The MU MALE

•January 30, 2018 • Leave a Comment

Conservative Black guy is back.

giphy

Today, I’m here to talk about the MU MALE, or FEMALE.

You hear all this stuff about Alphas, and this dribble about Beta Males, and misinformation (probably spread by Alphas) about the actually little-known Omegas.  Well, it’s time to put this into perspective, and clear things up.

Alpha and Omega are based on the Grecian Alphabet.

1. Alpha

2. Beta

3. Gamma

4. Delta

5. Epsilon

6. Zeta

7. Eta

8. Theta

9. Iota

10. Kappa

11. Lambda

12. Mu

13. Nu

14. Xi

15. Omicron

16. Pi

17. Rho

18. Sigma

19. Tau

20. Upsilon

21. Phi

22. Chi

23. Psi

24. Omega

In this instance, there are two beginnings, and one common ending.  In any event, first, let’s look at the Alpha.

The Alpha Male/Female is someone that thinks they are, somehow, dominant, or better than, their peers.  This is because they feel they have a more dominant personality, or they’re more physically, or mentally fit, etc.  Alphas can radiate charisma.  They are attracted to risky situations, fully willing to enter into high risk, high reward situations.  In some cases, they actually are physically, and/or mentally, superior to the norm.  They feel they must (and deserve have to have) a “court” of their “subordinates”, and that they must constantly command respect from these people and anyone they come across.  They are pathologically decisive, even if they have poor decision-making capabilities, and feel the need to dominate all decision making, group settings, conversations, etc, even if they don’t truly comprehend what’s going on.  Alphas strive for leadership positions, and some even feel entitled to such positions, or even that it’s, somehow, their birthright.  In sports, they vie for positions like quarterbacks, team captains, etc., and gravitate towards sports like football.  They are incredibly competitive, and can actually be unhealthily so.  In mating rituals, Alphas strive to win mates by impressing them with their force of personality, the size and quality of their “court”, social status, etc.  Two Alphas will always be in competition, even if they work to maintain a veneer of respect, no matter how thin.  When their personalities do not match up, this can create serious – if not life-long – enemies.  The nature of their competition is, sometimes, fairly unfriendly, as it is generally intended to prove they are better than their rival, and sheerly for self-betterment.  Some of the less intelligent Alphas are violence prone, and will not tolerate even a hint of what they interpret as disrespect.  They will try to make examples out of anyone that is disrespectful, and never allow this to drop.  Alphas are prone to behavior that crosses the line of narcissism, malignant narcissism, or even various degrees of functional sociopathy.  There are, however, benign Alphas, of course.

Then, there’s the heretofore unknown OMEGA.  The OMEGA Male/Female is someone that, commonly, is somehow superior to their peers, yet have no desire to advertise this.  Their personalities tend to be more subdued, and elements of being “dominant” are more often kept in undertones, if not outright suppressed, in spite of the fact that they commonly are physically, or mentally, superior to the norm of their peers.  In some cases, they actually are physically, and/or mentally, superior to the norm.  Commonly, Omegas are either outright loners, or maintain only a small circle of true friends, as they do not feel any need, or obligation, to socialize, unlike the Alphas, who have a deep, psychological need to be constantly surrounded by a “court” of their “subordinates”.  Omegas can radiate a surprising charisma, and are definitely not risk-adverse, especially in high risk, high reward situations.  While they will properly acknowledge respect given to them, they could not care less as to whether anyone respects them, or not, and are not afraid to say it.  While Alphas need to be respected and admired, Omegas crave neither, and prefer to be left alone.  They are, when engaged, very certain and decisive, though they do not feel any compulsion to dominate all decision making, group settings, conversations, etc, and generally know what they’re talking about.  Omegas do not strive for leadership positions, though they stand out as solid second in commands, and seem, to many, to be the natural leaders, even over Alphas.  Omegas, in sports, vie for a variety of positions, in a variety of sports, and only when they are pretty dedicated to the sport.  Those that are are solid players that anybody that wants to win wants on their team.  In mating rituals, Omegas rely on innate magnetism.  Unlike the Alphas, they do not, ordinarily, put themselves out to impress.  Their own traits speak for themselves, and you like them, or you don’t.  strive to win mates by impressing them with their force of personality, the size and quality of their “court”, social status, etc.  They are incredibly competitive, but its more rare this delves into unhealthy depths, but they can be raging competitors, not because they want to prove they’re better, or superior, to someone else, but to push themselves to improve and become better.  Two Omegas will always be in competition, but, if their personalities match up, there will always be respect, and their competition will be viewed as to their mutual benefit, pushing each other to become better at everything.  Omegas, due to their lack of care for the opinions of others, are rarely violence prone, though they have limits to their ability to tolerate disrespect, and are unafraid to make an example out of anyone whose disrespect crosses the line.  Omegas are more prone to go for intellectual pursuits (such as academics) or physical activities that are not common (such as martial arts, CrossFit, etc).  There are, however, malignant Omegas, of course.  Some can even exhibit minor (but normally functional) psychopathy in their drive to remain detached and uncaring about the thoughts or feelings of others.

The Alpha and the Omega are shadowy reflections of one another, though Alphas, and their “courts” have much more difficulty being respectful, due to the Omegas being so different from them (and much more self-sufficient and stable).  Omegas, while they may hold Alphas in low regard, or even outright contempt, have very little desire to be openly disrespectful, and, if pushed, will express it.  These people are commonly rivals, and sometimes – if not often – this rivalry is unfriendly, especially on the part of the Alpha.  Where Alphas are, commonly, loud and outgoing, Omegas are the opposite, as they tend towards being quiet and introverted, which Alphas misinterpret as being weak, or even cowardly, which can be a terrible mistake.

Now think of the Alpha on one side, and the Omega on the other, but this is not linear.  The line is actually a “V” shape, with the Alpha and Omega being closer, and in the foreground, and every other alphabet descending behind them into a common distance and a common point, their forces of personality becoming less and less strong, the further you go away from the prime letters (Alpha and Omega).  For instance, a Beta is a shade less drastic than an Alpha, and a Psi is a step away from an Omega.  That common point is the letter MU.

Not to beat around the bush, the Mu can be an obsequious worm.  They are literally at the bottom of the pile, and subservient to everyone ahead of them.  They are like remoras, carefully clinging to a shark, feeding on the scraps the superior creature leaves behind.  They have virtually no inherent strength of character, seemingly unable to get by, without having an Alpha to cling to, or, in more rare cases, an Omega (and Omegas, generally, do not tolerate the presence of such people).  They will denigrate and debase themselves to appease their superiors.  They are completely unfit for leadership positions, and in sports, they are only good for support positions, generally.  In terms of achievements and ambition, they are average.  Males are generally morally weak, and even subordinate themselves to women, such as with SJW males.  In terms of mating, they can, in bad cases, be pathetic, and fit only for those like themselves.  They tend to be very risk-adverse, and even submissive and subservient.  Normally, Mu Males/Females do not like Omega Males and Females, due to their outward personalities of not being loud and confrontational, and interpreting this as someone that cannot, or will not, protect them, if they get into trouble.  In some cases, an Alpha will take care of his subordinates, but, in other cases, they will not, and will leave them to their own devices.

