Monday, 02 March 2015


Ken Berwitz

Today's Quote Of The Day comes to us from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In a previous blog, I noted that he had made a terrific speech before AIPAC (The American Israeli Political Action Committee). 

Here is a key part of what Mr. Netanyahu said:

"My speech is not intended to show any disrespect to President Obama or the esteemed office that he holds. I have great respect for both. My speech is also not intended to inject Israel into the American partisan debate. An important reason why our alliance has grown stronger, decade after decade, is that it has been championed by both parties, and so it must remain.

"The purpose of my address to congress tomorrow is to speak up about a potential deal with Iran that could threaten the survival of Israel. Iran is the foremost state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Imagine what Iran would do with nuclear weapons. And this same Iran vows to annihilate Israel. If it develops nuclear weapons it would have the means to achieve that goal. We must not let that happen."

What we were treated to in this, and the rest of his speech, is plainly spoken common sense, from a man who has a well-earned reputation for providing just that - which is why he earns today's Quote Of The Day honors.

In those few words, Benjamin Netanyahu not only put to rest several of the issues, real and bogus, that have been invoked about his appearance before congress tomorrow, but actually gives Democrats who are currently intending to boycott the speech a face-saving out:  "Well, he says he respects the President, acknowledges his support for Israel, and assures us he is here only to outline his view of the danger in making a deal with Iran.  If that is why he is here, I am now comfortable with his motives and will be there for his speech".

Let's see how many of them take advantage of Mr. Netanyahu's generous olive branch... and how many don't.


Ken Berwitz

A quick point to be made here:

Now we are getting indications from Arab states, which are - understandably - scared excrement-less of Iran going nuclear, indicating that if a "deal" is cut which allows Iran to continue its nuclear program, they will assume Iran is moving ahead with nuclear weapon capability...and quickly start nuclear programs of their own.

Maybe Barack Obama can be duped into thinking that's not how it will go down but, apparently, others are seeing what is right in front of their eyes.

The answer here is a simple, straightforward one.  No to Iran. 

You don't allow the single most prolific backer of terrorism in the world, and one specifically commited to obliterating Israel, to create the means by which it can be done. 

The Arab gulf states know that, although Israel is Iran's prime target, it is far from the only one.  Even if the hapless, hopeless Obama/Kerry tandem can't figure it out.

I wish Benjamin Netanyahu every success in his attempt to make this clear to the U.S. congress tomorrow -- and marvel at the improbable group of supporters he inherently will be speaking for.


Ken Berwitz

John McCain was on MSNBC this weekend...and I suspect he spun a few heads with his remarks about John Kerry.

As any regular reader of this blog knows, I have cited Kerry many times for being in public office as long as he has without any discernible accomplishments.  Sadly (though predictably), this has continued with his tenure as Secretary Of State.

I did not watch the interview.  But, according to this Associated Press article, Mr. McCain said, among other things, that Kerry:

-has "accomplished nothing except mileage",

- demanded that his interviewers  "tell me one accomplishment that he has made." (I don't know of any - do you?), and

-and added in Kerry's boss, by characterizing Barack Obama's foreign policy this way:  "I would say worse than adrift. I would say delusional.".

My question to you:  which of these statements is anything but accurate?

Personally I would have said it a bit more colorfully (then again, McCain was on a TV show, so maybe in a different venue he would have too).  But I would have reached the same conclusions.

Less than two more years of this nightmare to go.  I count the seconds.

Shar Haven't you heard that no one listens to McCain anymore - he is considered one of the least influential senators in Washington. One of the other things I hear is that there may be a coup and Boehner will be pushed out of Speaker of the House. Any thoughts on that development? (03/02/15)

Ken Berwitz Translation: it had nothing to do with whether McCain was correct, so on to another non-sequitur. Yawn. (03/02/15)

Zeke. .. . . . . . . . . . Shar-Pei finally said something I agree with : - - - - "as I exit left ... no one cares.". . . . . . . . . . (03/02/15)

