Ken Berwitz

Andy Warhol once said that everybody gets 15 minutes of fame.

levi johnson, mercifully, is in his 16th minute.

From Patrick Gavin's blog at politico.com:

Who's the most unpopular person in politics? If you thought John Edwards, you *used* to be correct, but there's a new champion: Levi Johnston.

A new PPP poll shows that, while the former North Carolina senator held the initial record for unfavorability (72 percent in January) of any politician in their home state, Johnston has matched that among Alaskans, and gone a step further: his favorability rating in his home state is at a mere 6 percent.

"Those poll numbers probably don't bode too well for his Wasilla Mayoral candidacy," the poll dryly opines. Just over 1300 likely Alaskan voters were called for the poll.

"Johnston is reviled pretty universally across the board," says PPP's website. "But he's a little more popular with Democrats (15/61) than he is with Republicans (4/76) or independents (4/74)."

Is there a lower-class "human" (I'm stretching to use that word) than levi johnson?  A serial philanderer, a publicity hound, a classic lounge-lizard type.....and those are probably his good points.

The best thing I can say about johnson is that, if the law of averages holds, he might singlehandedly be responsible for Albert Einstein, Mother Teresa and whoever started the Red Cross.

What was Bristol thinking????  Was she thinking at all?????

We know she was SOMETHINGing, but maybe thinking would have been a better idea.

Ken Berwitz

One of the links I posted in my previous blog was to a feel-good commentary by Labor Secretary Hilda Solis which, I suppose, is supposed to make us happy about what a great job situation we have these days.

Here is a small part of what Ms. Solis had to say:

The big question: Are things getting better? To answer that, we need to look back more than a year ago, when the economy was losing a staggering 800,000 jobs a month. Our actions, most notably the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, stopped those losses.

The Recovery Act saved millions of American jobs — keeping health care providers in hospitals, teachers in classrooms, and police and firefighters on the beat. But the benefits weren't just in the public sector. During the past eight months, the economy has averaged 95,000 new private sector jobs.

Let's forget the whopping lie that we were losing 800,000 jobs a month (we lost a lot of jobs over a four month period, ONE MONTH of which was near 800,000.  But, true to the Chicago tradition the President came out of, Secretary Solis joins him in proclaiming this was some kind of ongoing average).  Let's instead talk about who was in charge during those job losses.

We'll start with a quick, one-sentence reminder:  Congress writes and votes on the budget. 

That's right.  Congress.  Not the President. 

So the big question now becomes, who was running Congress?  And the answer is....................Democrats.

The Democratic Party took control of congress - both the house and the senate- after the 2006 elections.  That means they wrote the 2007 and 2008 budgets.  Not President Bush or Republicans, but Democrats in congress.

And when does a budget kick in?  Fourth quarter.  So the first day of the Democratic congress's first budget was October 1, 2007. 

Ok.  Now look at the following chart, which tracks unemployment in the United States from 2006 to the present.  Please note where it was until October of 2007 (2007-10), when the budget was controlled by Republicans.  Then see where it went from there until the present, which is when the budget was controlled by Democrats:

That tells a story, doesn't it?

But not to worry.  The Obama administration has a three-word answer:  "Damn that Bush".

After two years and record deficits, we'll see how this flies in November.

If I were a Democrat, I wouldn't be expecting a victory celebration.....

Ken Berwitz

President Barack Obama may not know it. 

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis may not know it.

But the US economy is a disaster bordering on a catastrophe at the lip of a cataclysm.

Read the articles from these links, which I just pulled from www.drudgereport.com, and see for yourself:

UNEMPLOYMENT JUMPS TO 9.6%...
Economy LOST 283,000 jobs during 'Recovery Summer' months...
NPR: 'Recovery Summer' Ends With Economic Pothole...
Labor Sec. Declares: 'There are jobs out there'...
TREASURY HEAD RUSHES BACK FROM VACATION; AIDES SEARCH FOR OTHER JOBS PACKAGE...
120 Days to Go Until Largest Tax Hikes in History...
HE NEEDS A VACATION: OBAMA TO CAMP DAVID...

November is not going to be a happy month for Mr. Obama and his fellow Democrats.  Nor should it be, after two years of stuffing legislation this country does not want down our throats and, in the process, running up a deficit unprecedented in US history.

As Hosea said (8: 7)  "They sow the wind, and they reap the whirlwind."