Advertisements

Hollow Men

•January 27, 2018 • Leave a Comment

trigger warning

Once, again, we have the criminal misuse of firearms, and, once again, just like clockwork, we have liberals that seize this as an opportunity to stand upon the bodies of the dead, the dying and the wounded, to use as their impromptu soapbox,

so they can virtue signal about the evils of homicide in society, and to spread their desire to take away the Natural Right to self defense, and the defense of others.

img_6670

Nobody in their right mind is going to listen to the words of people like this that have the audacity to tell people they shouldn’t have the right to armed self defense (or if they do, they shouldn’t have it without crippling regulations that violate Natural Law, in favor of political correctness), and in the next breath, advocate murdering unborn children, and even children as young as 2, if their parents deem them inconvenient and undesirable.

Dead+baby+cake+dead+baby+cake_eebb60_5061569

This is all a distraction from what the real problem is, and that’s societal morality.  My family, some of the people that FRAMED and FOUNDED this country, knew best.

J_S_Copley_-_Samuel_Adams

“He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard for his country. There is seldom an instance of a man guilty of betraying his country, who had not before lost the feeling of moral obligations in his private connections.” –Governor Samuel Adams

This is a direct warning of the liberal/progressive way of life.  People, who, by the very definition of their own socio-political philosophies are “…void of virtuous attachments in private life…”, as they place no value on life, itself (with the possible exception of their own, and the lives of people from whom they can profit, somehow), and, hence, are “…void of all regard for his country.”  Another dead-on description of people that believe the Constitution is a “…living, breathing document…” that should change with any direction the winds blow.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/11/the-us-needs-a-new-constitution-heres-how-to-write-it/281090/

Liberalism/progressivism is a disease of the mind, where the infection is passed via inculcation, and not by physical proximity, and, in keeping with the liberal/progressive tradition of victimizing the weakest of society that cannot fight back against them, they put extra effort into indoctrinating their children, and anyone else’s children they can gain that kind of access to, into their world view.

What is that world view?

The world view based on un-godly types, such as this evil man:

john dewey

A morally bankrupt, broken excuse for a man, he is regarded as being the father of the latter day, broken education system, championed by people like himself in teachers unions.  A secular humanist, and a self-professed ‘democratic socialist‘ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey#cite_note-63), he was a believer in Humanity evolving into some sort of virtuous being that will, someday, solve all problems, and create an idyllic paradisaical world for our future posterity.  What are the fruits of the world populated by children from this system of education, and parented by parents that are accomplices to this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

A trickle becomes a stream.  Dewey was a man that, like most people that are “…void of virtuous attachments in private life…”, railed against religion, and railed against the country and it’s laws, promoting the idea that the nation is a democracy, and not a federal constitutional republic, like most short-sighed, selfish liberals.  Again, my family was not fooled, and knew of his coming, centuries before.

“Remember, democracy never lasts long.  It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself.  There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.  It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy, or monarchy.  It is not true, in face, and nowhere appears in history.  Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence and cruelty.” -President John Adams

president john adams

Decades upon decades of the philosophies of weak men like John Dewey are readily seen throughout the nation:  a weak man, and his legacy of weak men.  The absolute loss of value for life and Human decency.  The dissolution of the family.  The victimization of entire segments of the population, by virtue of the color of their skin.  The destruction of the core family.  The devaluing of marriage and fidelity.  The celebration of the perverse and the championing of evil, as good, and the condemnation of good, as evil.  Centuries before my family in the forms of John and Samuel Adams, the great Apostle Paul saw hollow men like Dewey centuries down the line:

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and the doctrines of devils;” -1 Timothy 4:1

hard times

“See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.”  -Colossians 2:8

Breaking down at the societal level will, inevitably, lead to breaking down at a national level, and anyone with any sense and clarity of thought knows this, and has known this, from the very beginning.

“A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.” –Governor Samuel Adams

Failing in your duties to protect and properly train and educate your children is the cornerstone of destruction of society, the nation, and the world, as a whole.

“Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it.” -Proverbs 22:6

Failure to do this leads to a sickness of the soul, which too many in society suffer from, and inculcate in others, either willingly, or unwittingly, creating future generations of people sicker than themselves.  Again, my family had a handle on this, and, again, in favor of the hollow teachings of soul-less men like Dewey, society has fallen away from the truth.

“It has been observed that education has a greater influence on manners, than human laws can have.  Human laws excite fears and apprehensions, least crimes committed may be detected and punished:  but a virtuous education is calculated to reach and influence the heart, and to prevent crimes. A very judicious writer has quoted Plato, who in shewing what care for the security of States ought to be taken of the education of youth, speaks of it as almost sufficient to supply the place both of Legislation and Administration. Such an education, which leads the youth beyond mere outside shew, will impress their minds with a profound reverence of the Deity, universal benevolence, and a warm attachment and affection towards their country. It will excite in them a just regard to Divine Revelation, which informs them of the original character and dignity of Man; and it will inspire them with a sense of true honor, which consists in conforming as much as possible, their principles, habits, and manners to that original character. It will enlarge their powers of mind, and prompt them impartially to search for truth in the consideration of every subject that may employ their thoughts; and among other branches of knowledge, it will instruct them in the skill of political architecture and jurisprudence; and qualify them to discover any error, if there should be such, in the forms and administration of Governments, and point out the method of correcting them.” -Governor Samuel Adams

John Dewey despised this, despised the Lord, and despised such speech.

“The conventional type of education which trains children to docility and obedience, to the careful performance of imposed tasks because they are imposed, regardless of where they lead, is suited to an autocratic society. These are the traits needed in a state where there is one head to plan and care for the lives and institutions of the people. But in a democracy they interfere with the successful conduct of society and government. Our famous, brief definition of a democracy, as “government of the people, for the people and by the people,” gives perhaps the best clue to what is involved in a democratic society. Responsibility for the conduct of society and government rests on every member of society. Therefore, every one must receive a training that will enable him to meet this responsibility, giving him just ideas of the condition and needs of the people collectively, and developing those qualities which will insure his doing a fair share of the work of government. If we train our children to take orders, to do things simply because they are told to, and fail to give them confidence to act and think for themselves, we are putting an almost insurmountable obstacle in the way of overcoming the present defects of our system and of establishing the truth of democratic ideals. Our State is founded on freedom, but when we train the State of to-morrow, we allow it just as little freedom as possible. Children in school must be allowed freedom so that they will know what its use means when they become the controlling body, and they must be allowed to develop active qualities of initiative, independence, and resourcefulness, before the abuses and failures of democracy will disappear.” -John Dewey

Garbage.

Cream of nothing.

