Thursday, 08 August 2013

TEACHING MATT DAMON A LESSON

Ken Berwitz

Matt Damon, apart from being an actor, writer, and far, far leftist (did you know he grew up on a commune?),  is a tireless advocate for public school education......

.....except when it's his children's education, that is.

From Damon's interview with the London Guardian's Decca Aitkenhead (not a typo, just an amazingly unfortunate name):

"Sending our kids in my family to private school was a big, big, big deal. And it was a giant family discussion. But it was a circular conversation, really, because ultimately we don't have a choice. I mean, I pay for a private education and I'm trying to get the one that most matches the public education that I had, but that kind of progressive education no longer exists in the public system. It's unfair." Damon has campaigned against teachers' pay being pegged to children's test results: "So we agitate about those things, and try to change them, and try to change the policy, but you know, it's a tough one."

Translation:  "I have the bucks, and I'm going to spend them to make sure my kids (his word, not mine) get the kind of education I want them too.  You other people?  If you don't like the public schools then stuff it.  Maybe one day you'll be a hot-shot movie star like me making tens of millions of dollars.  Then you'll be able to send them wherever you like, while you pontificate about how important a public school education is.  Unmtil then?  Like I said before, stuff it."

Since Mr. Damon is so committed to learning, I would like to offer him a lesson, in the form of his own words - but reformulated to reflect the way they might have been said by a lower middle class Black parent who lives in, say, South Central.  Here is how he might have put it:

"Sending our kids in my family to a charter school was a big, big, big deal. And it was a giant family discussion. But it was a circular conversation, really, because ultimately we don't have a choice. I mean, I don't have the money to pay the full cost for a private education and I'm trying to rescue my children from the public education that I had, where few children learn, and many of the ones who try are beat up for "acting White".  That kind of learning-intensive education exists in charter schools where I would gladly add some of my not-very-plentiful dollars to a government subsidy, so that they can have opportunities they'll never get from the public schools.  I want them in a situation where their test results mean something, and children can move ahead at the speed of their capabilities, rather than at the speed of the slowest or most disruptive members of the class.  So we agitate about those things, and try to get those charter schools, but you know, it's a tough one."

That's a lesson worth thinking about, Mr. Damon.  In the meanwhile, I wish your children every success in their rarefied, rich-and-famous-lifestyle educational endeavors.


DE-GAFFING PRESIDENT OBAMA (CONT.)

Ken Berwitz

One more example of media's "degaffing" of President Obama - this one even worse than the others.

As pointed out by Tom Blumer of newsbusters.org (which really is an invaluable source for uncovering media bias), the Associated Press report did stop at simply not reporting what President Obama said, it intentinally led readers to believe he did not say it at all.

How did that happen?  Well, here is the President's verbatim comment about the "Gulf" cities of Charleston, Savannah and Jacksonville:

"If we don't deepen our ports all along the Gulf - places like Charleston, South Carolina, or Savannah, Georgia, or Jacksonville, Florida - if we don't do that, those ships are going to go someplace else. And we'll lose jobs. Businesses won't locate here."

As pointed out in the previous blog, not one of those cities is along the Gulf.  You couldn't find a clearer gaffe than that if you tried, right?

But instead of reporting it as such, here is how that same statement was represented - at least in the AP's stories carried in Charleston and Savannah - by Russ Bynum of the Associated Press:

"If we don't deepen our ports all along the Gulf - (and in) places like Charleston, S.C., or Savannah, Ga., or Jacksonville, Fla. - if we don't do that, these ships are going to go someplace else and we'll lose jobs"

See the difference?  (UPDATE:  And, even worse, the article released for national usage omits the entire quote, by just mentioning the three cities without Obama's incorrect mention that they are on the gulf.  Click here and see for yourself.)

How nice of Mr. Bynum and his AP editors to clean up President Obama's mess.

As you may remember, several months ago it was learned that the Obama administration was snooping into the private and professional phone calls of media people.  A good many of them were Associated Press reporters.

