Buy Our Book Here!

Saturday, 25 October 2014


Ken Berwitz

Apropos of nothing political...

The best Pizza restaurant in Monmouth County, if you're asking me, is Luigi's in Lincroft. (Luigi's Famous Pizza, to be exact).

The food is delicious - especially the pizza.  The portions are very large, the prices are very moderate, and the wait staff is excellent.  What more could you want?

Just thought I'd mention.

Ok, back to politics, where nothing is delicious, the lies are very large, and if you are very moderate you will probably lose. 

Hopelessly Partisan @ 19:45 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Apropos of nothing political...

The best Pizza restaurant in Monmouth County, if you're asking me, is Luigi's in Lincroft. (Luigi's Famous Pizza, to be exact).

The food is delicious - especially the pizza.  The portions are very large, the prices are very moderate, and the wait staff is excellent.  What more could you want?

Just thought I'd mention.

Ok, back to politics, where nothing is delicious, the lies are very large, and if you are very moderate you will probably lose. 

Hopelessly Partisan @ 19:44 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Here are the first three paragraphs of a terribly sad story about the Michael Brown/Darren Wilson investigation, written by the Saint Louis Post-Dispatch's Jessica Bock:

The Ferguson-Florissant and Clayton school districts sent letters to parents this week with reminders of emergency procedures should classes be canceled, delayed or dismissed early.

Schools typically send reminders before winter begins of inclement weather procedures. But the districts want parents to be especially cognizant this year as the public awaits a decision from the St. Louis County grand jury on whether to charge Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown.

"Should any event occur during school hours which presents a concern for public safety, a decision will be made as soon as possible regarding any necessary changes to the school day schedule, and we will evaluate whether bus transportation will be possible depending on several factors including road closures impacting bus routes," Ferguson-Florissant's Acting Superintendent Larry Larrew wrote.

Now, a short Q&A:

-Why would these school districts be so worried?  Because - as you don't need me to tell you - if the grand jury does not indict officer Darren Wilson for shooting and killing Michael Brown, and based on the evidence which has been leaked that is a very strong likelihood, there are going to be riots.

-Who will perpetrate these riots? Supporters of the so-called "Justice For Michael Brown" movement.

-What do these people want? Now you have to eliminate the word "justice". What they want is for Darren Wilson to be tried, convicted, and sentenced to a maximum term, maybe put to death altogether.

-Do they give a damn about the evidence which has been uncovered, which seems clearly to support officer Wilson's version of what happened? No they do not.

-Does it inflame racial tensions?  Obviously it does.

-But who benefits from it? Which group?  Don't feel bad about not being able to name one.  I can't name one either.

This is what it has come to.  This is the sharpton/jackson progression in all its glory.

Well done, al.  Well done, jesse.  Mission accomplished.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 11:58 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

New York City Police Chief Bill Bratton, talking about the attack on four police officers by a hatchet-wielding "man" whose facebook page was loaded with radical Islamic material:

"There's nothing we know at this time that would indicate that [Islamic terrorism] is the case. That's what the investigation will attempt to determine."

New York City Police Chief Bill Bratton, later on, talking about the attack on four police officers by a hatchet-wielding "man" whose facebook page was loaded with radical Islamic material (via Jonathan Dienst's article for NBC News):

"We at this time believe that he acted alone," Police Commissioner Bill Bratton said Friday. "We would describe him as self-radicalized. We would describe him as self-directed in his activities."

Asked directly if Zale Thompson could be considered a homegrown terrorist or a "lone wolf," investigators said "it appears at this point" that terror was the suspect's "intent," though police stressed the investigation was in its preliminary stages.

Same Bill Bratton. 

Can anyone tell me what happened between the first description and the second - other than, possibly, Bratton realizing (either by himself or due to the comments of others) what a complete fool he sounded like the first time?

Why is the first instinct of some people - even a respected Police Chief - to create this kind of obviously untrue pretense? 