Just like the fool who said it, just like the fools that believe him.

obama-cream-of-nothing

A philosophy that calls upon the gullible and stupid parents of society to teach children in a way that emphasizes insufficient structure and freedom of thought to children that barely know what thought is for, indoctrinating them into a government that does not exist in this country, and never has.  Teaching them to not obey the wisdom of people like well-educated elders, but to make their own, ignorant way in life, in order to provide what Dewey calls “…freedom…”, and is, in reality, the training of insufficient people, to create and perpetuate and insufficient society made in their own image, forgetting centuries of wisdom, in favor of the wisdom of fools.

Look around you.

This is not only where society is going, but its where we are.

https://nypost.com/video/the-perverse-reasons-female-teachers-are-having-sex-with-students/

Reverend John Knox Witherspoon railed against this creeping evil.

“Mistake me not, my brethren: I am not speaking against learning in itself; it is a precious gift of God, and may be happily improved in the service of the gospel; but I will venture to say, in the spirit of the apostle Paul’s writings in general, and of this passage in particular, Accursed be all that learning which sets itself in opposition to the cross of Christ! Accursed be all that learning which disguises or is ashamed of the cross of Christ! Accursed be all that learning which fills the room that is due to the cross of Christ! and once more, Accursed be all that learning which is not made subservient to the honour and glory of the cross of Christ!” -From the sermon “Glorying in the Cross”, published in 1768. Misquoted since 1845 as “Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ; cursed be all that learning that is not coincident with the cross of Christ; cursed be all that learning that is not subservient to the cross of Christ.” So quoted by S. S. Cox in October 1845, in Permanent Documents of the Society for the Promotion of Collegiate and Theological Education at the West, Volume 1, p. 30.

John_Witherspoon

Liberals/progressives lie with their lips, in their false and empty claims of respect for the Constitution, the Founders and the Framers, but tell the truth through their abominable actions, as they stand in opposition of the wisdom of men like Framer Noah Webster,

“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important, and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government, ought to be instructed. … No truth is more evident to my mind, than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people. ” -Representative Noah Webster

and President John Adams.

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” -President John Adams

As the teachings of Dewey, reinforced by negligent parents and a complicit system of “educators” usher in the rot of the underpinnings of society, they shut their eyes, and stop up their ears, to avoid hearing the words of men like Framer Benjamin Rush:

Benjamin_Rush

“The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion.  Without this, there can be no virtue, and without virtue, there can be no liberty; and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments…We waste so much time and money in punishing crimes, and take so little pains to prevent them.  We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government, that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity, by means of the bible; for this divine book, above all others, favors that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws.”

Obviously, he concurs with the previous quote from my ancestor, President John Adams.

Whereas John Dewey said:

“Man is not logical and his intellectual history is a record of mental reserves and compromises. He hangs on to what he can in his old beliefs even when he is compelled to surrender their logical basis.”

advocating the ungodly nihilism that is paving the way to the downfall of our country, Noah Webster – father of the past education system that produced more men of greatness than the Dewey System ever will – stated this:

“Education is useless without the Bible. The Bible was America’s basic text book in all fields. God’s Word, contained in the Bible, has furnished all necessary rules to direct our conduct.”

Noah_Webster

“Education without morals is like a ship without a compass, merely wandering nowhere. It is not enough to have the power of concentration, but we must have worthy objectives upon which to concentrate. It is not enough to know truth, but we must love truth, and sacrifice for it.” -Doctor Martin Luther King, Junior

martin-luther-king-jr-9365086-2-402

It’s not the gun in the hands of a criminal, and it’s not even the gun in the hands of a child, looking to commit criminal acts.  It’s not in the blade of a knife, it’s not in the yield of a bomb.  This problem we’re having in America, and the world at large, isn’t from any tool or weapon:  it’s from the souls of the people that have grown up in an environment of sickness and spiritual depravity, taught as righteousness and intellectualism.

I am VIRUS-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO, and I approve this message.

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identity Politics, At its Finest

•January 21, 2018 • Leave a Comment

The Black Conservative is back.

thats-racist

This time, leftist Tammy Duckworth is on my mind.

Donald Trump tweeted on Saturday that Democrats were to blame for the shutdown of the federal government, claiming the party was “holding our military hostage over their desire to have unchecked illegal immigration.” 

Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) was not having any of it.

Duckworth, an Army veteran who lost both her legs in the line of duty, minced no words on the Senate floor as she lambasted the president’s tweet on Saturday. Calling him a “five-deferment draft dodger,” Duckworth described Trump’s comments as the “latest example of him failing to show leadership to take responsibility for leading this nation.”

“Does he even know that there are service members who are in harm’s way right now, watching him, looking for their commander in chief to show leadership, rather than to try to deflect blame?” Duckworth asked. “Or that his own Pentagon says that … the short-term funding plans he seems intent on pushing is (sic) actually harmful to not just the military, but to our national security?”

“I spent my entire adult life looking out for the well-being, the training, the equipping of the troops for whom I was responsible,” she continued. “Sadly, this is something the current occupant of the Oval Office does not seem to care to do, and I will not be lectured about what our military needs by a five-deferment draft dodger.” 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tammy-duckworth-trump-draft-dodger_us_5a645e39e4b0dc592a098651

Duckworth is a Veteran and double amputee. Good for her, she did what a lot of people, including Thump, were too much a bitch to do: SERVE.

maxresdefault

That being said, she has immediately moved on to forget where she came from, until it becomes politically convenient, like now. She uses her status as a disabled Veteran for political gain, like she did in this video. Now, I am certainly not denying the fact that Thump is a cowardly draft dodging PUNK

donald-trump-unfit-for-command-22-trump-was-captain-the-cade-politics-1456968486

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/deferments-helped-trump-dodge-vietnam

…that’s just content to roll over and let the military be infiltrated by the mentally ill

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/12/30/trump-drops-challenge-transgender-troops-military/992213001/

…which is very much in keeping with his previous words that people seem to have conveniently forgotten about, as they pat him on the back for every little thing, which is really just to make themselves feel better about voting for him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHAHKGP10yc

And while she says Trump is pushing a budget that she claims pentagon officials (that she did not name) are calling a threat to national security, did she oppose that kind of budget when Obama was proposing it?

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/5/24/15681846/trump-defense-budget-obama-readiness

How about her opposition to sequestration..

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-obama-shrank-the-military-1438551147

…which has demonstrably hurt the military and national security?

https://byrne.house.gov/media-center/columns/defense-cuts-are-hurting-our-national-security

Duckworth is ethnically Thai, and in a political party that INVENTED identity politicking in America (and, incidentally, in it’s early party planks, expressed it’s hatred of Asians).

1880 Democratic Party Platform
June 22, 1880

“11. Amendment of the Burlingame Treaty. No more Chinese immigration, except for travel, education, and foreign commerce, and that even carefully guarded.”