You know, one of those "phony scandals" this administration assures us is nothing with nothing.

The AP was justifiably outraged by this behavior - or so it said. 

But now, just months later, it has lapsed right back into preserve-and-protect mode for its lord and savior, Barack Obama.

Pathetic?  Yep, and then some.

Keep 'em ignorant, and you own 'em.

Zeke .... .... .... We have to dredge the seaports in all 57 states. ..... ...... ..... John Kerry has experience in 57 kinds .... .... ... (08/08/13)


SHEILA "DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO" JACKSON LEE

Ken Berwitz

This one needs no longwinded analysis.  Read the first three paragraphs of Penny Starr's article at cnsnews.com and you'll understand:

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) tweeted her approval Wednesday for the Obama administration's decision that members of Congress will not have to join health care exchanges and their health care coverage will be subsidized by American taxpayers.

"It's official: Members of Congress and congressional staff will keep their health subsidies under Obamacare!" Jackson Lee tweeted on her official Twitter account.

Jackson tweeted next: "And some staffers will not have to join the health exchanges at all."

Yes, this is the same Sheila Jackson Lee who advocated for, and voted for, ObamaCare so that the rest of us sucke....er, lucky citizens could get stuck wi...er, blessed with it.

Do the words "fraud" and "hypocrite" come to mind?  I hope so.

Now, what words come to mind for the mainstream media which will most assuredly bury this story (watch network evening news tonight and see if it comes up)?  You can use any words you want...but you get special commendations for keeping it clean, given how hard it must be to do so under these circumstances.

Zeke .... ..... .... According to the leak-mill, trial balloons have be observed: . . . Sheila Jackson Lee is being proposed / whispered about / a decoy for the real nominee. . . . . . The position is Secretary of the Dept of Homeland Security. . . (a Cabinet position). . . . .. (08/08/13)


DE-GAFFING PRESIDENT OBAMA

Ken Berwitz

How many gaffes did President Obama make on his guest stint with Jay Leno the night before last?

Well, Geoffrey Dickens of newsbusters.org counted them up and there were plenty:

Mr. Obama said that:

-Vladimir Putin formerly headed the KGB.  He did not;

-Savannah, Georga, Charleston, South Carolina and Jacksonville, Florida are on the Gulf Coast.  None of them is;

-Olympic events which take place on the track, in the pool and on the balance beam should be what is important, not sexual orientation.  Russia is hosting the winter olympics, not the summer olympics, and none of those events will take place there;

And, as an extra added attraction, Mr. Obama lectured us that we are more likely to die in a car accident than as the result of a terrorist attack.  Point of order:  since over 42,000 people died in car accidents in 2001, does that mean we should all shrug off the almost 3,000 dead on 9/11 of that year?  And since far more people die of cancer than in auto accidents, should we ignore auto accidents?  The stupidity of Mr. Obama's comparison is breathtaking.

If this had been President Bush talking, how do you suppose the major networks would have reported this amazing display of ignorance and stupidity?  Is there any doubt in the world that he would have been royally skewered for it?  That he would have been derided as a one-man gaffe machine?

Well, guess what:  NOT ONE of the major networks reported any of those gaffes on their Wednesday morning show.  Not CBS.  Not ABC.  Not even the Today show on NBC, the network President Obama said them on.  Zero.

So, by selective censorship, the sheeple are kept nice and unaware.  They can't know what the news doesn't report, can they?  And the narrative that George Bush was a borderline idiot but Barack Obama is a brilliant man, on top of everything and never prone to the gaffes that plagued lesser beings like Bush, remains intact.

Keep 'em ignorant and you own 'em.


THE ANTI-ISRAEL NEW YORK TIMES

Ken Berwitz

How anti-Israel is the New York Times?

Enough so that it installed a Jerusalem Bureau chief so slanted in favor of Palestinian Arabs - so willing to put out information in their favor that is factually untrue - that even the self-hating Jews who run the Times have had to stop looking the other way.