Who knew Hosea was that good a political analyst?

Oh, and enjoy your vacation time at Camp David this weekend, Mr. President.  Especially since going on vacation is what you seem to like doing most.  And be sure to enjoy a couple more rounds on the golf course.

After all, look how long it has been since your last one.

Ken Berwitz

I have read a lot about the Obama administration's attempt to resurrect what media ludicrously call the "peace process" between Israel and "Palestinians" in Judea/Samaria (the west bank) and Gaza.

Just like all the other "peace process" charades over the years, it won't be going anywhere.  Why?  Because there is only one party actually interested in a peace settlement.

Mona Charen's latest column, which deals with this pathetic dog and pony show, is absolutely superb;  so much so that I yearn to post every word of it. 

But I will resist the urge and post only some of the key excerpts.  You can (and most certainly should) read her entire piece, by clicking here:

Hamas sent a greeting card to the quintet of leaders meeting in Washington, D.C., this week to initiate negotiations about a peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. In a well-planned ambush, they killed four Israeli civilians near the city of Hebron, two men and two women (one nine months pregnant), creating seven orphans. The murderers escaped, and may perhaps have videotaped the atrocity.

In Gaza that evening, 3,000 celebrants clogged the streets, waving flags, setting bonfires, passing out candy, and carrying their children on their shoulders. If there is videotape, it will presumably permit the revelers to relive the pleasure, even as the video of Daniel Pearl's beheading has circulated on the Internet.

In the course of the past few months, the PA has named a square and a children's summer camp in honor of a terrorist who murdered 37 Israeli civilians on a bus, and provided a hero's funeral to Amin al-Hindi, one of the planners of the kidnapping and murder of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics. The official PA newspaper described al-Hindi as "one of the stars ... who sparkled at the sports stadium in Munich." Both Mahmoud Abbas and Fayyad attended the funeral.

With whom would Israel be making binding agreements? Since a bitter civil conflict in 2007, Palestinian society has been divided. Hamas controls the Gaza Strip, and the PA controls the West Bank. Just last month, the Palestinian Authority canceled scheduled municipal elections for fear that Hamas might again triumph at the polls as they did in 2006. Hamas and Fatah thugs continue to target and assassinate one another.

Just this week, the Palestinian Authority's minister for prisoners affairs presented an award called the Shield of Resoluteness and Giving to Um Yousuf Abu Hamid. Her accomplishment? Four of her sons are serving long sentences in Israeli prisons for committing terrorist attacks. Handing her the plaque, the minister intoned, "The Palestinian mother is a central partner in the struggle, by virtue of what she has given and continues to give. It is she who gave birth to the fighters, and she deserves that we bow to her in salute and in honor."

A Palestinian children's television program instructs its viewers that all Israeli cities - including Haifa, Lod, Ramle, and Acre -- are "occupied Palestinian" cities. Another show aimed at children, which often dispenses advice like "drink your milk" and "obey your parents," also advised a young viewer named Saraa that "all Jews must be erased from our land ... "We want to slaughter them, Saraa, so they will be expelled from our land ... we'll have to (do it) by slaughter."

This latest iteration of Israeli/Palestinian peace talks midwived by the U.S. is doomed just as all of its predecessors were - because it is based on a fallacy and a stubborn refusal to face the truth about Palestinian society.

 You cannot negotiate with, make a serious settlement with, or peacefully coexist with people whose intent is to obliterate your country and either remove or kill your people - preferably kill them. 

Mona Charen understands this.  I understand this.  And I hope you do too.

Unfortunately, most of our wonderful "neutral" media do not, and maybe never will.

Ken Berwitz

Most people, I would hope, have at least somewhat of a sense that President Obama is deferential to unions - those nice folks who were so instrumental in getting out the vote for him in 2008 and will be so instrumental in getting out the vote for other Democrats in 2010.

But I wonder how many of them know that the Obama administration is ignoring the law to give one union - the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and maybe others I don't yet know about - power to coerce political money out of its local chapters.

Here are key excerpts of an article about this blatant, illegal shakedown from Mark Mix, President of the National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation.

I suggest that you avoid eating or drinking while you read it, because what you are trying to consume may wind up sprayed on your keyboard and monitor:

Imagine the outcry if McDonalds executives demanded that franchise owners collect “voluntary” contributions totaling $25,000 for the company’s Political Action Committee (PAC) from employees at every restaurant.

