" columnist for the international edition of the New York Times, writes of the allegedly horrific threat to women's health posed by restrictive abortion laws in places like Africa, Asia and Latin America. She makes no mention of the estimated 160 million women "missing" in Asia alone who were killed in gender-selective abortions.

...President Obama -- and nearly every other abortion-rights supporter -- blithely accuses Republicans of wanting to make women's "health care choices" for them.

How odd from the eponymous father of Obamacare, which will mandate that women (and men) pay for insurance coverage they don't need. It will cause many women (and men) to lose their existing health care plans. It will empower bureaucrats to decide what treatments for women (and men) the government will reimburse and which it won't.

By any objective measure, liberals are far more eager to use the government to make health care decisions for women, because liberals want to make health care decisions for all Americans.

It's the abortion-rights extremists who boil down the vast range of issues and choices raised by the term "women's health" to a single issue: sexual reproduction, as if women were nothing more than breeders. And yet conservatives are the ones who're called sexists.

Does Jonah Goldberg make cogent points?  Well, you just read some of them (and, I again hope, all the rest of them as well, via my link to his entire piece on the subject).  You tell me.

Few issues generate more hypocrisy, more stone-throwing from glass houses, than abortion.  And Mr. Goldberg lays them out for us beautifully. 

Thank you, sir.


DESPERATELY PROPPING UP RACHEL JEANTEL

Ken Berwitz

If this were not a trial to determine whether George Zimmerman will or will not spend the rest of his life in jail, this would actually be pretty funny.

But it is, so this isn't funny at all.

The left - and I include within that category a large component of what passes for mainstream media these days - is desperately trying to convince us that Rachel Jeantel, generally considered by both sides to be the prosecution's star witness, is credible. -- which, of course, she is not, since she has been caught in lie after lie.

So, faced with her history of lying, and - as of yesterday's testimony - her baseless presumption that Trayvon Martin was being beaten by George Zimmerman instead of the other way around, which was decminated by the defense in open court, what's left?

Well, here, excerpted from her latest article, is the way slate.com's Mary Elizabeth Williams is your answer (bold print is mine):

Jeantel does not fit the comfortable image of the grieving girl. As Rachel Samara wrote Wednesday in Global Grind, "A predominantly white jury is not going to like Rachel Jeantel," a girl "who has no media training and who is fully entrenched in a hostile environment." There is confusion over whether or not she was Martin's girlfriend, which eradicates her chances of being depicted as a devastated young quasi-widow. On the stand, she has been blunt, hostile and at times seemingly confused. Online, she has a documented history that includes partying. She is not thin or blond or demure. So there goes her credibility.

Here is what is true about Jeantel. She has publicly admitted to underage drinking and getting high. She is a poor speller (at least on social media). Her way with words is not calculated to win favor - she has testified that Martin told her "a creepy-ass cracker" was following him. She has responded to the defense's line of questioning with an icy "You got it?" and "That's retarded, sir. The Daily News describes her diction as "often difficult-to-understand" and says it's cringe-worthy" and "humiliating" that she couldn't read a letter out loud on the stand because she says, "I dont read cursive." Jeantel has also admitted to law enforcement that she lied about her initial claim that she didn't attend Martin's funeral because she was hospitalized at the time; she now says that she felt too "guilty" to face his parents and "didn't want to see the body." She admits that at the beginning of the investigation, she said she was under 18, because she didn't want to get involved. She is unpolished and emotional.

So is she a reliable witness? That's yet to be determined.

Dear Ms. Williams:  I'm shocked...shocked...to find that your first (and only) line of defense for Rachel Jeantel is her race.  After all, when have we ever heard the left rely on race before (feel free to wipe the glob of sarcasm from your monitor any time you care to).

That, I strongly suspect, is why you detail Ms. Jeantel's many deficiencies as a credible witness only after establishing your racial premise.  Because the racial premise is all you've got to prop her up.

Yes, it is true that we cannot be 100% sure the jury will deem Ms. Jeantel unreliable;  neither of us has a functioning crystal ball. 

But you know she is unreliable, don't you?  Read your own words, it's right there.

So do us a favor and stash the "She is not thin, blonde and demure.  So there goes her credibility" crap.  If Ms. Jeantel were thin, blonde and demure, and lied that way, she would be a lousy witness no more or less than if she were not any of those things. 