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29582

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act

And, while a sell-out to the Slave Party that hated Asians every bit as much as they hated Blacks, she is, very much so, simultaneously selling out the military that she claims to love so much for ILLEGAL ALIENS.  This shut down is not something I’m putting at Thump’s feet, and everyone knows how much I despise the man, and what low regard I hold him in. This is squarely the doing of the Slave Party, which is refusing to fund the armed forces, in favor of making the lives of illegal aliens better, and let’s not delude ourselves into believing the Slave Party actually likes illegal aliens. The Slave Party is a schizophrenic, racist mess of ethnic groups and identity groups that hate each other, minimally expressing that disdain through the bigotry of low expectations

“Now, in the year 2016, virtually nothing has changed.  Blacks are still joining the political party that created the traitorous abomination called the Confederacy, all because they are too fucking stupid to realize that they are still slaves.  In the backs of their minds they know, but they’re not smart enough to bring their suspicions front and center.  So, as their subconscious minds mull over this, it influences their behavior, making them crave the power they believe whites have over them, so they can use it to oppress – and even murder – them.  This is where terrorist organizations like Black Lives Matters comes from; a pack of infantile, infantilized blacks looking to get a cheap, free leg up on everybody else.  And they’re not the only ones.  Latinos join, because they want to be “the power”.  Asians join, because they want to ‘be in charge’.  Etc.  And all tell the lie that the Slave Party watches out for ethnic minorities in the United States.  Yeah, their political party’s planks really tell that story.  In short, the Slave Party is schizophrenic.  A kluged Frankenstein’s monster of stolen parts that actually hate each other.  Under the candy-coating thin veneer of civility – or even respect – the whites hate the blacks, the blacks hate the whites, the Asians hate everyone, the Latinos hate them, etc.”

https://virusx.wordpress.com/2016/07/30/2956/

She can bleat about Thump’s leadership, but where was she when Obama was telling the troops – that she claims to love so much, because she used to be one – that they’d had enough hot food, and that they should just eat rations for about a year?

June 21st, 2013
06:30 AM ET 

U.S. cutting back on hot chow for troops

By Barbara Starr

Napoleon Bonaparte is credited with the battlefield adage: “An Army moves on its stomach.” That, of course, means there’s nothing like good chow.

For the thousands of U.S. troops who will fight in Afghanistan for another 17 months, it is not just the quality of the food they have to consider. Now there will be a bit less of it.

U.S. troops in Afghanistan for years have been fed four hot meals a day, including what is fondly known as “mid-rats” or midnight rations.

That is a meal for troops headed back and forth from the field or pulling a midnight shift on base.

Those meals are served in cafeteria-style dining halls – sometimes little more than a tent – where troops can select items from a buffet.

But as the United States winds down its combat operations in Afghanistan, so, too, will it wind down its food operations.

The Defense Department is cutting back to two hot meals a day, most likely just lunch and dinner.

The reason: the Pentagon is trying to scale down the number of contractors needed to cook and serve meals and run dining areas.

Its all about getting ready to pull troops, equipment and everything else that supports the war.

“We will significantly reduce contractor and supply chain requirements,” said David Lakin, a spokesman for U.S. Force in Afghanistan, in an e-mail exchange with CNN.

Commanders insist, however, that the troops will not go hungry.

Packaged foods will be available. But breakfast and the midnight meal will now be mainly “meals ready to eat.” Those are the bagged rations known as “MRE’s.”

Large-quantity rations packages, which feed multiple troops at one time, also will be available.

The military believes “most soldiers don’t consume the midnight meal and breakfast is also a low attendance event.

Putting the two hot meals together through lunch and dinner also allows for removal of an entire dining facility shift, Lakin said.

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/21/u-s-cutting-back-on-hot-chow-for-troops/

Was she critical of Obama’s “leadership”, when he refused to send in adequate troops to win the warfighting in the Afghanistan front?

https://www.heritage.org/middle-east/commentary/obama-risks-failure-afghanistan-not-sending-more-troops

Yes, the Slave Party is holding funding for the military hostage, in exchange for their new, favorite flavor of the month:  illegal aliens.

Democrats will do anything in order to not work with Republicans and the American public are the ones paying for it. Hundreds of Thousands of government employees could be working without pay or layed off of work completely. All this in exchange for securing legal protection for 800,000 immigrants are here illegally.

Congress has three days to come together on a deal that would keep the federal government funded though October. If they don’t come to an agreement by Jan 19th, all “non-essential” government employees and active U.S. Military personnel, including those positioned overseas, will be forced to work without pay. All funding for federal museums or parks would be cut off as well.

Democrats are apparently happy with all this happening, as long as they can secure benefits for illegal immigrants. Would you trade hundreds of thousands of American jobs, and security for those families, for increased rights for immigrants who are here illegally?

Despite the fact that the deadline clicks closer and closer, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi have refused to move from their position to keep the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program in existence. The Democrats are under the impression that they have the upper hand in terms of this power struggle, but in reality it just reflects poorly on their party.

“The fact remains the only way to guarantee the legal status for DREAMers is to pass DACA protections into law and do it now,” Schumer said Wednesday. “For that reason, a resolution to the DACA issue must be part of a global deal on the budget.”

Democrats are willing to throw everything out the window to protect illegal immigrants. Something tells me they are going to cave, because if they don’t, this will go down in history as one of the most detrimental decisions ever made by an American political party.

http://www.unitedconservative.com/dems-wants-to-force-active-military-people-to-work-without-pay-unless/

democrats help illegal aliens over troops

Pay stops, mission continues: Shutdown 101 for troops and families

Maybe this is just part of a new Slave Party Confederate peace initiative.  Remember, they saved us from the Vietnam War with budget cuts, not long ago.

http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/31400

Why win a war, when you can just run away and declare victory, right?

This whole thing is about farming out illegal aliens for votes, in order to make the Slave Party Confederates the dominant political force in the country, not to better the country, and certainly not for the illegal aliens, beyond their only useful purpose.  They give them names like DREAMers, and try to paint them in the most sympathetic lights with all sorts of glowing stories…

http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/04/sympathetic-media-scrambles-to-trot-out-shiny-dreamers-but-forgets-all-the-nightmares/

…but the fact is, people like Duckface and the rest of her anti-American, Slave Party Confederate are selling out the military.  This is another pattern of liberals.  Take away the rights and freedoms someone else is literally entitled to, to give to someone else, who isn’t.

Case in point.

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tax Problem? NO. Spending Problem? YES.

•December 30, 2017 • Leave a Comment

Yep.

That Conservative Black guy is at it, again.

Spouting all those unsolicited opinions…

Claiming Free Speech…

trigger warning

In any event, with the passage of Thump’s tax reform bill into law, we’ve got liberals making all kinds of statements about how its going to hurt the economy, and individuals.  Some even believe that taxes will become too low.

Yep.  There’s some stupid motor fingers out there.

In any event, let’s look at our tax situation:

How the federal government generated money in 2016

All told, the U.S. government collected $3.267 trillion (noted as $3,267 billion in the chart below) in fiscal 2016. The vast majority of revenue came from the collection of taxes.

G
IMAGE SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY.