Who do they think they are protecting?  Muslims?  They certainly are not protecting decent Muslims who would never think of doing such a thing - and who comprise a very, very large majority of the Muslim population in the USA.

So who are they really protecting?  Radicalized Muslim lunatics happy to commit random acts of terror?

Why would Bill Bratton, or anyone else, want to do that?

Just how far does PC go?  And when do we wake up?

Hopelessly Partisan @ 10:21 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Remember the Fast & Furious scandal? 

It is understandable if the memory grows hazy, given that Fast & Furious is one of so many scandals and failures of this impossibly incompetent, inept, dishonest administration which have been buried by most mainstream media, that it is hard to keep them top-of-mind.

But I hope you remember it today.  Because years-old information has come out (more exactly, was finally forced out through use of the Freedom of Information Act) which not only demonstrates - again - that Attorney General eric holder lied to our faces about his knowledge of this operation, but also directly implicates President Obama's most trusted acolyte, Valerie Jarrett.

From the explosive commentary at

President Obama's trusted senior advisor, Valerie Jarrett, was a key player in the effort to cover up that Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress about the Fast and Furious scandal, according to public records obtained by Judicial Watch.

JW had to sue the agency for the records after the Obama administration failed to provide them under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  Yesterday JW reported on the broad information in the records, including that Obama asserted executive privilege for Holder's wife as part of the administration's efforts to cover up the scandal.

Jarrett was brought in to manage the fact that Holder lied to Congress after the story about the disastrous gun-running operation broke in the media. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) ran the once-secret program that allowed guns from the U.S. to be smuggled into Mexico so they could eventually be traced to drug cartels. Instead, federal law enforcement officers lost track of hundreds of weapons which have been used in an unknown number of crimes, including the murder of a U.S. Border Patrol agent in Arizona.

This directly contradicted Holder's May 3, 2011 testimony to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, during which he stated that he, "probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks." The October 4, 2011 date may also be significant because it came shortly after the August 30, 2011 resignation of U.S. Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke and reassignment of acting ATF director Kenneth Melson to the position of "senior forensics advisor" at DOJ.

There is more (as if what you just read isn't enough). so I urge you to use the link I've provided to read it all.

How important was Fast & Furious?  Well, those weapons apparently were used to kill two of our agents - not one, as the above commentary suggests (Border Agent Brian Terry and Customs Agent Jaime Zapata), along with an unknown number of others (years ago, Mexico estimated its loss of life in the hundreds).

But what stands out - again, as it has in so many other instances since this administration took office - is that President Obama and the people around him are liars, who hide behind their Accomplice Media; media which would rather allow their lies, and the horrible consequences of Fast & Furious  to be kept from the public than to confront the people they so avidly,  so unprofessionally provide cover for.

I count the days until the Obama administration is out of office.  But have largely given up hope that mainstream media will even think about trying to retrieve its professionalism in the forseeable future.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 09:07 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Today's quote comes to us from Hillary Clinton - who is in a lifelong competition with John Kerry to see who can spend the most time in elective and appointive office without the fewest accomplishments (they're still in a tie).

Speaking at an enthusiastic rally for Martha Coakley - a Democrat who, having lost her senate race to Republican Scott Brown four years ago, now appears about to lose her gubernatorial race to Republican Charlie Baker (a Democrat losing two statewide races in Massachusetts is roughly equivalent to kim jung-un losing two national elections in North Korea), Ms. Clinton had these words of wisdom about how the economy works:

"Don't let anybody, don't let anybody tell you that, uh, y'know, it's corporations and businesses that create jobs."

I read this quote, and saw the video at John Hinderaker's blog for, who followed up by asking "Where do they come from, then? Does the stork deliver them? Are they legislated by Congress?"

I tried to come up with something more disdainful than what John wrote, and couldn' I'll leave it at that. 

Hillary Clinton gets Quote Of The Day honors for showing us how little she knows about the economy, but how much she knows about pandering to a leftward crowd ready to cheer anything she says, no matter how ridiculous.

