Buy Our Book Here!

Friday, 09 October 2015


Ken Berwitz

My compliments to Alex Griswold of, for this terrific take on Hillary Clinton's denunciation of the NRA - which, with apologies to Mr. Griswold, I am posting in its entirety because it is so short (he can, of course, do the same with anything I write).

Perhaps Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton should have chosen her words more carefully when she attacked the NRA yesterday:

Now the real answer to this is for gun-owners to form a different organization that supports the Second Amendment, supports their rights to own guns, use guns, go hunting, go target shooting, but stands against the absolutism of the NRA. You know, the NRA's position reminds me of negotiating with the Iranians or the communists. There's no possible discussion. And it's for political purposes.

Setting aside the attack on the NRA... did President Barack Obama's former Secretary of State really just say there's "no possible discussion" to be had with the Iranians?

Now if you ask me, that sounds an awful lot like what Republicans have been saying for the past few months; that Iran can't be negotiated with, and that any agreement would simply be ignored by Iranian hardliners. That doesn't at all (seem) like a presidential candidate who enthusiastically supports the Iran deal.

The notion that there's "no possible discussion" to be had with communists is equally amusing, given that the Obama administration is currently in the middle of a thaw in diplomatic relations with Raul Castro's Cuba. Again, Hillary Clinton has followed the president's lead on that issue, flip-flopping on the issue of the Cuban embargo.

So here's a free tip for Hillary: the next time you smear your opponents by comparing them to dictatorial regimes, trying picking regimes you aren't currently kowtowing to.  

I have nothing to add.  This speaks for itself...eloquently and Hillariously.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 20:14 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

Here is the beginning of drew magary's article in the current issue Gentleman's Quarterly...which both he and the magazine seem to think is very worthwhile, very cool:

Fuck Ben Carson

You know, the only thing more alarming than Donald Trump leading the Republican presidential field is the fact that Ben Carson is the guy right behind him. While establishment puds like Jeb! Bush and Marco Rubio can’t decide if they want to beat Trump or emulate him, the Good Doctor made it clear this week that he is not only willing to replicate Trump's signature brand of hot-garbage-spewing, but he'll say even DUMBER shit. Here is Carson from earlier in the week on the Oregon shooter:

"Not only would I probably not cooperate with him, I would not just stand there and let him shoot me. I would say, 'Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can't get us all.'"

I gather from this highly elevated and intelligent analysis, that magary thinks the 9 dead and 7 injured during chris harper mercer's massacre were much better off doing what they did than what Mr. Carson suggested.  

I gather he thinks that meekly obeying the murderer's commands, and either dying or being sent to hospitals in varying degrees of mortal danger, was a far superior outcome than rushing harper mercer and incapacitating him at the cost of possibly one or two casualties - maybe none if harper mercer were sufficiently surprised to either not fire at all, or fire wildly and miss.

I am tempted to use the same verb to insult drew magary that he used to insult Ben Carson.  But that's way too easy.  I'll just let his supersedingly stupid "analysis" stand as-is.  His own words say it just as clearly.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 16:50 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

After blogging about all the political crap, I thought you might want to hear, and see, something really great.

Here is Freddie Mercury and operatic singer Montserrat Caballe singing Mercury's composition, "Barcelona", which was going to be the theme of the 1992 summer olympics, but was pulled after Mercury died of AIDS months before they were going to start.

If you are not thrilled by this, you are immune to being thrilled.


Hopelessly Partisan @ 14:35 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

No excerpts here.  Only a link.

If you click here, you will find the letter that House Oversight Committee Chair Trey Gowdy has sent to ranking Democrat Elijah Cummings - a letter that a) was way, way overdue and b) is actually pleasant and collegial compared to what Cummings deserved.

Believe me, you have not seen a letter like this before.  

Ok, ok, just one excerpt:  Gowdy's last paragraph.....which should give you an idea of its tonality:

House Benghazi Committee

Again:  I urge you to use the link and read the entire letter.  This is one you should not miss.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 14:13 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

From investigative reporter James Rosen of Fox News (certainly not NBC, CBS or ABC):

Some senior U.S. officials involved in the implementation of the Iran nuclear deal have privately concluded that a key sanctions relief provision - a concession to Iran that will open the doors to tens of billions of dollars in U.S.-backed commerce with the Islamic regime - conflicts with existing federal statutes and cannot be implemented without violating those laws, Fox News has learned.

At issue is a passage tucked away in ancillary paperwork attached to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, as the Iran nuclear deal is formally known. Specifically, Section 5.1.2 of Annex II provides that in exchange for Iranian compliance with the terms of the deal, the U.S. "shall...license non-U.S. entities that are owned or controlled by a U.S. person to engage in activities with Iran that are consistent with this JCPOA."