Zeke . . . . . . . Shar-Pei heard it on the Grape Vine. . . . . . . [But Shar-Pei is just a Troll; She is NOT Marvyn Gaye]. . . . . . . . Trolls interject extraneous conversation into a Blog - - - in this case, to divert attention from her failed heros. . . . . . . . . . . . The "Oh Look ! . . . There's a Squirrel over there" argument. (03/02/15)

Ken Berwitz Shar - what does that have to do with whether McCain is correct in what he said about Kerry and Obama - which, in my opinion he self-evidently is? (03/02/15)

Shar Because your constant outrage and "count the seconds" is getting really old. Nothing is really going to change in the near future no matter how much you rant. Much more interesting to focus on the struggle within the Republican party to see if they really have a chance at the White House in the next election. (03/02/15)

Shar Sorry for wanting to take you someplace more interesting. Rant on - as I exit left. P.S. Here's a clue - no one cares. (03/02/15)

Zeke . . . . . . Well, yes; what you say about Swift Boat Johnny is all true. - - - - But, imho, Heinz Ketchup is really good. . . . . . . . (03/02/15)


Ken Berwitz

The Paragraphs Of The Day - usually it's just one, but today there are two - come from today's Washington Examiner editorial which decries the obvious dislike (or a lot worse) that President Obama holds not just for Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, but for Israel itself.

The editorial is excellent, and I urge you to use the above link to read every word.  But the last two paragraphs sum things up so well that they garner Paragraph(s) Of The Day honors:

Even if we were to set aside any notion of the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship or dismiss the significance of the vow "Never Again," and merely look at the issue in the most narrow and dispassionate terms of what's in America's national security interests, the administration's moves are dangerous. In trying to prove that he won't be cowed by any sort of lobbying effort by the pro-Israel community, Obama has been stubbornly refusing to see that his policy has elevated a radical Islamist regime as a regional power - a regime that has for decades called for "Death to America" and has been a leading state sponsor of terrorism. Allowing Iran to go nuclear not only alienates Israel, but also Arab nations that would also be threatened.

As thousands gather for this year's AIPAC conference on Monday, Obama won't be addressing them, as he last did in 2008 and 2012, when he was seeking election. Instead, he will send National Security Advisor Susan Rice (who recently called Netanyahu's visit to Congress "destructive") and U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power. No doubt, the two will speak in platitudes about the importance of the U.S. relationship with Israel. But it's getting more difficult to hide the fact that Obama's foreign policy is blinded by his hostility toward Israel to the point where he's putting America's own national security at risk.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Remember:  Barack Obama is the same foreign policy deep-thinker who told us al-qaeda was "virtually eliminated", ISIS was a "jayvee squad" facilitated the demise of moamar be replaced by a virtually nonexistent government where Islamic terrorists are thriving, facilitated the demise of Egypt's Hosni be replaced by a Muslim Brotherhood stooge who ignored the Egyptian constitution and eventually had to be removed from power by the military, has warned Syrian butcher bashar al-assad about crossing a red line...and then did nothing about it when he did...and has been made mincemeat of for years by Russian KGBer vladimir putin.

If Barack Obama is this incompetent everywhere else, why would anyone expect him to perform any more capably with Israel?  Supporters of Israel had every reason to expect nothing - and, arguably, got even less.

Prime Minister Netanyahu gave a bravura performance this morning at AIPAC - an organization that, as would be expected, is entirely friendly to him.  His speech was compelling, on-target, and devoid of the rancor he has every reason to feel for Obama & Co.  In other words, he acted like a big boy. 

Tomorrow Mr. Netanyahu will address a joint session of congress, where most members will also be friendly....but those who are not - virtually all of them Democrats (paying attention, Lost Tribers?)...will act like little boys and girls, and head for parts unknown while he speaks.

Ironically, by not showing their anti-Israel faces, they are doing Prime Minister Netanyahu a favor. 

And, even more ironically, by showing how sizable, and dedicated, the Democrat anti-Israel contingent is, they're doing the Republican Party a favor as well.

Brilliant move, guys. Honest.


Ken Berwitz

New York Times Op-Ed columnist Charles Blow is fun to read.  His stock in trade, these days, is picking up on poll data (from the polls which have results he likes), posting the data in huge print, and writing colmns which make conclusions based on those poll data.

