Buy Our Book Here!

Wednesday, 10 February 2016


Ken Berwitz

For the benighted gullible people who believe there is no such thing as voter fraud... is additional proof, created by James O'Keefe and his Project Veritas Action (PVA) group, which - if the past is any indication - mainstream media will diligently ignore.

Excerpted from Chuck Ross's article at

Explosive new video released by muckraking journalist James O’Keefe exposes just how easy it is for non-residents to vote in New Hampshire's primary, despite a change in the state's laws aimed at curbing voter fraud.

The video - which was shared exclusively with The Daily Caller - shows poll workers advising undercover journalists working for O’Keefe's Project Veritas Action (PVA) how to skirt the rules in order to vote as non-residents. The damning video also shows Bernie Sanders campaign staffers encouraging undercover journalists to claim false addresses in order to vote in the primary.


Does the video you just watched show that voter fraud is easy to accomplish, even when specific laws have been passed to prevent it?  

Yes, obviously.

If voter fraud can be accomplished this easily in states with such laws, is it eminently easy to accomplish voter fraud in states which do not have any such laws at all - especially states where voters are not required to prove they are who they say they are before voting?  

Yes, obviously.

Why then, do mainstream media invariably bury videos like this, which prove so conclusively that voter fraud is easy to accomplish and nearly impossible to uncover?  Why would media not perform the basic journalistic function of reporting such a major story?

Sadly, that is just as obvious.

People who tell you media bias does not exist, either are benighted and gullible....or are rooting for the side which benefits by such bias.

That, too, is obvious.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 10:43 AM   1 comment


Ken Berwitz

Like it or not (and, believe me, I don't), Donald Trump ran away with the New Hampshire Republican primary.  Jeff Jacoby, the Boston Globe's excellent "house conservative" columnist says it very, very well:

This time around, the winner of New Hampshire's GOP presidential primary is a vulgar and loudmouthed egomaniac, as ignorant of public affairs as he is gifted at stoking anger and xenophobia.

Trump led every poll of New Hampshire Republican voters since last summer, nearly all of them by double digits, so his first-place finish on Tuesday, with 35 percent of the vote, came as no surprise. But it was a grievous confirmation of how far the Party of Reagan has drifted from its moorings.

...New Hampshire voters have just given their imprimatur to a Republican candidate who embodies a crude, unfiltered, uninformed solipsism - a demagogue far removed from everything thoughtful and honorable in the Republican Party's traditions.

Love the way you say it, Jeff.

As for the rest:

-Ohio Governor John Kasich finished second, with 16% - ahead of Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush, all of whom are tightly bunched in third/fourth/fifth place.  It remains to be seen whether Kasich can parlay this into a real surge.  I hope he does.

-Ted Cruz is at something of a crossroads here.  If he is strong in the next two primaries (Nevada and South Carolina), he will probably stay it it to the end.  If not, he will go the way of Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina, both of whom moved strongly upward, only to move strongly downward shortly thereafter.

-Marco Rubio did well to blame himself for New Hampshire's disappointing showing.  By defining his loss as an anecdote, a one-time quirk, he gets something of a bye this time around.  But it also makes a strong showing in the next primaries an imperative to "prove" it was a one-time lapse, or he's probably through.

-Jeb Bush did slightly better than bad...but is on life support. If, after his strong showings in the last two debates, this is where he lands, he - like Cruz and Rubio - absolutely has to be strong in Nevada and South Carolina.

-Chris Christie, even after being endorsed by the Manchester Union-Leader, wound up in 6th place with just 8% of the vote.  He's done.

-Ditto Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina, whose combined vote total was less than Christie's.

-Jim Gilmore is so far behind even the losing tier of candidates that he makes a fool of himself every day he does not drop out.....not that anyone would even notice if he did.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 09:49 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Here is the story of New Hampshire's Democrat primary:  

-Hillary Clinton lost to Bernie Sanders, 60% - 38%.  A royal creaming.

-She lost to women by 11%.  That special place in hell Madeleine Albright obnoxiously talked about is getting awfully crowded.

-She lost badly to voters 45 and under;

-She tied voters 45 - 64, and won among over 65's.  This tells us that, at least in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton comes across as so old and tired that a candidate 6 years her senior - and a self-professed socialist to boot (shades of Norman Thomas) - is fresher...but she's in solid with the geriatric set.

-And she won among voters in households with incomes of $200,000 a year or more - which may only demonstrate that, to well-off people, anyone is better than a socialist who wants to tax their socks off, but might also suggest that - her protestations aside - Hillary Clinton is the preferred Democrat among the rich folk.  And why not?  Don't birds of a feather stick together?

Is Hillary Clinton's candidacy in trouble?  No more than a skydiver who forgot his parachute.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 08:44 AM   1 comment


Ken Berwitz

Republican presidential aspirant Marco Rubio just finished an interview on the Today Show. 

