Buy Our Book Here!

Sunday, 26 April 2015


Ken Berwitz

Here is the latest installment of our series, "What we lose if we lose Israel":

Excerpted from Joel Leyden's article for

Jerusalem, Israel — April 25, 2015 … Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this evening following the lethal earthquake in Nepal and nearby areas, held an assessment of the situation, via telephone, with Israel Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman and Israel Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon.

It was agreed to dispatch - as soon as possible - a rescue delegation including medical support. The humanitarian delegation will land near the affected zone and make its preparations until it becomes possible to land in Nepal.

Israelis in the affected zone will receive the means necessary to return to Israel. The Prime Minister, on behalf of the Israeli people, conveys his deepest condolences to the people of Nepal and says that Israel will render such assistance as may be required.

The IDF announced that they will send a delegation to determine the extent of required humanitarian aid assistance. The mission is set to fly out in the next 24 hours on the orders of IDF Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot.

Israel, as they did in Haiti, in Indonesia after the tsunami, and virtually everywhere else there is massive tragedy, will be there - fast and effectively - with humanitarian aid.  Not just a pledge of money which might or might not get there, but with medical teams, equipment and supplies.

How many of Israel's neighbors, who want - make that demand - that Israel is obliterated, will be sending similar humanitarian aid?  I would say there are so few that you could count them up on the fingers of one hand...but I don't think you even need the one hand.

That is what we lose if we lose Israel. 

Maybe losing Israel isn't such a good idea.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:12 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Excerpted from an article at Agence France Presse, via

Protesters smashed police cars and shop windows in downtown Baltimore on Saturday when the biggest demonstration over the death of a young African-American man in police custody turned violent.

More than 1,000 people joined an orderly 90-minute rally at Baltimore city hall demanding justice for Freddie Gray, who died last Sunday from spinal injuries, a week after his arrest in the city's impoverished west side.

But the mood shifted dramatically when several scores of protesters moved on to the Camden Yards baseball stadium, an hour before the scheduled start of a Baltimore Orioles-Boston Red Sox game.

Live images from local television news helicopters showed a youthful crowd hurling soda bottles and trash cans at police officers alongside the Sports Legends museum and Camden Yards ticket booths.

"Protesters are now breaking windows and throwing items at us," the Baltimore police department confirmed on its Twitter feed. "We are asking everyone to remain peaceful."

Others were seen smashing shop windows and blocked intersections, with one motorist getting a rock through her car window, CBS affiliate WBAL reported.

Five police cars were seen by an AFP photographer getting their windows smashed, before riot police moved in.

How are we supposed to feel about this? 

Are people going to accept the premise that this was an "orderly 90 minute rally"?  Or are people going to look at this and say "They're doing the same thing they did in Ferguson.  They're using it as an excuse to riot.  To loot.  To break things.  To steal things.  Freddie Gray's death was not a tragedy to these people, his death was an opportunity for them."?

Which do you think is more likely?

If Freddie Gray's death was caused by police indifference, or an intentional effort to hurt him that went far beyond what they intended, or even intentional murder, how exactly does this answer what happened?  How does this resolve any issues that are involved with his death?  

The saddest part?  There are people - and, I would bet a lot more of them now than there were before the riot you just read about - who would answer this way:

 "That is what they are tnd that is what they do.  They scream out insults at the police and at White they break or steal anything that's nailed down.  Just like they did in Ferguson, for Michael Brown.  And the next day they're back in the welfare office collecting taxpayer money for their illegitmate babies like nothing happened.  And we're supposed to live with them.  They're animals and that's all they know how to do. I won't go near them if I can avoid it, and I'll cross the street if I see them coming".

Is what you just read fair?  No it is not. 

Is it reasonable?  No it is not. 

Is it  a disaster for the large  majority of Black people who did not and would not engage in any such activity, and just want to go about their business and live their lives?  Yes it is.

But do do actions like last night's riot (and don't think it will be the last one in Baltimore) generate that kind of a response?  You know the answer as well as I do.

Congratulations to the rioters and looters.  You certainly have done wonders for racial tolerance, and for honoring the memory of Freddie Gray.

I hope you're happy with what you've accomplished.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 06:59 AM   Add Comment

Saturday, 25 April 2015


Ken Berwitz

Is it just me, or do you also find it incredibly unseemly for Bill Clinton's wife to make a speech, as Hillary Clinton did yesterday, in which she rails about "the continuing scourge of sexual assault"?

