Reality Hammer - For People Who Can Handle The Truth

Happy 4th of July Weekend!

Sat, 04 Jul 2009 22:55:41 GMT

I hope you are all having a great weekend!

Ah, you can always count on liberals to have no class.

Sat, 04 Jul 2009 03:42:24 GMT

Rich Sanchez says that Governor Palin is resigning because she's pregnant. Erik Nelson spewed a vile piece that was quickly taken down at the Huffington Post. But I'll reprint it here because people saved it before that happened.

In Sarah Palin's resignation announcement she complained about the treatment of her son Trig who always teaches her life lessons. She said that the "world needs more Trigs, not fewer." That's a presidential campaign promise we can all get behind. She will be the first politician to actually try to increase the population of retarded people. To me, it's kinda like saying the world needs more cancer patients because they teach us such personal lessons.

Her first act as President: To introduce a Pre-K lunch buffet that includes lead paint chips. Sort of a Large HEAD-START Program.

She will then encourage women to hold off on pregnancies until their 40's just to mix up some chromosomes.

She now is in favor of abortion only in case of diploid birth.

Her policies will increase jobs because Wal-Mart is building new stores each day and someone has to be the greeter.

This will lead to smaller government because fewer Americans will have the cognitive ability to hold a government job.

There's more, of course. Suffice it to say that hypocrisy doesn't even begin to cover the hatred that the left unleashes on anyone who dares oppose them.

Red Leader...checking out?

Sat, 04 Jul 2009 03:16:48 GMT

Well, that was unexpected. I'm sure the rabid left will crow that they successfully drove Governor Palin from the playing field. Of course if Republicans did anything like that it would be held up as proof that they were women hating, minority hating thugs.

I suspect we'll know "the rest of the story" in time.

In any event Sarah Palin has our thanks for leading the fight against socialism. I hope this is not the end of her career in politics.

Governor Palin says she'd come out ahead in a run against Obama

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 03:41:43 GMT

Okay, it's a play on words because she really means "running" and not politics. It's from a story in Runner's World.

Which, I might add, doesn't have any unsubstantiated claims in it. Oh, and speaking of unsubstantiated allegations, does this sound like someone who is obsessed with their own fame and appearance?

When I run, I'm totally incognito because I'm not wearing the trough full of makeup. I can go running through a mob of tourists and they don't recognize me.

Vanity Fair must be pretty embarrassed to have been outclassed by Runner's World.

And speaking of being outclassed, here's a tip for Katie Couric: when you ask a specific question you get a specific answer:

[Palin] ...You know, [former RW columnist] George Sheehan really could articulate what running means in terms of applicability to life. During the campaign, when people asked me about my favorite authors, I said C.S. Lewis, John Steinbeck, and Dr. George Sheehan, and people would look at me, these reporters, like who in the world is that. But his books and columns so inspired me 10, 15, 20 years ago, and still do. I remember what he wrote about applying the lessons of running to relationships and families and businesses and, in my case, running a state. He was a brilliant man.

[RW] Can you think of some specific passages you remember or lessons learned from his work?

[Palin] I remember reading one of his columns about the beauty of where he was running that day. And I thought how lucky I am to be in a place that has these protections of our environment and that has stuck with me ever since—to not take for granted that Alaska has such beauty to offer

So yeah, apparently Couric is the only "journalist" who was never able to figure out a way to get Governor Palin to talk about her favorite authors. :D

Another anti-Palin hit piece from the MSM

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 01:55:54 GMT

This time in Vanity Fair.

The author of this alleged piece of journalism doesn't cite a single source. That's all you need to know about alleged journalist Todd Purdum and what he set out to achieve with what only be called a libelous, hate-filled hit piece masquerading as journalism.

Purdum tips his hand by using such obviously false constructs as claiming that multiple people looked up personality disorders in a book instead of just doing a web search. This is part of a heavy-handed attempt to link her to Richard Nixon, the "great Satan" of liberals who love to portray him as a psychotic.

Once again liberals project their own hate and psychological foibles onto others and claim that since they believe it, it must be true.

If I were Governor Palin I'd sue. She may be a public figure but the complete lack of cited sources and statements that say the opposite from people who are willing to go on the record is proof of malicious intent as far as I am concerned.

This is just more evidence that the left fears Governor Palin and will do anything, no matter how unethical or even illegal, in order to destroy her political career.

Coleman concedes

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:26:43 GMT

It may not be ironic that a professional liar and personal attack artist has become a politician and won a seat in the Senate. Indeed some would argue that Al Franken is merely "rising" to his potential in that field.