In short, this means that foreign subsidiaries of U.S. parent companies will, under certain conditions, be allowed to do business with Iran. The problem is that the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act (ITRA), signed into law by President Obama in August 2012, was explicit in closing the so-called "foreign sub" loophole.

So the "deal" may be illegal.  Does it matter?  

-This is an administration that has unilaterally changed ObamaCare dozens of times without going through congress...which legislated it.  That is unconstitutional.

-This is an administration which bombed Libya for over a half year without seeking congressional approval.  That is unconstitutional.

-This is an administration that tells us in so many words which laws it will enforce and which it will not.  

Why, then, would the apparent illegality of a nuclear "deal" matter at all?  

Thank you, James Rosen, for the heads-up.  You seem to know what being a reporter is.  Must be very lonely.

And thank you in advance, NBC, CBS or ABC, for ignorning it - an outcome I fully expect, based on 7 years of ignoring the Obama administration's refusal to abide by the laws of this country.

Fifteen more months of this.  I count the seconds.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 13:36 PM   Add Comment


Ken Berwitz

You would be hard pressed to know this based on the amount of coverage mainstream media are providing, but there has been a sudden rash of attacks by Palestinian Arabs on Jewish citizens throughout Israel, but centered in Jerusalem.  A young couple was shot to death in front of their children, while driving home.   Two dead and two seriously injured in a stabbing days later.  And numerous other stabbings, rock-throwing injuries, etc.

What does this mean?  Well, if history is any indication, it means that the Palestinian Arab terrorists have sufficiently re-armed, and are now heading for another confrontation that will result:

-A necessary retaliatory incursion by Israel;

-Many Palestinian dead, including civilians who will die because attacks will be launched from civilian areas (a standard tactic of thse "brave warriors");

-Israel decimating more of where Palestinian Arabs live (again, due in large part because attacks are launched from civilian areas, which Israel will then hit back at);

-Israel will complete its incursion, after which Palestinian Arabs will declare it a great victory for their side;

-The United Nations will condemn.....Israel.

-And then things will die down again, until Palestinan Arabs can sufficiently re-arm.

My expectation is that this will all happen over the next few months.

Let's hope I'm wrong.

One other thing:  be sure to read the Associated Press account of what is going on in Israel right now - as a case study in making Israel rather than Palestinians the villains - complete with a picture of a Palestinian Arab man carrying a wounded "victim" to safety, and Palestinian Arabs peacefully protesting (can you believe those damn Jews for going after them?)

Hopelessly Partisan @ 09:26 AM   1 comment


Ken Berwitz

What is the problem with gun control laws?

Cartoonist Chip Bok provides the answer - clearly and cogently - to that question, which all too many advocates of more and stricter gun control laws cannot bring themselves to face:




The problem, of course, is that people who do not obey gun control laws are unaffected by them.

This is not to say strict, logical gun control laws should not be passed - and, most importantly, enforced.  Anyone who reads this blog knows I am in favor of, among other things, registration of handguns and IDing of ammunition.

But none of this will be relevant for gun violence being perpetrated by people who obtain and use guns illegally - which is to say the vast majority of gun violence.

Every time we have an incident like the one at Upqua Community College, the all-talk-no-action crowd screams for more gun control laws.  Yeah, that's the ticket.  We're on the right side of things.  We can pat ourselves on the back and be proud of our principled stand...while getting all those votes from the suckers concerned citizens out there.

But the harsh reality is that, while it is certainly reasonable to avoid putting legal guns into the hands of people who have no business owning them, this will have a minimal affect on the amount of gun violence which takes place.

Chicago, to cite just one example, is experiencing rampant gun violence this year.  But it has among the strictest gun control laws among major cities in the United States. 

How can that be? 

Well, ask yourself a different question:  how many of Chicago's gun crimes are committed by legal gun owners - keeping in mind that the vast majority of gun crimes in Chicago involve gang members in mostly Black areas of the city. 

Now you know the answer. 

Here's another question worth considering:  do you think the decent, law-abiding people in those neighborhoods - and let's never ever forget that a large majority are decent, law abiding people - think more gun control laws will protect them?  Or do you think they'd feel safer if Chicago did more to disrupt and, if possible, break up the gangs which, in no small part, run those neighborhoods?

You know the answer to that one too.

So let the politicians pride themselves on how many new gun control laws they can dream up...which will then be used to get votes because of how "tough on crime" they are. 

But understand that they are doing next to nothing to prevent gun violence...and, apparently could not care less.

THAT is the problem with gun control laws.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 08:50 AM   2 comments


Ken Berwitz

First, we have these links, from

Then this one:

Any doubt about what's going on here?

I am certain that Joe Biden has, by now, reconciled his personal tragedy with his presidential ambitions.  If that had caused him to walk away from a presidential run, we'd have heard about it already.