All Matt Lauer and Savannah Guthrie wanted to ask about was his "bad" performance in the last debate, where he kept saying that President Obama "knows exactly what he is doing", thus creating the impression he wasn't thinking, but just working from a memorized script - which Chris Christie brought home very effectively (not effectively enough to be a viable candidate, though, as last night's vote showed).

So what was Senator Rubio's answer to Mr. Lauer and Ms. Guthrie?  He said "that will never happen again" a minimum of four times, at different points in the interview...

...thus creating the impression he wasn't thinking, but just working from a memorized script.

And the sad part is that, other than his parroting of the same line over and over again, Mr. Rubio gave an excellent interview in which he made a strong case for his presidential run - just as, other than repeating the line about President Obama, he had a strong debate performance last week.

When media latch on to something like this, no matter how ridiculous and inconsequential it is, a smart candidate finds ways of deflating it.  Marco Rubio, this morning, found a way of reinforcing it.

If that isn't shooting himself in the foot, what is?

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:43 AM   Add Comment

Tuesday, 09 February 2016


Ken Berwitz

This is just a prelim...I'll talk more about the primary tomorrow, when we have full results.

A few early observations:

-I am delighted to see Bernie Sanders clean Hillary Clinton's clock. Not that I would ever vote for Sanders, but because the thought of an accomplishment-less arrogant liar like Hillary Clinton being the Democrat Party nominee sickens me.  If I felt Sanders had any shot at all of winning the nomination I would not feel the same way...but what I smell is a late entry or two (even Jackass Joe Biden would be welcome at this point).

-I expected Trump to win New Hampshire, and it appalls me.  In just the last two days Trump questioned why anyone would hire Jeb Bush for anything, and called Ted Cruz a "pussy".  He is an obnoxious blowhard who, for all his bluster and bragadoccio, has never accomplished a single thing in politics.  And please don't tell me about his business success:   business does not run the way politics does.  Barking out orders and viciously tossing personal insults at whomever doesn't bow down is not what a President does.  It is not what a mature person does.  It would, however, have gotten him a daily ass-kicking at PS 164 in Queens, where I used to hang out as a kid.

-I am glad to see Kasich and Bush running well, albeit far behind Trump.  I hope it sets one or the other of them up for a serious run.  I could vote for either man...and would certainly vote for either over Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.

More on the primary tomorrow.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 21:00 PM   4 comments


Ken Berwitz

If my blogging has been a bit sporadic this week, I came by it honestly.  My wife and I spent a delightful week in Fort Lauderdale with dear friends.  

Back to normal, more or less, tomorrow.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 20:51 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

A quick word on the Super Bowl halftime show:

-How great was Lady Gaga's rendition of the national anthem? 

-And how repulsive was Beyonce's racially-charged tribute to black lives matter? 

Anyone who wonders how divisive this country has become, need only have watched the half time show for an update.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 08:48 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

What do you think about the lynchings which often took place in the south?  The ones where racist scum lynched a Black man who was accused of doing something he may or may not have done, or lynched the first Black male they saw, regardless of whether he could have had anything to do with the accusation, to "teach those niggers a lesson"? 

Does that sicken you to your stomach?  I hope so.  Because, if it doesn't, you need serious help.

With that in mind, please read the following article (too short to excerpt)from from CBS News (but not well covered by most mainstream media):

It's a story heard a lot these days: A cop mistook something a suspect was carrying for a gun and shot him dead.

The difference with the Antroine Scott shooting in San Antonio last week is that a local tabloid newspaper wants to publicly expose every local cop over it.

CBS affiliate KENS-TV reports the owners of the San Antonio Observer held a press conference and spoke on behalf of Scott's family while revealing their plans. The editor-in-chief, Stephanie Zarriello, said shootings of citizens by officers go unpunished because the officers remain anonymous.

"Like Ku Klux Klansmen with hoods, (officers) do everything they can in order to protect their identities for fear of being brought to justice," said Zarriello. "Just as the names and addresses of sex offenders are publicized in order to protect the public from their wicked behavior, we feel that our community has the right to the exact same level of protection."

San Antonio's police chief said Friday that Scott was holding a cellphone, not a gun as officers feared, when he was killed.

The 36-year-old was fatally shot at a north San Antonio apartment complex by officers trying to serve two felony weapons and drug warrants for his arrest Thursday evening.

At a news conference Friday, Police Chief William McManus said Officer John Lee approached the suspect as he stepped from a car and told Scott to raise his hands. McManus says Scott spun quickly with something in his hand. Lee, fearing for his life, shot him in the upper torso. Scott died where he fell.

Lee, who's a 10-year veteran of the San Antonio Police Department, has been placed on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of a department investigation.