It is however, a sad day for America. That such a vile piece of human scum is representing good, honest people is a tragedy.

Newly minted as a Senator, Franken is already one of the worst politicians ever. Born in scandal, his political career will surely end that way as well.

Obama fails another foreign policy test

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:46:48 GMT

Unlike his endless dithering over Iran and its elections, President Obama swiftly proclaimed his support for one side in the Honduras "is it a coup or counter-coup?" affair.

Unfortunately for Obama he came down on the wrong side of liberty.

The Honduran military moved to oust a President who was channeling Hugo Chavez (or Fidel Castro or just about any other socialist strong man) and attempting to use an illegal referendum to lend an air of legitimacy to his attempt to become "President for life".

This move was at odds with the Honduran courts, congress and even the sitting President's own political party.

So the military moved in and invited Manuel Zelaya to leave the country. (As in, not kill him!) They then oversaw the swearing in of the Speaker of the Honduran Parliament as interim President until the November elections.

Gee, sounds like a massive killing-fields meant to perpetuate an authoritarian regime. No, wait, that's Iran.

Obama is even at odds with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who said the action was "not a coup".

Looks like Obama needs even more on the job training!

Victory!

Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:59:41 GMT

Another victory for sanity in the Supreme Court. In a ruling that also reflects on nominee Sonia Sotomayor, the Supreme Court ruled that the city of New Haven could not scrap a test already taken by employees simply because no blacks would receive a promotion as a result.

Rejecting the notion of equality of outcomes the Supreme Court noted that the city failed to demonstrate that any discrimination had taken place.

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Monday that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when there is no evidence it was intentional.

Liberals, of course, both criticized the ruling (which is now precedent) and then claimed that Sotomayor "was only following precedent" when she joined a ruling rejecting the firefighter's claims. No word from Sotomayor on whether she will follow this precedent.

It's okay that Sotomayor was wrong; no judge has a perfect record. What's important is that she realizes why she was wrong and respects this ruling.

Speaking of which, Justice Ginsburg continues to demonstrate why she is the worst Justice currently on the bench. In her dissent she argued against a straw man:

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

The firefighters in question did not claim they had a "right" to a promotion. Indeed, their lawsuit argued they were denied a promotion that they had rightfully earned. And, of course, no one had been promoted because of the ongoing lawsuit. I would claim that Harvard (Ginsburg's law school) must be embarrassed by such nonsensical statements but I have a feeling that they agree with the notion of equality of outcomes and hold their own prejudices to be the "lawful kind".

Governor Palin Visits Camp Bondsteel

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:33:55 GMT

Red Leader checking in

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:01:33 GMT

From her visit to Alaskan troops:

Untimely lies

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:03:20 GMT

Alleged journalist Kevin O'Leary tells a few whoppers in his story about the current fiscal mess California finds itself in. Like a good little liberal robot he repeats the myth that is being spread by the left: that Proposition 13 (passed 30 years ago) is to blame for all of it.

Gosh, just what is this monstrous "Proposition 13"?

Why, it was a proposal that Californians voted on that made future tax hikes subject to a 2/3 vote in order to be passed.

That's it?

That's it.

No edicts to kill women, children, the elderly, the poor, minorities, glbts, etc?

Nope.

So..."why is it a problem?", you ask? Well, it's not! The liberals are just whining because they can't convince 2/3 of the state legislatures (who are being held "hostage" by their...constituents!) that tax hikes are a better way to solve the current problem than, say, spending cuts.

About now you must be thinking, "but I and every other household I know of cuts spending when income goes down." Yes, yes we do. But leftists believe that government is special. So special it deserves your money even when is hasn't earned it and (especially) when it has spent it so foolishly it finds itself in debt.

Not content with lying about Proposition 13 and the current fiscal crisis California finds itself in, O'Leary also tosses in some lies about Social Security being "assaulted" by "conservatives", Ronald Reagan being evil (what else?) because he outed welfare queens" (Dorothy Woods, anyone?) and whether the state should step in with guaranteed incomes for people who either can't work or choose not to work because money would be falling from the sky if those evil conservatives would simply agree to be taxed more.

O'Leary also fails to inform readers why Proposition 13 passed in the first place: because inflation and taxes tied to inflation (like property taxes) were eroding the wealth and incomes of people so quickly in the 1970s that they were getting poorer even while they made more money. To stop such insanity they made automatic tax hikes a thing of the past. And wouldn't you know it...California boomed for more than two decades before this allegedly caused a problem. And with that boom came...higher spending. Not just on residents and for residents but also on illegal aliens and for illegal aliens. What, O'Leary didn't mention that? I am shocked, shocked I say!