Look at it this way:  if doing that is an accomplishment, she just dropped behind John Kerry.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:16 AM   Add Comment

Friday, 24 October 2014


Ken Berwitz

We all know that Republicans are where all those rich guys are.  You know, the Koch Brothers and all those others that Democrats endlessly invoke when describing the terrible funding disadvantage they are laboring under. 

Or do we?

Excerpted from Fred Barnes' highly illuminating article at

The Democratic edge in spending, especially in key Senate races, belies one of the party's prominent campaign themes: that Charles and David Koch are corrupting politics by their funding in support of Republicans. It turns out liberal billionaire Tom Steyer is the biggest single political donor in 2014 at $58 million, at least in terms of publicly disclosed funding. The Kochs back several "issue" groups that are not required to reveal either their spending or their donors.

In Alaska, Democratic senator Mark Begich has raised $275,000 less than Republican Dan Sullivan. But he has a $3.9 million edge in outside spending. In Colorado, the situation is similar. Democratic senator Mark Udall has outraised Republican Cory Gardner $10.4 million to $9.3 million. And Udall has gotten nearly $2 million more in outside aid.

Still sure that all the rich ones are Republicans? Still sure that Republicans are running roughshod over Democrats in midterm election spending?

I didn't think so.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 17:21 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

This will be an easy blog to write...because all I'm doing is pulling two paragraphs from an article.

First the paragraphs, then the source:

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama's 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina's adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin

 Damn those right wingnuts.  Can you believe them putting out garbage like this?


This did not come from a right wing site. This, folks came from Jesse Richman and David Earnest's article for the Washington Post.

Yes, that Washington Post.  

And if this doesn't tell you that voter fraud not only exists, but is changing the results of elections, I don't know how to get through to you.

Would requiring a valid ID have prevented these illegal voters from registering?  Probably not all of them; some voter fraud is inevitable.  But maybe most.  And any level of voter fraud prevention is a good thing.

And who is perpetrating the fraud?

To answer that, I will end by repeating part of a blog I wrote yesterday:

When we talk about corruption, what is the operative recommendation?  "Follow the money". 

When we talk about voter fraud, it seems to me the operative recommendation is "See who fights against voter IDs".  Keep that in mind and the answer becomes simple to determine:

-Show me a political party which demands people identify themselves before voting, and I will show you a party that wants only legal voters to cast ballots. 

-Show me a political party which demands people not identify themselves before voting, so there is no way to check that they have a right to do so, and I will show you a party that wants an open door for non-legal voters to cast ballots.

Do we have two such political parties right now?  I doubt you need me to tell you.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 16:39 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

You're not going to believe this.

In an effort to attract women - and by women, I mean young, unmarried and/or Black women, because married White women mostly vote Republican -  the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has called upon....

...wait.  Tell you what.  First let me show you her pitch, then I'll tell you who it is:

The outcome of this election will be determined by one factor.  Women.

And that scares the Republicans half to death ... but not enough to make them actually change their anti-women policies. They still refuse to pass Equal Pay laws. And they're still perfectly comfortable denying women their basic human right to make decisions about their own bodies.

Instead they're relying on tired, sexist tropes to appeal to us. Women will only vote if voting is like dating, getting married, or breaking up. At least that's what Republicans seem to think.

This election is our chance to show them that their relentless sexism will not stand -- in fact, it will cost them their seats in Congress.

That's why I'm emailing you today. I need you to step up right now and make sure that Republicans who rely on sexism will lose on November 4th.

Are you in?

Sorry for boring you with what might just possibly be the single most overused mantra in political history:  the "war on women".  But that is what she signed her name to, and that, therefore, is what I am reporting to you.

And who, pray tell, is the signee?  Who does the DCCC think is going to rope in all those unmarried young women?

It is....(fanfare please)....

Gloria Steinem.

That's right, Gloria Steinem. 