The only reason I see for him not still holding off is that Hillary Clinton, his only significant competition (Sanders has a ceiling, O'Malley hasn't gotten off the floor yet), keeps falling in the polls without him doing a thing..

Then add in the fact that Clilnton will be skewered by Sanders and O'Malley in next week's CNN debate - again, without any need for Joe Biden to get involved.   

The debate-aftermath period, it seems to me, would be a very logical time for Mr. Biden to ride on on his white horse and save the party.

I originally thought he'd jump in right after Labor Day.  But I did not foresee that Ms. Clinton's numbers would go nowhere but down - both before Labor Day and afterwards too.  

In the (probably paraphrased) words of Napoleon,  "Never interfere with the enemy when he is in the process of destroying himself."  Change "him" to "her" and you've got the Biden strategy.

Remember when the so-called pundits were assuring you, smugly and all-knowingly - that Hillary Clinton was "inevitable"?  
When was the last time you heard any of them say that?

Don't ever expect to hear it again.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 07:33 AM   1 comment

Thursday, 08 October 2015


Ken Berwitz

Not much need to expand on the "for me, but not thee" message we find in S. A Miller's piece for the Washington Times:

Senate Democrats gathered Thursday on the steps of the Capitol surrounded by about a dozen armed guards to announce a new push for tougher gun-control laws.

The officers from the U.S. Capitol Police, who carried sidearms, were in addition to the regular detail paroling the Capitol ground due the large number of elected officials attending the event, according to a officer on the scene.

Any questions - other than "could this bunch possibly be more hypocritical?  

Any comments - other than "If I had armed guards protecting me I wouldn't need a gun either"?

Point made.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 20:33 PM   1 comment


Ken Berwitz

Chuck Ross is a first-class investigative reporter for  And his latest blog, if accurate, will literally blow the lid off of Hillary Clinton's handling of Benghazi and, more generally Libya -- unless mainstream media decides to bury it (which is always a possibility - especially on behalf of a Clinton).

Mr. Ross's piece is long, and the following few excerpts will not do it justice.  So I urge you to use this link and read every word.  

Here's your taste (bold print is mine):

A trove of emails that the State Department gave the House Select Committee on Benghazi only two weeks ago show that longtime Hillary Clinton friend Sidney Blumenthal pushed his business interests in Libya on the then-secretary of state and that she forwarded an email discussing a CIA source which was classified at the time it was sent.

That's according to House Select Committee on Benghazi chairman Trey Gowdy, who stated in a letter sent Thursday to Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings that he plans to release the 1,500 emails within the next five days.

Though many of the exchanges involved discussions about Libya and Benghazi, the State Department turned the records over only two weeks ago. In May, the State Department released what it claimed at the time were all of the emails related to the North African country.

While it is still unclear why the agency withheld the documents for so long, the discovery of the records corresponds with the departure of Catherine Duval. She took a job in the legal affairs division of the State Department last August and handled the production of Clinton’s emails. Duval, who previously worked at the IRS on the production of Lois Lerner's emails, had also worked at Williams & Connolly, the law firm that employees Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall.

In his letter to Cummings, Gowdy refers to emails from Blumenthal which indicate that he was pushing business interests on behalf of a company called Osprey Global Solutions, which sought private contracts in post-civil war Libya. That despite Blumenthal having no official position within the U.S. government. In fact, the Obama administration famously blocked him from a job at Clinton’s State Department because of his dirty political work during the 2008 presidential campaign.

So what do we have here? 

 -We have classified documents being passed to a confidante and political friend (FYI:  Sid Blumenthal is known as a hatchet man supreme), whom Ms. Clinton's boss, the President of the United States, did not want anywhere near the administration.  

-We have emails that could have and should have been made available a long time ago - but may have been withheld by a lois lerner confidante (remember her?  The one who pled the fifth to the house oversight committee - after first giving her side of the story, which almost certainly made taking the fifth illegal?  The one who ought to be in jail right now?).

-And we have the State Department caught in a blatant lie, when it said all the emails had been turned over.

I again remind you that this is just a taste of what is in Mr. Ross's commentary...and urge you to use the link and read it all.  

Then pick your own adjectives to describe what you think of Ms. Clinton when she tells the low-information crowd that this is nothing but a witch hunt aganist pore ol' Hillary.

Hopelessly Partisan @ 19:35 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:

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

-With Hillary Clinton sinking like a rock, what happens if/when Joe Biden jumps into the race?

-How much are the email and Clinton foundation scandals causing Hillary's downward plunge? What can she do to stop it? Anything?

-When does Zimbabwe stop whining about "Cecil" and take responsibility for giving hunters permission to kill lions...for $50,000 each?

-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 Tom Brady possibly come across as less honest? Less sincere?

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

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