What if the fast food titan’s headquarters followed up with a threat - pay us, or face a $37,500 fine? Do you think this heavy-handed scheme would raise a few eyebrows at the Federal Election Commission (FEC)?

Replace “McDonalds” with “SEIU” in that description and you’ve got a pretty good idea of Big Labor’s latest political fundraising strategy. To meet their ambitious fundraising targets, Service Employees International Union bosses are now threatening to fine any local affiliate that doesn’t meet its PAC contribution requirements.

The only problem with this racket is that FEC guidelines explicitly prohibit organizations from collecting PAC funds by threatening members with financial reprisals. SEIU bosses aren’t exactly hiding their intentions, either – they actually wrote this fundraising provision into the union’s constitution at their annual convention.

If McDonalds had the nerve to collect contributions from employees using similar threats, you can bet the FEC would be all over the case. The SEIU, however, seems to have gotten away scot-free.

After SEIU bosses announced their new policy, the National Right to Work Foundation filed a formal complaint with the FEC. Foundation attorneys argued that the union’s new constitutional provision coerces political campaign contributions from employees.

Although the FEC dismissed the Foundation’s complaint in April, Foundation attorneys were only notified of the decision 23 days after the fact. Adding insult to injury, the FEC finally got around to releasing the reasoning behind its dismissal in August, 111 days after the original decision was made.

Coincidentally, all FEC appeals must be filed within 60 days of any ruling. By delaying its announcement and only releasing its reasoning until well after the window period had expired, the FEC effectively made it impossible to appeal the decision to federal court.

Meanwhile, Obama’s latest appointment to the National Labor Relations Board, an organization charged with overseeing American labor law, worked as a top SEIU lawyer before he joined the presidential transition team. Unsurprisingly, in just a short few months on the job, he has already pushed to eliminate independent audits for union expenditures.

The DISCLOSE Act, a bill being pushed in Congress that would require political organizations to release the names of top donors, features yet another Big Labor carve-out. Prompted by union operatives, Obama and the Democrats have largely exempted unions from the bill’s disclosure requirements, but other activist groups are out of luck.

Naturally, the same FEC that refuses to look into the SEIU’s shady fundraising tactics would be responsible for implementing DISCLOSE if it passes.

The FEC’s antics reveal what should have been obvious as soon as Big Labor’s money started pouring into Obama’s campaign coffers: Under Obama, the union bosses have effectively bought themselves immunity from any laws that get in the way of their massive forced-dues money-making machine.

There are many ways in which the Obama administration is giving this country away to his cronies and political partisans.  This is one of them.  And it's a big one.

Please, please, remember as much on election day.

Ken Berwitz

I'm constantly amused by that term "peace process".  It's right up there with "comprehensive immigration reform" and "affirmative action". 

What do they mean?  Well, nothing - therefore, whatever the person using them wants them to mean. 

Here, excerpted from Patrick Goodenough's article at cnsnews.com, is the beginning of "negotiations" between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and "Palestinian" President of whatever hamas lets him still be President of, Mahmoud Abbas:

Palestinian Leader Rebuffs Netanyahu’s Call for A ‘Jewish State’
Friday, September 03, 2010
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

 

(CNSNews.com) – Behind the polite talk at Thursday’s re-launch of direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations at the State Department was a deep gulf on what Israel calls a make-or-break issue – Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
 
Addressing Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas directly in English, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu identified what he called “two pillars of peace that I think will enable us to resolve all the outstanding issues … legitimacy and security.”
 
“Just as you expect us to be ready to recognize a Palestinian state as the nation-state of the Palestinian people, we expect you to be prepared to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people,” Netanyahu said, adding that the more than one million non-Jews living in Israel enjoy full civil rights.
 
“I think this mutual recognition between us is indispensable to clarifying to our two people – our two peoples – that the conflict between us is over.”
 
Abbas’ response, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton turned the floor over to him minutes later, was that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had already recognized Israel – in September 1993, when his predecessor, Yasser Arafat, and then Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin had signed “a document of mutual recognition.”
 
“And in this document, we give enough to show that our intentions are good, our intentions with respect to recognizing the state of Israel,” he added, speaking in Arabic through a translator.
 
Left unsaid was the fact that neither in 1993 nor since then has the PLO agreed to recognize Israel specifically as a Jewish state.
 
On the contrary, Abbas and other Palestinian leaders have repeatedly rejected this Israeli requirement.
 