Isn't that a little like Bernie Madoff's wife railing about "the continuing scourge of stock market fraud"?

Just asking....

Hopelessly Partisan @ 10:48 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Anyone who reads this blog certainly knows that I stand 100% in favor of gay rights and 100% in support of gay marriage.

I feel this way because I believe in freedom, and could never accept the persecution and destruction of anyone for living their own lives or for having sincere, personally held beliefs.

So why would I, or any other reasonable person, support the persecution and destruction of religious Christianss for exactly the same reason?

Excerpted from George Rede's article in The Oregonian:

The lesbian couple turned away by a Gresham bakery that refused to make them a wedding cake for religious reasons should receive $135,000 in damages for their emotional suffering, a state hearings officer says.

Rachel Bowman-Cryer should collect $75,000 and her wife, Laurel Bowman-Cryer, $60,000 from the owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, an administrative law judge for the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries said in a proposed order released Friday, April 24.

Bureau prosecutors sought $75,000 for each woman -- $150,000 total -- during a hearing on damages in March.

The amounts recommended by law judge Alan McCullough, coming after four days of testimony, are not final. State Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian has the final authority to raise, lower or leave the proposed damages as is.

The controversy began in January 2013 when Aaron Klein turned away Rachel Bowman-Cryer and her mother at a cake-tasting appointment they had set up with Melissa Klein. Melissa Klein was not at the shop that day.

In August 2013, the women complained to BOLI. The agency conducted an investigation and in January 2014 brought charges that the Kleins had unlawfully discriminated against the couple because of their sexual orientation.

In a statement Friday, BOLI said: "The facts of this case clearly demonstrate that the Kleins unlawfully discriminated against the Complainants. Under Oregon law, businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot turn customers away because of race, sex, disability, age or religion. Our agency is committed to fair and thorough enforcement of Oregon civil rights laws, including the Equality Act of 2007."

The Bowman-Cryers both testified to the emotional stress they attributed to their experience with Sweet Cakes as well as the glare of media attention that soon followed.

Aaron Klein said his family, too, had suffered because of the case. Reporters came to his home and his shop, he testified during the March hearing.

The Sweet Cakes by Melissa car was vandalized and broken into twice. Photographers and florists severed ties with the company, eventually forcing Sweet Cakes to close the Gresham shop in September 2013. The business now operates out of the couple's home in Sandy.

Anna Harmon, one of three attorneys representing the Kleins, said, "It's a shocking result and it shows the state's relentless campaign to punish Oregonians who live and work according to their faith."

"The important thing to realize is this," she added, "This is real money that Aaron and Melissa are going to have to pay that otherwise would be used to pay their mortgage and feed their kids."

Let's understand what happened here.  The same-sex couple was not refused service in the bakery.  They were not told they could not buy a wedding cake there.  They were told that, based on their religious beliefs, the Kleins would not put a same-sex message on the cake.

That's it.  That is the extent of Aaron and Melissa Klein's "crimes".  That is why they have been put out of business, have had their property attacked, have been threatened (not shown in the excerpt above, but they have been) and now may be fined $135,000.

Even if you agree with Oregon's view of this incident, how can you - how can any sane person - accept this kind of punishment?  A $50 or $100 fine and a warning might make sense.  But $135,000?  Stock swindlers who screw widows out of their life's savings are fined less than that.

The state of Oregon has destroyed the livelihood of a family and put them in physical danger for not writing something on top of a cake - an "issue" which could have been resolved by the two obnoxious, self-righteous, money-grubbing opportunistic "aggrieved parties" either patronizing another bakery, or having someone with one of those baker's squeeze-things and about 50 cents worth of icing, write any message they wanted. 

This is religious persecution of the first order.  It shames and disgraces Oregon by making its legal apparatus look like a bunch of idiots, who think they can resolve a minor incident of what it deems as sex discrimination with a major incident of what most people would consider religious discrimination.

Congratulations to Oregon for leading the way in malicious, stupid, vindictive, hypocritical behavior.  How proud its citizens must be.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:21 AM   1 comment


Ken Berwitz

Remember Brian Williams?  A few months ago he was riding high as the anchor of NBC Nightly News, the highest-rated network news show.