All in all, a typical article in a mainstream media publication! It states a conclusion that can't be supported by the facts, lies about the issues surrounding the matter, lies about more issues the author wishes to rant about and then tosses in some unrelated anecdotes in an attempt to pursued you by appealing to your emotional side.

That's pretty much the antithesis of real journalism.

Democrats take another step toward economic enslavement of the United States

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 07:33:05 GMT

I suppose that if you are going to build a slave society you might as well enslave everyone. (Except the ruling elite, of course.)

In one of the biggest swindles in history, House Democrats forced through legislation that claims to help the environment but in reality is just another step toward claiming all of the income produced by Americans.

The vote was 219-212, capping months of negotiations and days of intense bargaining among Democrats. Republicans were overwhelmingly against the measure, arguing it would destroy jobs in the midst of a recession while burdening consumers with a new tax in the form of higher energy costs.

The fact is that this bill will do nothing to decrease pollution (whether "linked" to the alleged man-made changes in climate or not) but will increase energy and energy-related costs for consumers by up to $800 a year.

Perhaps Obama will propose another $6.50 a week "tax cut" to offset this?

At some point even the most die-hard Obamatron will be forced to admit that Obama's policies are claiming an ever-increasing share of people's incomes. At some point economic slavery will ensue because the government will be taking most of your income and made you dependent on government handouts and services for your basic needs. They used to call that a "plantation" economy. The Democrat plantation will be every bit as destructive to freedom as the historic model was.

Historians looking for a day when the line was crossed could hardly do worse by selecting this day.

Obama has been in office for less than six months yet has spent as much as President Bush did in almost eight years. And in that six months he has committed you, your children and your children's children to pay twice the taxes you were paying just a few years ago. Even worse, he has monopolized government spending and limited spending options for future Presidents by borrowing such massive amounts of money. There will be little room for paying for anything except Democrat legacy programs like Social Security and Obama's programs and the resulting debt.

Congratulations, America. You're voting yourself into slavery.

If you only glance at the story

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:35:41 GMT

You might come away with the impression that the "Jena 6" were found to be innocent instead of guilty of beating Justin Barker.

JENA, La. – Five members of the Jena Six pleaded no contest Friday to misdemeanor simple battery and won't serve jail time, ending a case that thrust a small Louisiana town into the national spotlight and sparked a massive civil rights demonstration.

I'm sure the "six" have lucrative careers ahead of them as "civil rights" ~~agitators~~ activists. Their first victory is that they aren't going to be charged with a hate crime or (apparently) sued for civil rights violations.

Friday's criminal proceedings were followed by a brief civil hearing to settle the lawsuit by Barker against the group.

No word from Obama on whether "Jena justice" has been served.

Pirate Hunting!

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:56:00 GMT

In what is otherwise expected to be a dark day for freedom, news comes of Russians conducting pirate hunting trips.

No word on if you are allowed to dress like a ninja.

For all the useful fools who mock people who support the Second Amendment

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:05:18 GMT

Mock all you like, this is why we will not be disarmed.

Bus loads of protesters were stopped and unloaded from their buses by "black-clad police" and literally herded. When the massing was sufficient, as the barely controllably distraught Tehran caller to CNN described first hand, hundreds of the regime's Basij thugs poured out of an adjoining mosque and commenced a massacre with axes, clubs, guns and gas.

And I know why you choose to mock: you'd be one of the people doing the killing in the above tragedy (or with the usual suspects here on LJ—cheering it on from a safe distance).

Why does Obama continue to fiddle while Iran burns?

Michael Jackson killed LJ!

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:42:02 GMT

I can't believe people posting to a gossip community on LJ about Michael Jackson brought down the servers.

Don't let liberals tell you what Republicans stand for

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 02:57:07 GMT

Or used to stand for, for that matter.

What Republicans have stood for from day one is quite clear. Life, liberty and property for all people. No exceptions. For legal immigration. For state sovereignty. Against profligate government spending.

In other words: against what the Democrats stood for in 1860...and in some cases stand for today.

A word of advice for today's Republicans: all it took to for the downfall of a party that dominated national politics was the abandonment of a single provision in the above list. The sooner you declare that foolish spending was wrong the sooner people will consider trusting you again.

SC Governor Mark Sanford reveals affair

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:45:24 GMT

It's hard to disguise an affair when you have to fly to Argentina to carry on. :P

Sandford chose his mistress (I'm assuming it's a female) over his wife and kids (flying down on Father's Day) even as he was apparently ending the affair.