His latest column is about CPAC - the Conservative Political Action Committee - and its just-ended convention.

Use the link I've provided and you will see that Mr. Blow has put up a series of poll results showing the country is emphatically against Republicans on key issues, which presumably is why he characterizes the CPAC convention as - to use the title of his column - "Hackneyed and Hollow".

Mr. Blow fleshes out that characterization by telling us that "There remains in the Republican Party, as evidenced by the speakers at this event, a breathtaking narrowness of vision and deficit of creative thought."

I am no apologist for CPAC, I assure you.  But this is too easy to answer for me to pass up the opportunity.

According to the University of Virginia's political pundit, Larry Sabato, over the 6 years President Obama has been President.  Republicans' "breathtaking narrowness of vision and deficit of creative thought" has resulted in gaining 13 Senate seats, 11 governorships, 69 House seats, 30 state legislative chambers and 913 state legislative seats.

According to - which ain't exactly an arm of CPAC - these losses are at least double those seen for any other two term presidency since Truman (and who knows how far back before that?).

This being the case, I have a question for Mr. Blow:  If Republicans' narrowness of vision and deficit of creative thought have yielded those gains, what would you say about the presumably broader vision and surfeit of creative thought provided by Democrats?  Any thoughts on why they were the losers of everything Republicans gained?

Tell me, sir:  knowing those actual results, do you really still think the public is that negative about Republicans?  That positive about Democrats?  That they join you in seeing the reasons for voting in so many Republicans "hackneyed and hollow"?

Just asking.....

Zeke . . . . . . . You are mistaken. . . . . Mr. Blow-Hard is not writing op-ed columns. . . . . . Blow-Hard is manufacturing Straw Men. . . . . . . . . . (03/02/15)


Ken Berwitz

Jewish organizations in the USA. I used to have great regard for them, and felt they performed important, even vital, service for Jewry in the USA and around the world.

I knew that virtually all of them were partisan Democrat organizations.  But that made sense, since Democrats, far more than Republicans, were fully supportive of equality for Jews in the USA and for Israel.

But, over the years, a sad shift has taken place.  Now the Democrat Party, far more than the Republican Party, is the place for anti-Jewish and anti-Israel sentiment.  And the Jewish organizations I respected so much have remained virtually unchanged in their partisanship.  They are still sucking up to Democrats and disdaining Republicans...

...which tells me that, like the NAACP has become for Black citizens, these groups are more self-congratulatory societies which enjoy their status among Democrats too much to risk damaging them by calling out the increasingly anti-Jewish, anti-Israel nature of the Democrat Party.

Let me show you a classic case in point. 

Over the weekend, there was a full page ad in the New York Times, attacking Susan Rice for her indifference to the fate of Israel at the hands of Iran - a country where the government stooges chant "Death To America, Death To Israel", and which is on record as intending to "wipe Israel off the map".

The ad goes into detail to show that this is not the first time Rice has put politics over genocide, and cites her despicable record on Rwanda as well. 

Here it is:

That ad is blunt, hard-hitting....and, sad to say, rings true.

But, immediately, virtually every Jewish organization in the USA fell over each other to denounce it.  If you read this article in the Jerusalem Post, you will see that the denunciations include comments such as: "revolting", "spurious and perverse", "outrageous", "entirely inappropriate", "ad hominem", "grotesque", "abhorrent", "a sinister slur" and that the ad "is completely inconsistent with the record of friendship and loyalty this public official has shown Israel and the Jewish people".

Tell me:  which of these denunciations in any way accuses the ad of being untrue - including the dodge that Susan Rice is "friendly and loyal to the Jewish people" but does not talk about her ongoing record of being anti-Israel (here is one example, here is another, and there's plenty more where that came from).

The answer?  NOT ONE of them. 

If this ad were untrue in any way, wouldn't you be seeing specific examples of what those untruths were?

The fact that all they can do is fecklessly barf out boiler-plate condemnations like "revolting", "perverse", "outrageous", blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada, - without providing even one example of anything that is untrue or even exaggerated about what the ad says - shows us what has become of these groups; what they have devolved into.

That is why I have so little regard for them anymore.  Do you blame me?

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!!