By the way, have you yet noticed that the only one who actually is injecting race into this equation is you?


THE QUOTE OF THE DAY

Ken Berwitz

Today's quote comes to us from Khadijah Costley White, who is identified as a faculty member in the Department of Journalism and Media Studies at Rutgers University in New Brunswick (New Jersey).

It is in the form of one paragraph from a written apology Mr. White has written, "on behalf of the world", to Rachel Jeantel, who spent much of Wednesday and Thursday testifying at the trial of George Zimmerman. 

Here is what Ms. White wrote to Ms. Jeantel:

"I want to write you an apology for this whole world, even if it's not my place to apologize. I'm so sorry that you're sitting on the stand right now, being interrogated like a criminal instead of another victim. I'm so sorry that people are judging you, fixated more on your beautiful brown skin, your carefully applied make-up, your body, your being, than your trauma and your pain. I'm sorry that you were born into a country where a man can pursue and kill a black boy, your friend, and go home the same night with the blessings of law enforcement officers. I'm sorry that you've been retraumatized, stigmatized, defamed, and attacked just because you were unlucky enough to love a black boy, to share time with him, to be the last one he ever called."

This is the thought process of a faculty member at a college? Yikes.

To review:

-Ms. White apologizes on behalf of the world ("...Khadijah Costley White wants to apologize to her on behalf of the world." is stated prior to the beginning of the letter), for the world (mentioned in the first sentence of this paragraph). I guess that means she is apologizing to the people who, themselves, should be apologizing.  Or something.

-And what is this apology for?  Because, as a witness in a trial that might put a man in prison for life, Ms. Jeantel had to answer questions not just from the prosecution but from the defense as well?  Oh, the inhumanity.

-The reference to her "beautiful brown skin" seems to me overtly racist. How about you?

-The reference to her "carefully applied make-up" and her body seems defensive, sexist, or both.  Your call.

-The comment about Zimmerman pursuing and killing "a black boy" not only judges the case before the trial is over, but establishes clearly that Ms. White sees this only in racial terms.

-The comment that Rachel Jeantel has been "retraumatized, stigmatized, defamed, and attacked" for nothing other than that she loved a black boy", not only ignores the fact that Ms. Jeantel - by her own grudging admission - has lied over and over again, but introduces race into the equation a third time.

I wonder if Ms. White is aware that, after almost a year and a half of opportunity to find a pattern of racism in George Zimmerman's life, no seems able to find any such thing.  What have been found are specific examples of the exact opposite (e.g. Zimmerman's mentoring of Black children, his demands that a police officer's son be held to account for an attack on a Black homeless man).

Personally, I strongly suspect Ms. White knows this perfectly well.  But, as with Mary Elizabeth Williams in my previous post, she needs to concoct a racism narrative because that's all she's got

In other words, the racism is not found with George Zimmerman, it is found with Khadijah Costley White.

Ironically - and tragically - the true victims of knee-jerk racist claims like this one, are Black people.  Because, like the boy who cried wolf, the next time there actually is a racist-inspired attack on a Black person, you can bet there will be people dismissing it out of hand, on the grounds that Black people make this claim about everything, so why believe it now?

With great sadness, I would remind Ms. White that trivializing racism - which most certainly is alive and well both in and out of the USA - makes real racism that much harder to fight.

I wish I had a more elevated reason for handing out today's Quote Of The Day award, but I don't. 

For sheer, unadulterated racism, Khadijah Costley White is the "winner".  I hope for her sake she doesn't "win" many more this way.


THE NETS' TRADE

Ken Berwitz

Nothing to do with politics, but......

The Brooklyn Nets made an astonishing trade yesterday, just before the NBA draft, acquiring surefire hall of famers Paul Pierce and  Kevin Garnett, along with Jason Terry, from the Boston Celtics, for Kris Humphries (whom the Nets desperately wanted to unload, just like little Kimmy Kardashian did), Reggie Evans (great rebounder but no offensive game), Gerald Wallace (very good defense, also no offensive game) and three first round draft picks over the next five years (that's eternity in sports, so who knows how those draft picks will work out?).