Individual income tax returns filed by an estimated 150 million-plus people in 2016 resulted in the collection of nearly $1.55 trillion. This figure is all the more impressive when you take into account the fact that 4 in 5 taxpayers receive refunds from the federal government in a given year. In a typical year, the top 1% of income earners in the U.S. pay more than 25% of all federal income tax revenue collected by the IRS. 

Running a fairly close second in revenue collection with $1.12 trillion in fiscal 2016 were Social Security and other payroll taxes. Among social programs, Social Security is by far the largest. Not surprisingly, the 12.4% payroll tax that workers pay on earned income between $1 and $118,500 generates a lot of money for the federal government each year. This tax is typically split down the middle between you (6.2%) and your employer (6.2%), while self-employed people pay the full amount.

In a distant third place are corporate income taxes, which generated $300 billion in revenue for the federal government in fiscal 2016. The U.S. has one of the highest peak corporate income tax rates in the world, with only Chad and the United Arab Emirates sporting higher rates. Just think how much tax revenue could be collected by the IRS if the approximately $2.1 trillion in corporate profits being held in overseas markets were repatriated.

Finally, $306 billion was collected from a plethora of additional taxes and duties according to the final monthly statement from the Treasury. This included the collection of more than $95 billion in excise taxes, $21 billion in estate and gift taxes, and $35 billion in custom duties.

The $3.267 trillion collected by the U.S. government in fiscal 2016 is an all-time high.

https://www.fool.com/retirement/2016/10/23/this-handy-chart-shows-how-much-money-the-governme.aspx

uncle same broke

That’s from the Motley Fool, a very good financial website that I advise you read, at least every once in a while.

The $3.267 trillion collected by the U.S. government in fiscal 2016 is an all-time high.

In any event, yes, you read that right:  an ALL-TIME HIGH.

Sooo, where did that money go?

How the federal government spent money in 2016

Now that you have a better understanding of where the money came from, let’s take a brief look at where it ended up.

As you can see in the chart provided by the Treasury Department, $3.854 trillion was spent by the federal government in 2016, which actually came in $17 billion below the fiscal 2016 budget passed by President Obama.

The biggest expense, which should be no surprise, was Social Security. The program, which pays out benefits to nearly 61 million people a month, is primarily there to provide a financial foundation for seniors during retirement. In 2016, the program paid out $916 billion in benefits; this figure is expected to rise as the beneficiary base grows with the ongoing retirement of baby boomers.

Interestingly enough there was actually a tie in spending for second between Medicare and Defense —  each received $595 billion from the federal government. Of the roughly 56 million people who qualify for Medicare, about 5 in 6 are aged 65 and up, making the Medicare program vital for the well-being of our nation’s seniors.

A significant chunk of the defense spending goes to fund military operations and pay the salaries of military personnel. The United States’ military expenditures are higher than the combined defense spending of the next eight-highest nations.

In fiscal 2016 the federal government also spent $241 billion just servicing the interest on its more than $19 trillion in existing national debt. The higher the debt level goes, the bigger this annual interest servicing expense will be.

The remaining $1.51 trillion was split among a multitude of programs — including $138 billion to the Department of Agriculture, $78 billion to the Department of Transportation, $174 billion to the Department of Veterans Affairs, and $91 billion to the Office of Personnel Management.

How’d the government fare in 2016?

So how did the government do compared to the budget it passed? As noted above, it did come in with spending that was $17 billion below expectations, but that didn’t stop it from running a $587 billion deficit in fiscal 2016. This reversed a four-year trend of successively lower budget deficits in each year since 2011 — though it’s worth noting that with the exception of a few years when a surplus was recognized while former-President Bill Clinton was in the Oval Office, budget deficits are quite the norm.

Looking ahead, budget deficits are likely going to remain the norm regardless of who takes the helm as our next president. Republican candidate Donald Trump has proposed substantial tax cuts that could reduce federal revenue collection. Meanwhile, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton would raise taxes on the wealthy, likely boosting tax revenue collection, but nowhere near enough to get anywhere near a balanced budget.

For the time being, the American public should remain accustomed to the federal government running in the red.

https://www.fool.com/retirement/2016/10/23/this-handy-chart-shows-how-much-money-the-governme.aspx

Like it, or not, Medicare is not a legitimate expenditure of taxpayer monies, and a violation of the Constitution, and I quote:

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time. -Appropriations Clause, United States Constitution

Now, some people (notably liberals) like to point to the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution as justification for social programs:

Article 1, Section 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; 

Oh, wait a minute.

There’s NO SUCH THING as the GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE.

That was the SPENDING CLAUSE.  Wow!  You mean liberals and other unsavory constitutional illiterates have been intentionally misinterpreting the Constitution for all these years, for political gain?!

shocked face

So, what does this “Spending Clause” authorize Congress to spend taxpayer monies out of the US Treasury on, anyway?

to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Hmmm.  That doesn’t sound like that constitutional clause was meant for social welfare programs.  Let’s look deeper.

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/34/spending-clause

So.

It appears as though the Spending Clause was actually only meant for things that would improve the nation as a whole.

Not for subsidies.

Not for individual retirement plans.

Not to pay for the medical care of infants or old people, or anyone in between.

Not for providing tuition money.

Not for buying people houses.

Not for the vast majority of the things that Congress has been abusing this clause for, after all.

To sum it up, it’s for national defense spending (through funding the military and things that keep the country safe and secure), and for infrastructure maintenance and improvement.

THAT’S IT.

The 10th Amendment seems to go along with that.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -10th Amendment, part of the Bill of Rights

This goes back to what I’ve been saying, all along:  the country is being bled dry by social programs, or unfunded liability spending, possibly to the tune of over TWO HUNDRED TRILLION DOLLARS (that’s $200,000,000,000,000.00 USD)

$205 Trillion in Unfunded Liabilities

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is acting in a bipartisan way to cover up the biggest single threat to the bipartisan political alliance that is stripping America of its wealth: the United States Congress.

There is no question that the following policy is bipartisan. Democrats and Republicans in Congress are completely agreed that the following information should not get out to the American people, namely, that the present value of the United States government’s off-budget liabilities is over $200 trillion.

…the government needs $205 trillion… to invest in the private sector, in order to fund its legal liabilities.

https://dailyreckoning.com/205-trillion-in-unfunded-liabilities/

Now, let’s put that $200,000,000,000,000.00 USD into perspective.

Listener Elizabeth Masten, from Norfolk, Virginia, asked Marketplace this question:

I’m curious as to how much money is out there in the world? Does anybody keep records as to how much money the world has?

Jacob Kirkegaard, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said one part of the answer can be found in information published by the U.S. Federal Reserve.

“It’s a number called M0, which is essentially the number of notes and coins in circulation,” Kirkegaard said. “For the United States, that number on the Federal Reserve website is somewhere in the vicinity of $1.5 trillion.”

Kirkegaard said that a comparable tally of currency in circulation from all over the world, tracked by the Bank for International Settlements, totals about $5 trillion.