Let's see:  Police are trying to serve a warrant for, among other things, felony weapons charges (i.e. there is good reason to believe the man they are serving those warrants are is armed).  The man they are trying to serve has an object in his hand and spins quickly toward the officer.  He shoots, the man is dead, and the item turns out not to be a weapon.  

 What would you have done?  What if you did not know whether the the indeterminate object an accused weapons felon reached for was a gun?  

Ok, let's take a worst case scenario here.  Let's suppose that the cop is lying.  Let's suppose he easily could have seen it was a cell phone, and decided, for whatever reasons (which may or may not have been racial) to just shoot the accused perp dead.  How does that translate into ALL cops being compared to the ku klux klan?  How does that translate into the names and addresses of ALL cops being put up for the public to that every police officer, regardless of his or her quality as a human being, along with anyone who lives in his or her home, could become a target?

How, conceptually, does that differ from the ugly "any Black male will do" example of racism I put up at the beginning of this blog? 

I don't know what the laws in Texas are for this kind of thing, but I hope every one that is applicable will be used against this sorry excuse for a "journalist", stephanie zarriello.  

I wonder how she will feel if someone puts up her home address, and/or other personal information that people who dislike her can use it for whatever their purposes are.  

I wonder how she will feel if someone puts up the same information for every employee of her paper, regardless of how they feel about her attitudes toward police, the way she intends to put up every police officer's information.

I hope for their sake they never have to suffer the possible consequences.

One other thing:  the article starts with "It's a story heard a lot these days:  a cop mistook something a suspect was carrying for a gun and shot him dead".  

The hell it is. 

There are almost a million police officers in this country.  Count up all the instances and see whether it is "a story heard a lot these days".  Even when trying to report a straight story they do this.

Journalism with a small "j".  Again.  As usual.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:22 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

What you are about to read is true.  I will not mention where it came from, to protect the person who told it to us, so you'll have to take this on faith.

My wife and I, with another couple, were at a restaurant last night.  We were surprised at how long it took for its staff to service our table...and by how many tables our waiter was handling...not just to serve food, but to change tablecloths and settings; the kind of thing a waiter in this type of restaurant usually does not do.

One of us (not me) mentioned that he was really working hard tonight. In answer, he apologized profusely and told us that the reason was because the restaurant had culled its staff down to 49 people in total, and the lower-end people were mostly gone, so he had to do the things they would have done in addition to waiting on tables.  

He told us that the reason for this was, in one word (one name, actually):  Obama.  If the restaurant had 50 or more employees everyone would have to be paid health insurance.  

He did not profess to be an accountant, and did not try to detail how much more money the restaurant would need to spend in overhead, how much higher the food bills would be to cover it, and how much business would be lost because of those higher bills (maybe enough to close altogether). But we didn't need him to.

After he left the table, I wondered out loud how many other places of business had become "49ers":  i.e. how many others were doing exactly the same the cost of jobs, and, more specifically, at the cost of lower-end jobs.  

I declined to also wonder out loud how many of those jobs were being filled by off-the-books illegals, not because the business owners wanted to break the law, but because it was the only way to stay competitive, thus stay in business.  But I assure you I thought about it to myself.

I have often written that ObamaCare, as constructed, is an unworkable monstrosity.  This is one of the many reasons why.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 06:43 AM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

We've all seen those cartoons, and photographs, where you're supposed to supply your own caption.  Well, how about supplying a meaning to this comment, which Bill Clinton made, yesterday, while campaigning in Milford, New Hampshire.

"Sometimes when I am on a stage like this, I wish that we weren't married, then I could say what I really think," Bill Clinton said before introducing his wife at a rally. "I don't mean that in a negative way. I am happy.

"The hotter this election gets, the more I wish I were just a former president and, just for a few months, not the spouse of the next one because, you know, I have to be careful what I say".

Huh?  What's that supposed to mean?

If Bill Clinton doesn't mean that in a negative way, how exactly does he mean it?  Is he sorry he can't say good things?  About who?

And since, according to NBC News-New York, he had no problem attacking Bernie Sanders yesterday, who is left in this primary but Hillary?

I'll leave it to you to come up with a logical explanation...and lots of luck with that.  But I'm having trouble doing so.  My only conclusion is that Bill Clinton may once have been a great politician (the greatest I ever saw), but what he was then and what he is now are two very different things.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 06:28 AM   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:

-How much more completely must President Obama's - and Hillary Clinton's - middle east "policies" fail before media call them out?

-Will Hillary Clinton's scripted debate win turn her campaign around?

-When will media report that the ahmed mohamed "clock" story was a complete hoax?

-When will media report that Zimbabwe admitted there was no "Cecil the lion" scandal?

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

Right down to:

-Does Donald Trump actually pay money to the person who does his hair?

-Could the movie "Truth" possibly be more untrue?

-When did they stop giving out speeding tickets on the Garden State Parkway?

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
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
   Town Hall
   Weekly Standard

About Us  
Blog Posts