Now, every member of the Nets' starting team has been an all-star in the past two years.  And they have at least a decent bench, especially if they retain Andre Blatch, which seems pretty likely.

Yeah, Pierce and Garnett are up there in age, and that, in and of itself, has risks.  But in one fell swoop the Nets have gone from a decent, above-.500 team, likely to go bye-bye in an early playoff round, to a genuine title contender.  Wow.

All kudos to General Manager Billy King!!!!  What a great deal for Brooklyn!!!!

OK, enough B-ball.  Now back to politics, also known as Z-ball


ON THE SAME WEEK THAT PAULA DEEN IS CRUCIFIED.....

Ken Berwitz

Over the past week, Paula Deen's career has been utterly destroyed, with the Food Channel, and now one corporation after another, running from her at 100MPH.  The reason?  Years ago, she made several racially offensive comments (a criterion, which if fully applied to everyone else, would literally empty the airwaves).

But today, as reported by the entertainment web site deadline.com, we have this impossibly disgusting news from from the sanctimonious left wing ideologues at NBC:

EXCLUSIVE: Roseanne Barr is nearing a return to primetime. I've learned that NBC is finalizing a deal for a new comedy series the Roseanne alumna is co-writing with Nurse Jackie co-creator/former co-showrunner Linda Wallem.

I have written about roseanne barr numbers of times over the past years; about what a sickening, hate-filled pig she is - especially when it comes to Jews and to Israel (yes, I know she is ancestrally Jewish.  So were the capos in the extermination camps).

Here is a short list that should tell you all about what barr really is:

-November, 2008, speaking about Black voters in California who voted overwhelmingly for Proposition 8:  "They showed themselves every inch as bigoted and ignorant as their white christian right wing counterpartners who voted for mccain-palin and bush-cheney"

-January, 2011, speaking about Sarah Palin:  "I hate Sarah Palin, I'd slap her" 

-May, 2007, speaking about Israel:  "I hate Israel too much to host The View" 

-February 11th, on her blog (which also viciously attacks Jews):  The Ruling Classes are less than one percent of the world's population, yet through their control of trade routes upon the Open Seas, the ungodly pirates that they are, control 99% of the world's resources, and move them through the world by water. They kill dispassionately and by stealing the wealth of entire communities and classes. After being arrested and tried by a Judicial system NOT heavily weighted in their favor (as now), they shall face a fate more horrifying than death (to them). These greedy moral derelicts will be forced to actually pay back the money they stole, every single plundered dime!!Without Bullshit, the Twin Towers of Patriarchy, Warmongering-Piracy and Woman Hating-Pedophilia will collapse under their own weight. 

-July 25th, 2012, she tweeted this about people who dare to eat at a Chick-Fil-a restaurant: "anyone who eats Shit-Fil-A deserves to get the cancer that is sure to come from eating antibiotic filled tortured chickens 4Christ".

-And then we have this proud moment from just a few years ago, when barr displayed her "humorous" side by having herself made up to look like adolf hitler, and baking what she called "burnt Jew cookies":

Roseanne Barr as Adolf Hilter holding burnt Jew cookies in Heeb

That ugly enough for you?

So what do we have here? 

-Paula Dean, a woman who has worked with, for and on behalf of Black people (including Barack and Michelle Obama) for so long a time, is being crucified for things she said years and years ago, and has apologized for (how nice of the Obamas to let her twist in the wind and not come to her defense, isn't it?  She only campaigned for them twice). 

-But roseanne barr, who has unrepentantly pumped out a steady torrent of hate right up to the present time, gets an NBC sitcom.

If that doesn't show how completely Political Correctness, and selective outrage based on political ideology, has overtaken us, I don't know what possibly would.


THE QUOTE OF THE DAY

Ken Berwitz

Today's quote comes to us from Khadijah Costley White, who is identified as a faculty member in the Department of Journalism and Media Studies at Rutgers University in New Brunswick (New Jersey).

It is in the form of one paragraph from a written apology Mr. White has written, "on behalf of the world", to Rachel Jeantel, who spent much of Wednesday and Thursday testifying at the trial of George Zimmerman. 