But using a more inclusive definition of money, “that amount goes much, much higher,” explained Jeff Desjardins at the financial media website Visual Capitalist, which has published an infographic on the topic.

“Add in checking accounts, savings accounts, money-market accounts — not quite physical money, but you can make a bank transaction digitally and use that as money,” and Desjardins said the total amount of money easily accessible in the world economy grows by several multiples. This is called broad money, and according to the CIA World Factbook, and the global total is in excess of $80 trillion.

Most of the broad money in the world economy isn’t actually cash held in bank vaults, explained Karen Petrou, managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics. It’s bank balances on digital ledgers, money that people deposited in banks, and banks then lent out again.

“Banks always have your money out working in the economy,” said Petrou. “If everybody lined up and suddenly went to the bank to get cash, you’d have a classic banking run.”

Petrou said the U.S. dollar is the most popular currency in use worldwide — for countries’ central-bank reserves, wealthy people’s cash holdings, and criminal enterprises.

Because of the stability of the United States, “it’s the most liquid currency,” said Petrou. “As a global store of value and safety, it’s one of the most important assets this country has.”

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-money-there-is-in-the-world-2017-10

Yep.

That means if you took everybody in the world, turned them upside down and shook them, and collected every penny, you wouldn’t come CLOSE to paying off the massive debt this country’s politicians have run it into, thanks to pandering for votes.  Don’t kind yourselves:  it was all about pandering.  It was politicians saying:  “Hmmm…What could I give people to make them vote for me, again?”  The answer was “money”.

money-down-toilet-624x468

And, because of the fiscal dire straits everyone was in, partially due to their own poor planning, and partially due to the poor leadership in politics, at all levels, they certainly weren’t going to turn down “free” money.  In fact, ask any liberal:  what they’re getting isn’t enough.  They want more.

19aq2uwrfp8lzgif

(Typically, though, liberals want more money, without having to pay more money, themselves.)

The federal unfunded liabilities are catastrophic for future taxpayers and economic growth. At usdebtclock.org, federal unfunded liabilities are estimated at near $127 trillion, which is roughly $1.1 million per taxpayer and nearly double 2012’s total world output.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/01/17/you-think-the-deficit-is-bad-federal-unfunded-liabilities-exceed-127-trillion/#f57cf1b9bf8a

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

debt clock snapshot 2017-12-24 1336

Let’s get a closer look.

debt clock biggest items 2017-12-24 1339

$1,161,620,923,652.00 on Medicare/Medicaid, alone, as of 2017/12/24, at 13:38 hours EST.

$950,224,410,927.00 on Social Security.

$295,854,651,946.00 on “Income Security”, which is defined as “Supplemental Security Income, earned income credits, unemployment compensation, Nutrition Assistance, Family Support, Child Nutrition, Foster Care, Making Work Pay” (source:  CBO)

These are all unconstitutional expenditures, and in direct violation of that Spending Clause that I just got through talking about, a little while ago.  Get rid of those programs, and the US has just stopped spending $2,407,699,986,525.00 USD.  That’s TWO TRILLION, FOUR HUNDRED SEVEN BILLION, SIX HUNDRED NINETY-NINE MILLION, NINE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SIX THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS.

In a SINGLE YEAR.

That’s a lot of money.  And speaking of a lot of money, how much do we owe our Devil worshiping enemies in the Peoples’ Republic of China?

The U.S. debt to China is $1.2 trillion as of August 2017.

https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-debt-to-china-how-much-does-it-own-3306355

That means we could pay the Devil back…

776b410312a382eb58f2c4b7f8d487b0

…with ONE BIG, FAT WIRE TRANSFER, and have money left to pay off other debts Congress stupidly ran up.  (Not to mention spend more money on beefing up out military and sabotaging their infrastructure.)

Here’s what the federal government is squeezing out of you:

https://budgeting.thenest.com/list-federal-taxes-withheld-employee-paychecks-27000.html

Federal Income Tax

Federal income tax is levied on personal income. It provides for national programs such as interest on national debt, law enforcement, defense and foreign affairs. Your employer is supposed to give you a W-4 form to complete when it hires you. The form helps your employer to figure the amount of federal income tax to take out of your wages. You put your filing status and allowances on the form. Your employer uses the W-4 data and the Internal Revenue Service Circular E tax-withholding tables to figure your tax amount.

So let’s examine that one.

The Sixteenth Amendment, approved by Congress in 1909 and ratified in 1913, made it possible for Congress to enact an income tax without having to worry about whether, under the rules applicable to direct taxes, the tax had to be apportioned among the states on the basis of population.

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/amendments/16/essays/177/income-tax

So, just as lazy politicians, today, gave us unconstitutional monstrosities like ObamaCare, lazy politicians of 1913 gave us income taxation.  A slap dash way to avoid doing research, to get around the Constitution, and to provide money for whatever spending projects they wanted, regardless of constitutional concerns and limitation.  In other words, as opposed to working to find a way to spend responsibly, they chose to alter the Constitution, so they could have an endless well of money to draw from, for whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted.

How’s that worked out for us?

My solution to that would not be to reduce unconstitutional taxation to provide very minor relief, but to eliminate all unconstitutional taxation and spending, altogether.  This is why we need to get rid of Trumps, Republicans, and ALL Slave Party politicians (who LIVE by the pork barrel), and bring in Conservatives.  People that hold the Constitution in the esteem it should be in, and work to make constitutional solutions.  I came up with this one, a while back:

https://virusx.wordpress.com/2017/10/07/virus-x-2020/

seems legit

It eliminates all tax brackets, leaving taxation to come from imposts, excises, duties, tariffs and some capitation, as the Framers wanted.  To enforce this, as some laws disappeared, more laws would have to appear; namely laws that would bar Congress from unconstitutional spending, on penalty of individual impeachments, massive fines for violating the rights of all Americans through flouting the law, and even imprisonment for violating America’s trust (Nancy Pelosi thought it was reasonable to send Americans to prison for not having benefits [http://dailysignal.com/2009/11/13/video-pelosi-says-jail-very-fair-punishment-for-not-buying-health-insurance/], so this should be reasonable, too).  Something like the Convention of States would probably be needed for this, because we all know that Congress isn’t going to do anything to force itself to operate within constitutional boundaries; in fact, they’ll resist and fight that kind of legislation tooth and nail.

Just imagine paychecks, from now on, without income tax taken out of them…

Social Security Tax

Social Security tax is a payroll tax, which the Federal Insurance Contributions Act authorizes. The tax provides benefits for retirees and their dependents and the disabled and their dependents. Your employer withholds Social Security tax at the rate Congress sets each year, up to the annual wage limit. As of 2012, Social Security is taxed at 10.4 percent; since your employer pays 6.2 percent, you pay only 4.2 percent. As of 2012, the annual wage limit for this tax is $110,100. In a few states, state and local employees do not pay Social Security taxes.