“Palestinians reject the demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state,” PLO Executive Committee member Wassel Abu Yousef told reporters in Ramallah less than a fortnight ago, after Netanyahu told his cabinet that “recognition of Israel as the national state of the Jewish people” was a necessary component of a peaceful settlement to the conflict.
 
At a landmark convention in Bethlehem last year, Abbas’ Fatah faction of the PLO adopted a platform rejecting recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Translation:  "Palestinians" accept the legitimacy of the state of Israel --- so long as it is not a Jewish state, and so long as enough Arabs can be stuffed into it so that they comprise a majority, make it an Arab state, and can then do what they want with the Jews living there (assuming they haven't fled) and the assets Jews created there over the 60 years of Israel's existence.

What a deal.

That, folks, is the "peace process".  Do you need me to tell you where it's going?

Ken Berwitz

Who are the rich politicians?  Well, we all know they're the Republicans.  That's the conventional wisdom, right? 

Uh........nope.

First off, let's understand that there are a lot of rich politicians on both sides of the aisle.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is mistaken.

But who are the richest among them? 

An analysis by www.thehill.com, uncovered the 50 richest members of congress.  And 27 of them are Democrats, compared to 32 who are Republican.  Whoops, there goes "conventional wisdom" right down the tubes.

But what about the very richest?  The top 10?

That's a fair question, and here's the answer:  7 of the top 10 are Democrats. 

Want to see who they are?  Just click here.

So the next time you're at a family gathering, a party or watching a cable talk show, and someone sneers out disdain for those rich, country-club Republicans?  You might keep this little swatch of reality in mind.

Ken Berwitz

This comes under the heading "It isn't funny but how can you not laugh?".

From WTAJ, central Pennsylvania, a  CBS affiliate:

Butts Arrested in Boob Murder Case

Reported by: Nate Potter

 

POTTER TOWNSHIP, CENTRE COUNTY - Police have arrested a third person in connection with the murder of Samuel Boob.

 

Boob was shot and killed at his home in Potter Township, Centre County, on the morning of August 23rd, 2009.

Kermit Butts, 26, of Madisonburg, is accused of driving the suspected killer to and from the crime scene on the morning of the killing.  He was charged with aggravated assault and assisting a murder suspect and placed in the Centre County Prison.

 

Police believe that Butts drove Ronald Heichel to the Boob home and picked him up later in the day on August 23rd, 2009.  Police believe Heichel shot Sam Boob twice with a shotgun and killed him.  Heichel was charged with 1st degree murder.

 

The victim's wife, Mirinda Boob, is accused of working with Heichel to have her husband killed.  Police say they have text messages that were sent between her and Heichel, proving that the two were working together to kill Samuel.  She has been charged with conspiracy to commit murder. 

Samuel is dead and his wife is implicated.  That's some pair of Boobs, let me tell you.

And why would any of them hang out with a schmuck like Heichel?

Incidentally, part of WTAJ's viewing area is Woodcock Valley.  This has nothing to do with the story but, for some reason, I can't help thinking that it fits in.

Ken Berwitz

Robert Costa of National Review has conducted a genuinely interesting and informative interview with veteran, venerable Democratic pollster Pat Caddell.  

You can read it all by clicking here.  But I am posting some of the key excerpts below.  Please pay special attention to the last paragraph, which I've put in bold print;  it says so much in so few words:

The polling figures paint an astounding picture -- and not just for Democrats, but for the political class as a whole.

 

In Jimmy Carter’s White House, Patrick Caddell was, in the words of Teddy White, the “house Cassandra” — an all-too-candid pollster whose prophecies spooked the president’s other advisors. Three decades later, Caddell again is warning his fellow Democrats about electoral doom. As he sips an iced tea over lunch in midtown Manhattan, Caddell sighs and tells me that the lessons of the Carter years appear to be all but forgotten by the current crop of Democrats in Washington.

“President Obama’s undoing may be his disingenuousness,” Caddell says. After campaigning for post-partisanship, Obama, he observes, has lurched without pause to the left. “You can’t get this far from what you promised,” Caddell says, “especially when people invest in hope — you must understand that obligation. The killer in American politics is disappointment. When you are elected on expectations, and you fail to meet them, your decline steepens.”

“Democrats are aware of this,” Caddell continues. “They know that the general outcome is baked.” As the fall campaign kicks into gear, “the question now becomes whether Obama can mitigate their losses. You see them trying to localize their campaigns and pretending that they don’t know Nancy Pelosi. It’s all rather amusing.”