Then it came out that he had made up several stories about his past and embellished others.  So NBC, not wanting to damage its reputation for credibility (there are those who are now asking "what credibility would that be?") suspended him for 6 months.

Well, don't hang by your thumbs waiting for him to be back.

Excerpted from Paul Farhi's article in today's Washington Post:

Journalists in NBC News's powerful Washington bureau expressed strong opposition to the potential return of suspended anchorman Brian Williams during a contentious meeting with the head of the network’s news division in February.

In a sometimes angry series of comments, the journalists told NBC News President Deborah Turness in the private meeting in Washington that Williams's embellished statements about his reporting exploits had damaged NBC's credibility and that he should not be permitted to return to the anchor chair, according to several people who attended the session.

One person who attended the Washington meeting described the overall tone as a "bloodbath" for Williams.

The journalists told Turness that the scandal had made them embarrassed to deal with their sources and to identify themselves as NBC News employees. .

Does that give you any sense that NBC will be putting Brian Williams back at its anchor desk any time soon?  A disgraced "journalist" whose colleagues in the news department are telling the President of the division that he is destroying them?

In the navy they sing "Anchors Aweigh", when they haul one in prior to departure.  In this case, I strongly suspect the NBC news division will happily sing "Anchor away" as they toss one overboard.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 06:56 AM   1 comment


Ken Berwitz

Today's quote comes to us from outgoing Attorney General, the disgraceful toady and Obama sock-puppet eric holder. This is what he had to say about his 6 years in that position - and I swear I am not making it up:

"This department is restored. It's restored to what it always was and certainly...and what it always must be. Free of politicization, focused on the mission, and making sure that justice is done without any kind of interference from political outsiders."

What astounding hubris. What astounding dishonesty. That is like Hillary Clinton bragging about what a great job she did in Benghazi.

eric holder is the only Attorney General ever cited for criminal contempt of congress. He lied about Operation Fast and Furious, lied and stonewalled about the IRS scandal, and ran the Department of Justice in such a racially divisive way that I took to calling it the Department of Just-us. We have had good Attornies General and bad ones. And he is right at the bottom of the heap.

I award eric holder Quote Of The Day honors for leaving his position as poorly and dishonestly as he functioned in it.

Congratulations. And good riddance.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 06:41 AM   Add Comment

Friday, 24 April 2015


Ken Berwitz

The Clinton Foundation scandal deepens by the day.  It has quickly moved ahead of the other Clinton scandals, and - at least as of now - appears to be the most significant threat of them all to Hillary Clinton's candidacy. 

The latest information, from Sarah Westwood's article for the Washington Examiner, is that:

Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award - and six of the eight ultimate winners - while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation.

Ms. Westsood, of course, goes on to detail and reference this statement.

What a coincidence.  Or is it?  Do you - does anyone - seriously believe that, with the Clintons, there are any coincidences?

And in case you think it couldn't get worse, now Common Cause - that's right the liberal activist organization Common Cause - is calling for an independent audit of the Clinton foundation.

With only 15% of the total monies collected being used for charitable causes, and almost 60% being reported as "other expenses" - i.e. not being explained at all - what do you think such an audit will find?

This is not going away.  To the contrary, it's a good bet that it is just getting started.

Stay tuned.  And get ready for the James Carville/Lanny Davis/John Podesta deflect-a-thon to go into high gear. 

Hopelessly Partisan @ 18:22 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Apropos of nothing political....

We spoke to our dear friend Sharon, who used to live near us but, for the past 20 years, has lived in North Carolina.

She told us that a friend - also originally from the Northeast - was approached by someone selling raffle tickets for a worthy cause and agreed to buy a number of them.  The friend asked what the prizes were.

She was told that one of the prizes was "tickets to the Herkins".

"The Herkins"? She asked who or what "The Herkins" were.

They were tickets to see the local National Hockey League's Carolina team, the Hurricanes.

Dialects.  You gotta love them.

Ok, back to politics, where we'd all be better off if most practitioners could be sent to the penalty box. Indefinitely.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 09:45 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Suppose you are an actor. 

Suppose you land a role in a play called "Ferguson", which is about the shooting and killing of Michael Brown by Police Officer Darren Wilson.

Suppose the play consists of little other than a reading of the actual grand jury testimony taken after the shooting/killing took place - not embellished, just word for word what actually was said.