People want to argue that Social Security isn’t going broke, but yes it is:

Social Security Will Be Paying Out More Than It Receives In Just Five Years

 
Tyler Durden's picture
When social security was first implemented in the 1930’s, America was a very different country. Especially in regards to demographics. The average life expectancy was roughly 18 years younger than it is now, and birth rates were a bit higher than they are now. By the 1950’s, the fertility rate was twice as high as it is in the 21st century.

In other words, for the first few decades, social security seemed very sustainable. Most people would only live long enough to benefit from it for a few years, and there was an abundance of young workers who could pay into the system.

Those days are long gone. As birth rates plummet and people live longer, (which otherwise should be considered a positive development) social security’s future is looking more and more bleak.

 According to the Social Security Board of Trustees, the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust Funds will be depleted in 2034.

When this happens, only 77 percent of benefits will be payable. That estimate is no change from last year’s estimate.

In addition, the Disability Insurance trust fund will be depleted in 2028, which is an improvement from last year’s estimate of 2023. Once that fund is depleted, 93 percent of benefits will be paid.

Right now, Social Security continues to take in through revenue more than it pays it through benefits, which is expected to continue until 2022. Once Social Security begins to pay out more than it takes in, it will be forced to liquidate the assets held by the trust funds.

In 2016, Social Security generated $957 billion in income. It only paid out $922 billion including $911 billion in benefits to 61 million beneficiaries.

But the solutions that have been proposed for this problem don’t hold much promise. For instance, we know that simply raising taxes won’t work.

But increasing the payroll tax is not a good long-term solution to fixing Social Security. For example a higher payroll tax would have negative economic effects. In addition, it’s not even clear that raising the payroll tax would even generate enough revenue.

“Some claim that the solution to preserving Social Security is to raise more taxes, but history shows that doesn’t work,” said David Barnes who is the director of policy engagement for Generation Opportunity in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon. “In fact, since Social Security was created, payroll taxes have been raised more than 20 times. Twenty times! Yet, the program is still headed towards insolvency.”

This is one reason why so many Western countries, almost all of which are suffering from declining birth rates, have been so eager to open their borders to more immigrants. They’re trying to bring in as many young workers as they can.

But that’s not going to work either. Forget about the high crime rates, terrorist attacks, and social disintegration that Europe is facing now after bringing in millions of immigrants. Even if those problems didn’t exist, immigration isn’t the solution. The West has had wide open borders for decades, and it hasn’t made a dent in the liabilities faced by social security programs (perhaps these immigrants aren’t paying as many taxes as these governments had hoped).

We could let younger generations opt out of social security to stave off future obligations, but that wouldn’t help fund the current generation of retirees. Social security is already on the path to being underfunded for them, and letting young people opt out would obviously make things worst for current retirees.

There isn’t really any viable solution for paying off the future liabilities of social security, aside from cutting the benefits or increasing the retirement age. Otherwise it’s going to run out of money eventually, which is the same story with private and public pensions. We are all paying for our retirements in one form or another, but few of us living right now are going to fully benefit from it.

Remember, Social Security has bled $950,224,410,927.00 out of the US Treasury (i.e.:  your pockets), already.  While safety nets are a necessary thing, they are unconstitutional at the national level.  There is no constitutional provision for nationalized government retirement plans.  This came from a socialist that was cozy with a communist.

https://www.csmonitor.com/Books/Book-Reviews/2015/0305/Roosevelt-and-Stalin-details-the-surprisingly-warm-relationship-of-an-unlikely-duo

And let’s not forget:

the goal of socialism

Somehow, I’m pretty sure Roosevelt knew that.

A Conservative solution to that would be to end all new enrollment in Social Security, altogether.  Convene a meeting with all state legislatures and the US Congress, and have the People and the States pick up that baton, because the federal government should never have been holding it, in the first place.  Local legislatures can craft legislation tailor made for their own State, based on population, age, economy, their treasury, and what they aim to provide.  The Private Sector, on the other hand (which almost always gets things more right than government) can do the same thing for people that come to them as clients.  They can craft individual retirement programs based on client age, economic status, savings and long term goals.

In fact, I could swear that already  happens… 

Some people can be held in the system and allowed to die out, continuing to receive their checks, for the rest of their lives, while the rest are given a one time payment (un-taxed, of course) with which they can do whatever they want.  They can go right back on the government dole (of their State), or work with the Private Sector and find something less one-size-fits-all, and get something meant for them, specifically.

Then that’s $950,224,410,927.00 the federal government isn’t spending, anymore.  States won’t have to spend that much, because no state has a population of 56,000,000+ (http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/17/politics/btn-social-security/index.html).  If they are stupid enough to try spending like that (and I’m looking at you, New York, California and Hawaii), then they’re (predictably) doing it wrong.  It’s your job to vote them out of office, get them impeached or recalled, and replaced by people that actually have your best interests in mind.

Medicare Tax

FICA also authorizes the collection of the Medicare payroll tax, which provides hospital insurance and medical benefits for eligible individuals when they reach 65. Congress sets the tax rate each year, and as of 2012, Medicare is taxed at 2.9 percent; your employer pays half of that amount, so you pay only 1.45 percent. No annual wage limit applies to this tax.

Same solution as Social Security.  End all enrollment, let some people die out of the system, and turn the program completely over to the People and the States.  The States, through legislation, can subsidize hospitals and clinics that care for people falling under this category of needs (provided their state constitution allows that).  Alternately, they could provide benefit cards to indigent individuals to be used at any hospital or clinic, acting as a promissory note for the full and prompt reimbursement to any health care provider that provides care and treatment (and pharmaceuticals, and medical devices) to the holder of that card.  The People?  They can form things like charities.  Hollywood scumbags are always talking about how much everybody else should give, and pouring millions of dollars into their favorite Slave Party politician.  Maybe they could put their money where their big, eternally flapping mouths are, and give money to something that’s actually important (or so they claim its important):  health care for the indigent.

Director that’s known for not doing much, these days, Steven Spielberg, gave two-time loser (and Benghazi denier) Hillary Clinton, $1,002,700.00 USD.  What else could he have used that $1,002,700.00 USD for?  Let’s see:  Synthroid (levothyroxine) is a moderately priced drug used to treat hypothyroidism, and is one of the most commonly prescribed drugs in the country. It also treats an enlarged thyroid gland and thyroid cancer.  At Walmart, you can get 30 pills for about 9 bucks (https://www.goodrx.com/synthroid).  How many people in his state (California, also known as the Left Coast) could’ve had their prescriptions filled by this greedy, left wing bastard (who probably advocates for socialist health care and wealth redistribution, but advocates against his PAYING for socialist health care, and redistributing HIS wealth)?