On Monday, Gallup released a new weekly poll showing Republicans leading Democrats by an unprecedented ten-point margin, 51 to 41 percent, in congressional voting preferences — the largest gap in Gallup’s history of tracking the midterm generic ballot. “I have never seen numbers like this,” Caddell says, shaking his head. “Unless Republicans can find some way to screw it up, they will win big, even though nobody really likes them, either.”

“Democrats used to be the voice of the common man in America, not his dictator,” Caddell laments. “Now, with Wall Street, their mantra is, ‘We’ll take your money, but we won’t kiss.’ The people who own the party — George Soros, the Center for American Progress, the public-employee union bosses, rich folks flying private jets to ‘ideas festivals’ in Aspen — they’re Obama’s base.”

“With Carter, I would argue that his failures were not of the heart or of intent, but, perhaps, of execution,” Caddell says. “He was never inconsistent with what he originally envisioned. I can’t say the same for Obama.” Successful presidents, Caddell argues, “realize that it is not about them — that the country is bigger than their presidency. With Obama, it is always about him. It’s a terrible thing to have to say, but I think that it has become obvious.”

"Successful presidents realize that it is not about them - that the country is bigger than their presidency.  With Obama, it is always about him": 

Bullseye! 

Speaking as someone who has spent many years in consumer research, and has great respect for professionals who understand more than just the numbers themselves, I would have loved to sit in on that lunch.  Not to talk, just to listen.

Pat Caddell is a man who sees things clearly -- which is why has so little cachet in today's Democratic Party.

Ken Berwitz

I have to admit that my first impulse was to see billionaire (or so I'm told) Jeff Greene as a hopelessly sore loser. 

Greene spent tens of millions of his own dollars in the Florida Democratic primary, but Kendrick Meek overhauled him anyway, by about 57% - 43%. 

Greene's reaction wasn't what you'd call gracious.  He filed suit against two newspapers - the St. Petersburg Times and Miami Herald - for libel, claiming they destroyed his primary run by knowingly publishing false stories about him.

Can he win?  Almost certainly not, since it is enormously difficult to successfully sue a newspaper for libel.

But does he have a point? 

When I started reading the article I didn't think so.  But afterwards I wasn't so sure.

Read this excerpt from the Associated Press, via Fox News, and decide for yourself:

Billionaire Jeff Greene Sues Florida Papers for Libel Over Failed Senate Bid

Published September 02, 2010

Failed Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Jeff Greene sued the St. Petersburg Times and The Miami Herald on Wednesday, claiming they published knowingly false articles timed to damage his chances of winning.

The lawsuit accuses the newspapers of "a coordinated and agreed-upon plan to assassinate Greene's character, to diminish his chances of winning ... and to impair the future earning capacity of an extremely successfully businessman." Greene is a billionaire real estate investor who spent more than $24 million of his own money on last week's Democratic Senate primary, which he lost to U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek.

The two newspapers have an agreement in which they share each other's stories and often work together.

One article and a follow-up editorial concerned a Greene condominium deal with a California businessman who was later indicted for mortgage fraud, a case in which Greene was not implicated. Another story involving boxer Mike Tyson -- who was best man at Greene's wedding -- detailed lurid allegations of illegal drug use and partying aboard Greene's 148-foot yacht, Summerwind.

Greene repeatedly said both stories were false and said he provided the two newspapers with evidence about that before the articles were published. A correction later ran in the Times and Herald on the Tyson story -- which originated from a Sports Illustrated interview -- noting that the boxer had "clarified" that he "didn't do drugs on the boat" and had no dealings with a drug trafficker on the yacht.

See what I mean?

Look, I'm no fan of rich people self-funding their candidacies.  I consider it a direct outgrowth of the ridiculous McCain-Feingold legislation.  I wish we were playing under the rules proposed years ago by Sen. McConnell and others:  unlimited funding by whoever wants to give to a candidate, but full disclosure we can all see, in a timely fashion, where the money is coming from.

Regardless of what I wish, however, McCain-Feingold is the law of the land, and Jeff Greene was perfectly within his rights to run as he did. 

I doubt that he'll get very far with the lawsuit.  But if it forces the Times and the Herald to be a little more careful about the accuracy of what they print - maybe a lot more careful - it will be all to the good.