Here is what Ms. White wrote to Ms. Jeantel:

"I want to write you an apology for this whole world, even if it's not my place to apologize. I'm so sorry that you're sitting on the stand right now, being interrogated like a criminal instead of another victim. I'm so sorry that people are judging you, fixated more on your beautiful brown skin, your carefully applied make-up, your body, your being, than your trauma and your pain. I'm sorry that you were born into a country where a man can pursue and kill a black boy, your friend, and go home the same night with the blessings of law enforcement officers. I'm sorry that you've been retraumatized, stigmatized, defamed, and attacked just because you were unlucky enough to love a black boy, to share time with him, to be the last one he ever called."

This is the thought process of a faculty member at a college? Yikes.

To review:

-Ms. White apologizes on behalf of the world ("...Khadijah Costley White wants to apologize to her on behalf of the world." is stated prior to the beginning of the letter), for the world (mentioned in the first sentence of this paragraph). I guess that means she is apologizing to the people who, themselves, should be apologizing.  Or something.

-And what is this apology for?  Because, as a witness in a trial that might put a man in prison for life, Ms. Jeantel had to answer questions not just from the prosecution but from the defense as well?  Oh, the inhumanity.

-The reference to her "beautiful brown skin" seems to me overtly racist. How about you?

-The reference to her "carefully applied make-up" and her body seems defensive, sexist, or both.  Your call.

-The comment about Zimmerman pursuing and killing "a black boy" not only judges the case before the trial is over, but establishes clearly that Ms. White sees this only in racial terms.

-The comment that Rachel Jeantel has been "retraumatized, stigmatized, defamed, and attacked" for nothing other than that she loved a black boy", not only ignores the fact that Ms. Jeantel - by her own grudging admission - has lied over and over again, but introduces race into the equation a third time.

I wonder if Ms. White is aware that, after almost a year and a half of opportunity to find a pattern of racism in George Zimmerman's life, no seems able to find any such thing.  What have been found are specific examples of the exact opposite (e.g. Zimmerman's mentoring of Black children, his demands that a police officer's son be held to account for an attack on a Black homeless man).

Personally, I strongly suspect Ms. White knows this perfectly well.  But, as with Mary Elizabeth Williams in my previous post, she needs to concoct a racism narrative because that's all she's got

In other words, the racism is not found with George Zimmerman, it is found with Khadijah Costley White.

Ironically - and tragically - the true victims of knee-jerk racist claims like this one, are Black people.  Because, like the boy who cried wolf, the next time there actually is a racist-inspired attack on a Black person, you can bet there will be people dismissing it out of hand, on the grounds that Black people make this claim about everything, so why believe it now?

With great sadness, I would remind Ms. White that trivializing racism - which most certainly is alive and well both in and out of the USA - makes real racism that much harder to fight.

I wish I had a more elevated reason for handing out today's Quote Of The Day award, but I don't. 

For sheer, unadulterated racism, Khadijah Costley White is the "winner".  I hope for her sake she doesn't "win" many more this way.


EXTINCTION BY ENVIRONMENTAL PC

Ken Berwitz

"I read somewhere that there are only 8 snow geese left in the world.  One of them shits  on my car, there's gonna be 7":  Buddy Hackett

I am not a bad person - at least I don't think I am.  But I have to admit that I spontaneously busted out laughing at this report, which I have excerpted from Will Robinson's article in London's Daily Mail:

There had been only eight recorded sightings of the white-throated needletail in the UK since 1846. So when one popped up again on British shores this week, twitchers were understandably excited.

A group of 40 enthusiasts dashed to the Hebrides to catch a glimpse of the brown, black and blue bird, which breeds in Asia and winters in Australasia.

But instead of being treated to a wildlife spectacle they were left with a horror show when it flew into a wind turbine and was killed.

Wind turbines are supposed to save us from the ravages of fossil fuels, remember?  But somehow, the geniuses who doped this out didn't take into account that wildlife just might not be as enviro-knowledgeable as they are, and have a nasty tendency to fly into those turbines and turn themselves into shredded fowl tartare.  Even rare species' like the white-throated needletail.

Well, I guess it's better than slow-roasting on a solar panel.....

free` I have to admit I LOL when I read this. But to be serious, many birds are killed every year by these turbines, but the media and enviro nuts never seem to mention it. (06/28/13)


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!!