And suppose you then find out that the grand jury testimony contradicts what you thought - maybe what you very much wanted to think - about how that shooting and killing went down.

What do you do?

Excerpted from Matt Pearce's article for the Los Angeles Times:

Veteran actor Philip Casnoff hadn't read the full script yet when he arrived for the first rehearsal of "Ferguson," a play chronicling the shooting of Michael Brown by a Missouri police officer.

Then he read the script, which tells the story that Brown didn't have his hands up and that he charged at Wilson.

Now, in a case of art imitating life, the play is experiencing the kind of ill will and mistrust that erupted from the city it attempts to portray. Part of the 13-member cast is in revolt - Casnoff and four others have quit - as the playwright and actors are locked in a fundamental disagreement over how to tell the story of Brown's death.

"It felt like the purpose of the piece was to show, 'Of course he was not indicted - here's why,'" Casnoff said. He said that after he learned who the play's author was, Casnoff, who describes himself as "very liberal, left-wing-leaning," thought, "Whoa, this is not the place for me to be."

Through testimony taken from grand jury transcripts, the play ends with a witness telling a prosecutor that Wilson was justified in killing Brown. The audience is then supposed to vote on whether Wilson should have been indicted.

Fascinating, isn't it? 

All this play does is present the same testimony, word for word, that the grand jury heard. 

But five of the actors, their wiwoo sensibiwities bwuised by having to deal with reality - i.e. the basis for Darren Wilson not being charged with any crime by either the grand jury or the eric holder-led Department of Justice (despite the fact that it was chafing at the bit to take him down) could not live with themselves if they had a hand in presenting it. 

Much better to continue pretending that Michael Brown was a helpless young teen angel, a gentle giant who was brutally executed by a bloodthirsty cop.  Hey, isn't that what the protesters said...when they weren't looting the stores on Ferguson's main street, then burning them down?  It MUST be right.  Right?  Uh, right?

Simply (and I do mean simply) stated, these people want to live in a world where truth is the enemy. 

Well, they are in I guess they picked the right place to do it. 

Me, I prefer the real world.  How about you?

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:24 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Barack Obama favorite and eric holder fan, Loretta Lynch, has been confirmed by the United States Senate, and will be our new Attorney General.

Based on the fact that, during her confirmation hearings, Ms. Lynch ducked question after question regarding how she would run the Justice Department, but was kind enough to tell us that illegal aliens have exactly the same rights to get jobs as the legal citizens competing for those jobs, I have no expectations that she will perform well.

Her exact quote on illegals and jobs:

"I believe that the right and the obligation to work is one that's shared by everyone in this country regardless of how they came here."

Ms. Lynch is also an avid fan of legal partial birth abortions - not just when the mother's life is in imminent danger, but any old time - even in the late 9th month, when anyone with a brain - and a heart - would know that the abortion would kill a live child. 

The good news is 1) Loretta Lynch is not eric holder:  an undeniably huge plus, 2) that, as poor a choice as I think she is, you never know how people are going to actually perform until they start performing, and 3) in any event, she will probably be there for less than two years - a 100% certainty if we elect a Republican in 2016.

My expectations aside, I wish Loretta Lynch well, and hope that she does nothing but surprise me in the positive.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:05 AM   1 comment

Multi-Year Archive
We're Hopelessly Partisan, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.

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. Such as:

-Could President Obama's Iran "deal" be worse?

-What really happened to Harry Reid? Did his brother Larry beat the crap out of him?

-Will the email scandal and the massive contributions from foreign countries hurt Hillary Clinton's chances in 2016?

-Can the eric holder DOJ scare Senator Menendez into silence?

-When will media talk about how many new jobs created in the Obama years are part-time rather than full-time?

Right down to:

-Did American Sniper's box office success teach Hollywood anything?

-Does anyone other than a few gossip columnists care about anything Lena Dunham says?

-Will I win or lose my $10 bet with Toy Insurance Bob that the Yankees will win more games than the Mets this year?BR>
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!!


Crooks and Liars
Daily Kos
Democracy Now
Democratic Underground
Media Matters
Talk Left
The Huffington Post
Think Progress


  Drudge Report
  Real Clear Politics
  The Hill


   American Spectator
   Daily Caller
   Free Republic
   Front Page Magazine
   Hot Air
   National Review
   Power Line
   Sweetness & Light
   Town Hall

About Us  
Blog Posts