Excerpted from Adam Kredo's highly illuminating article at Washington Free Beacon (freebeacon.com):

The New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren is under renewed criticism from the pro-Israel community for articles critics say slant toward the Palestinian Authority and misrepresent U.S. policy towards Israel.

Pro-Israel officials have once again questioned Rudorens journalistic objectivity following two recent articles that they say favorably portrayed Palestinian stone throwers and falsely claimed that the United States considers Israeli settlements illegal.

Rudoren has displayed a pro-Palestinian bias since her appointment last year and may have been influenced by one of Israels top opponents, these critics say.

The Times subsequently assigned an editor to oversee Rudorens use of social media, including her Facebook and Twitter accounts, according to reports.

Believe me when I tell you that what you just read is just the tip of the iceberg.  I urge you to use the link I've provided and go through Mr. Kredo's entire piece to understand the full extent of this journalistic disgrace.

 

As regular readers know, I have spent years railing about the anti-Israel bias of the New York Times.  So the fact that it put someone like this in charge of the Jerusalem bureau is hardly a surprise to me. 

 

But to the folks who read the Times thinking that its coverage of Israel is in any way neutral, this should be a major revelation.  And - remarkably/ridiculously - there are a great many such people.

 

When do these benighted dupes wake up and smell the bias?

 

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

 

FYI:  In case you're interested, Judy Rudoren used to be known as Judy Wilgoren.  She married Gary Ruderman, and they decided to invent a combination of the two names.  I don't know if they're a pair of leftist ideologues, but I've always found that this is the kind of stuff which seems to occupy the minds of that segment of the population. 

 

And since leftist ideology is as much a hallmark of today's New York Times as anti-Israel bias.....well, you do the math.


THE 2013 HONDA FOUR CYLINDER ACCORD

Ken Berwitz

Time out from politics for a quick blog about our new car.

Two weeks ago we turned in our 2010 Honda 6 cylinder Accord off lease, and got what we think is a very good deal on a 2013 Honda Accord - same model, but this time a 4 cylinder.

The 2010 was a roomy, comfortable car with a nice big trunk, tight turn radius (a problem with previous years' Hondas) and held the road very well.  Mileage-wise, though it did not quite give us its estimated mileage, it came close enough so that we didn't have much to complain about.

The 2013 has all the roominess and handling attributes mentioned above (although I wish the steering wheel was a little tighter).  But, despite not being completely "broken in" (maybe this is just a residual attitude from days gone by, but I always expect cars to give better mileage after a few thousand miles), instead of coming close to the mileage estimates, it is already exceeding them.

The estimate is 27 mpg city, 36 highway.  However, yesterday, while driving "around town" for about 25 or so miles, my wife got almost 29 miles to the gallon.  And last weekend, over a 16 mile highway stretch, we got a touch over 40 to the gallon.

As for the pickup?  Other than from a standing start to about 20 or 30 mph, there is no apparent difference - not even at the highest speeds.  And since neither of us is into jackrabbit starts, that means we find virtually no difference at all.

The fact that the new Honda is also a technological marvel is icing on the cake.

Just thought you'd be interested to know.

Now, back to politics.

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

UPDATE:  My wife has driven the last 95 miles, entirely around town (not one inch of highway driving), and if the car's "Average MPG"  indicator is accurate, she is getting 30.4 miles to the gallon.

Now I can't wait to fill it up and confirm this really is happening.  Because if it is, I am in love with a motor vehicle.

Ken .... .... My experience has been that 4 cylinder engines run faster, with more noise. ..... .... Is that present on the two Accords ? (08/08/13)

Ken Berwitz In normal driving, the 4 is just a bit louder from idle to about 25 or 30 MPH - very little difference unless you're really nailing the accelerator (which we found out when our salesperson did so during the test drive - it's not the kind of driving we do). After that, we're not finding any noise difference at all. Nice name, by the way...... (08/08/13)

Art VanDelay Interesting (08/08/13)

Zeke ..... ..... Either I, or my keyboard, is all thumbs every so often. ..... .... (08/08/13)


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!!