Did you even know she was still alive? 

Ms Steinem, who celebrated her 80th birthday this year, is old enough to be the grandmother of the people this appeal is aimed at.  Call me a pessimist, but somehow I don't think that her dialogue about "decisions about their own bodies" is going to resonate with the 18 - 25 crowd.  They'd probably be more comfortable with her telling them about a Colonial Penn insurance policy, or maybe Fixodent.

This is roughly the equivalent of the RCCC getting a court order to exhume Harold Stassen, and putting up a commentary in his name.

But, hey, desperate times call for desperate measures.  Any port in a storm.

I wonder who they're going to try next.  Maybe the ghost of Betty Freidan? 

Hopelessly Partisan @ 14:55 PM   1 comment


Ken Berwitz

I am reasonably certain you are aware that there was a fight earlier this month involving members of Sarah Palin's family.

The initial reports - and, even now, some accounts - make it seem as though the Palins were fighting each other. 

In fact that was not so.  Based on Bristol Palin's (exceedingly profane) contemporaneous description of what happened, a woman pushed her sister and a man attacked her - neither being members of the Palin family.  No member of the family disputed a word of what was said at that time - which, if they were fighting among themselves, you would have expected immediately after it occurred, before tempers had cooled down.

But don't take my word for it.  Click here for an audio of the police interviewing the Palins, and accompanying pictures.

OK, that's one.

Now let's go to the other - which I am reasonably certain you are not aware of.

There was a brawl between members of Michael Brown's family over who would be selling t-shirts featuring their dead relative.

Last Saturday, October 18th, there was a brawl between Michael Brown's mother, Lesley McSpadden and his aunt (Pearlie Gordon) and cousin (Tony Petty) over who should be profiting from their dead relative.

According to

Police sources tell us Brown's Grandmother, Pearlie Gordon, along with Brown's Cousin Tony Petty, were selling t-shirts and other Michael Brown merchandise.

A police report describes a car pulling up and several people getting out.  One of those people, was reported to be Michael Brown's Mom, Lesley McSpadden.  A witness described McSpadden yelling "You can't sell this s%$&"  One of the relatives, who was selling, reportedly demanded McSpadden show a document proving she had a patent.

The police report says that's when an unidentified person with McSpadden assaulted Petty so violently that it resulted in a 911 call.  A witness tells Fox 2 that the weapon was a metal pipe or pole.  The suspect reportedly struck Petty in the face.  Medics then took him to Christian Northeast Hospital.  The witness said the assault suspect grabbed merchandise and a box of cash believed to contain about $1,400.

So there you are. Two brawls involving famous families.

-One involves Sarah Palin, a former politician who has been out of office and has not run for any position in 6 years, and apparently was brought on not by family members, but by people instigating a fight with them.  That has been plastered everywhere, with no shortage of smirking insinuations about the Palins.

-The other involves Michael Brown, whose shooting death at the hands of Officer Darren Wilson and its aftermath are still entirely current news.  It directly involved family members at each other and resulted in an assault and a robbery.  There is virtually no mainstream media news of this fight at all, anywhere.

Media bias anyone?

Hopelessly Partisan @ 12:45 PM   Add 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:

-Which is worse: not having a strategy to fight ISIS or having one that is a failure from the starting gate?

-Now that 5 more people's emails are "lost", will maintstream media finally be shamed into covering this scandal?

-Does President Obama help or hinder his party in the midterm elections?

-If Hillary Clinton drops out of the Presidential sweepstakes - either due to health reasons or lower favorability ratings - who would Democrats run instead?

-When will President Obama stop pretending he cares about the constitution and just declare himself king?

Right down to:

-Is Ray Rice just the tip of the NFL iceberg?

-What is causing viewership of MSNBC's prime time shows, poor to begin with, to drop even further?

-Why does the lightpost at 59th St. and Amsterdam Avenue have two one-way traffic signs, one directly over the other, pointing in opposite directions?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