He needs to get his shit together if he wants to remain Governor for the rest of his term. There's certainly no reason to re-elect him as there is a wealth of political talent that can take his place. As good as he's been with economic programs his actions the past few days demonstrate a remarkable lack of wisdom when it comes to the priorities of an elected official.

Perhaps he should look into retirement programs in Argentina for American citizens.

Look for the union label

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:37:08 GMT

It's a sure sign of problems at work!

* Studies typically find that unionized companies earn profits between 10 percent and 15 percent lower than those of comparable non-union firms.

* Some unions win higher wages for their members, though many do not. But with these higher wages, unions bring less investment, fewer jobs, higher prices, and smaller 401(k) plans for everyone else.

* Final union contracts typically give workers group identities instead of treating them as individuals. Unions do not have the resources to monitor each worker's performance and tailor the contract accordingly. Even if they could, they would not want to do so. Unions want employees to view the union--not their individual achievements--as the source of their economic gains.

* Consequently, union contracts compress wages: They suppress the wages of more productive workers and raise the wages of the less competent. Unions redistribute wealth between workers.

* A better summary of the economic research is that unions do not increase workers' wages by nearly as much as they claim and that, at a number of companies, they do not raise wages at all.

* In essence, unions "tax" investments that corporations make, redistributing part of the return from these investments to their members. This makes undertaking a new investment less worthwhile. Companies respond to the union tax in the same way they respond to government taxes on investment--by investing less.

* Research shows that unions directly cause firms to reduce their investments. In fact, investment drops sharply after unions organize a company. One study found that unionizing reduces capital investment by 30 percent--the same effect as a 33 percentage point increase in the corporate tax rate

* The balance of economic research shows that unions do not just happen to organize firms with more layoffs and less job growth: They cause job losses. Most studies find that jobs drop at newly organized companies, with employment falling between 5 percent and 10 percent

This is why professional groups have long resisted attempts at unionization. Almost every professional that works hard understands they would lose compensation and would be subsidizing people who didn't work as hard or as efficiently as they do.

Conservatives will lose the economic high ground if they continue to dither

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:57:18 GMT

Moderate and liberal politicians are supporting tax cuts. If conservatives continue to dither instead of taking action they will lose their claim to be the champions of lower tax rates.

I've always wondered why liberals (and some moderates) refused to accept the proven track record of supply side (or even just lower tax rates) in stimulating the economy and promoting growth. Whether it was an irrational hatred of all things Reagan (or simply Republican) or being wedded to the idea of controlling people through their pocketbook most non-conservative and non-libertarian politicians seemed happy to let lower tax policies be the domain of their opposition.

No more, it would seem! This would be a severe blow to conservatives hoping to retain some form of a power base. If they lose the people who agree with them fiscally but not on foreign or other domestic policies it will be hard for them to remain a power with the Republican Party, much less the dominant one.

ACORN changes its name

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:00:37 GMT

They can run, but they can't hide.

http://www.rottenacorn.com/

More wisdom from the Gipper

Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:40:09 GMT

What Ronald Reagan can teach us about dealing with situations like the one currently in Iran.

Reagan courageously backed Polish resisters and helped bring down the Soviet client state. What will Obama's legacy be?

Worse than worst?

Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:38:32 GMT

But "oddly enough" they are not the subject of MSM news headlines like Bush's ratings were.

Obama's approval ratings have plummeted to the 50s as people grow tired of his endless pontifications while the economy worsens. Too many people have realized that Obama's plan for "saving" jobs and the economy is geared toward boosting his popularity (and thus the Democrats) in time for the 2010 elections.

For millions of Americans, that is going to be too late.

Apparently oblivious to the image he is presenting hard-pressed Americans, Obama's trips for golf, ice cream and movies continue. You know, he could at least pretend to "feel our pain" like Clinton did.

Democrats tried to portray the expanding economy of 2002-7 as "the worst since Hoover". Where does that leave the recessionary economy we've experienced since the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007? Worse than worst?

Boot to the head time!

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:30:23 GMT

~~Senator~~ Boxer displays her usual arrogance.

Do you think Boxer realizes that she works for the people instead of ruling them from above?

Hat tip: prader

Democrats in Congress: getting their way one way or the other

Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:24:58 GMT

Democrats are plumbing new depths in unethical behavior in Congress.

After getting tied up in debates about ACORN and Nancy Pelosi's lies about the CIA the Democrats claimed there would be no further votes on amendments for a spending bill that day. After enough Republicans had left for the day the Democrats called a surprise vote to end debate which easily passed as few Republicans made it back in time to vote.

Don't be surprised, this is your future for at least the next two years. I'm surprised Democrats even deign to allow Republicans to vote at all.