Then we have Jeffrey Katzenberg, some other guy from Spielberg’s Dreamworks, who doled out $1,002,700.00 USD to double loser, crypto-racist Slave Party politician, Hillary Clinton.  How many outpatient procedures could’ve been covered by $1,002,700.00 USD?

http://www.businessinsider.com/celebrity-donors-election-2016-3/#beyonc–2700-to-hillary-clinton-5

Mark Cuban, Meg Whitman, Warren Buffett, Oprah Winfrey, Mike Bloomberg, George Soros and Sheryl Sandberg all have two things in common:  they’re leftists, and they gave money to double-loser and serial liar Hillary Clinton, that could’ve been better used for the very things they advocate:  providing health care, assisting people in getting affordable insurance, providing housing for the homeless, improving schools, etc.  In their states (and even beyond), they could’ve been part of “the People” working to fill in the gaps of Medicare, or to keep people off it, altogether.

http://fortune.com/2016/08/04/hillary-clinton-billionaire-backers/

Instead, though, they’re telling people that make a lot less money to spend a lot more money on electing liberal politicians that will take a lot more money from them, to give to whomever they see as being more fit to have it, than the earners.

margaret-thatcher on socialism

Administrating Agencies

Whereas Congress establishes federal tax laws, the IRS administers federal income tax and collects Social Security and Medicare taxes. The Social Security Administration administers Social Security and Medicare taxes to some extent, which enables the agency to pay benefits to those who qualify for Social Security and Medicare.

Go back to the Constitution.  Specifically the Spending Clause.

Article 1, Section 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; 

If spending money to fund it is not covered in the Constitution, stop spending money on it.  Every single unconstitutional agency, END ITS FUNDING.  KILL IT.  Make those people find REAL jobs, in the Private Sector.

Here’s a brief sampling:

Executive Office of the PresidentCONSTITUTIONAL, in accordance with Article 2. 

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA):  UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

“…responsible for developing and executing federal laws related to farming, agriculture, forestry, and food. It aims to meet the needs of farmers and ranchers, promote agricultural trade and production, work to assure food safety, protect natural resources, foster rural communities and end hunger in the United States and internationally.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Agriculture

Legislation is to originate from the Legislature, not some bureau of un-elected bureaucrats.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.  -Article 1, Section 1, United States Constitution

No mention of any Department of Agriculture.

It aims to meet the needs of farmers and ranchers, promote agricultural trade and production, work to assure food safety, protect natural resources, foster rural communities…

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights

These are the duties of the People and the States.  Their job is to “…meet the needs of farmers and ranchers, promote agricultural trade and production, work to assure food safety, protect natural resources,” and to “…foster rural communities…”  Not the federal government.  This is why states have their own legislatures and systems of law and government, independent of the federal system.  Agricultural trade and production is the responsibility of the farmers, who are more than free to work together towards these goals, and even form organizations to these ends.

Then we have this:

and end hunger in the United States and internationally.”

DEFINITELY not the job of the federal government.  That’s $156,000,000,000.00 USD (https://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/fy16budsum.pdf) we’re wasting, and not having the States do their jobs.

United States Department of Commerce:  PARTIALLY CONSTITUTIONAL, but exercising many unconstitutional powers.  For instance, there’s the Economic Development Administration:

The Economic Development Administration (EDA) is an agency in the United States Department of Commerce that provides grants and technical assistance to economically distressed communities in order to generate new employment, help retain existing jobs and stimulate industrial and commercial growth through a variety of investment programs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Development_Administration

Nowhere in the US Constitution does the federal government have the enumerated power to provide “…grants and technical assistance to economically distressed communities in order to generate new employment, help retain existing jobs…” nor to “…stimulate industrial and commercial growth through a variety of investment programs.”

Nowhere.  

In fiscal year 2015, that was $248,100,000.00 USD poured down the drain toilet, with the rest of the social engineering projects.

money-down-toilet-624x468

You know this is pretty much strictly used for vote farming.  It puts some cash into communities, to insure they’ll vote for whomever, and others that won’t vote for whomever don’t get a dime.  Leave this to where the Constitution says it belongs:  in the hands of the People and the States.  The People can buy and develop land, as they see fit, and the States can, too, within the limits of their own constitutional laws.

The International Trade Administration (ITA) is an agency in the United States Department of Commerce that promotes United States exports of nonagricultural U.S. services and goods.  

The ITA’s stated goals are to

  1. Provide practical information to help Americans select markets and products.

  2. Ensure that Americans have access to international markets as required by the U.S. trade agreements.

  3. Safeguard Americans from unfair competition from dumped and subsidized imports.

This, actually, is constitutional, in accordance with Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution:

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Another branch under the Department of Commerce:

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that deals with issues involving national security and high technology. A principal goal for the bureau is helping stop proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, while furthering the growth of United States exports. The Bureau is led by the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security.

The mission of the BIS is to advance U.S. national security, foreign policy, and economic interests. BIS’s activities include regulating the export of sensitive goods and dual-use technologies in an effective and efficient manner; enforcing export control, anti-boycott, and public safety laws; cooperating with and assisting other countries on export control and strategic trade issues; assisting U.S. industry to comply with international arms control agreements; monitoring the viability of the U.S. defense-industrial base; and promoting federal initiatives and public-private partnerships to protect the nation’s critical infrastructures.

Items on the Commerce Control List (CCL) – which includes many sensitive goods and technologies like encryption software – require a permit from the Department of Commerce before they can be exported.

Actually, another constitutional aim.  As long as they’re not MAKING regulations on the export of sensitive goods and dual-use technologies (that’s Congress’ job), they’re good.

 

In any event, I’ll stop.  I’m sure you get the point.

All this was to convey the fact that tax cuts (even those that Thump made) don’t hurt people; liberals that spend taxpayer monies unconstitutionally like drunken sailors, THEY’re the ones that hurt people.  My grandfather used to have a saying:

“Penny-wise and pound foolish.”

If we’re giving little tax cuts, here and there, every once in a great while, and yet we continually show absolutely no restraint or respect for the rule of law – the Constitution – when it comes to spending, the tax cuts mean nothing.  They don’t help the individual, they don’t help America.  This is why people like myself call for downsizing the government to constitutional levels, and doing the same to government spending.  If your boss gives you a raise (and I’m not equating tax cuts with a raise in pay), and you before, during and after, spend, spend, spend your money on every stupid things you can think of, that raise will be like nothing.  Like it never happened.  True fiscal responsibility – Fiscal Conservatism – lies in spending wisely, realizing that the federal government is the steward of the Peoples’ money, and that it is not their job to spend it on every pet project that comes down the pike, nor to lavish it on other countries.

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

FOREIGN AID RE-EVALUATION ACT

•December 30, 2017 • Leave a Comment

ice-cold-conservative

Virus-X, Republic Commando, here, and this time, I’m tackling the issue of foreign aide (or aid, however you want to spell it).  It’s unconstitutional, and its been a way for foreign countries to bleed the US dry for decades,

shut up an take my money

and its high time somebody addressed a way to get this out of control situation back under control, once and for all.

seems legit

COMMITTEE: All Constitutional Conservatives of the United States of America

PRINCIPAL AUTHOR:  VIRUS-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO

BILL NUMBER:

DELEGATION: The Conservatives

TITLE OF BILL:  The Foreign Aid Re-Evaluation Act

Be it enacted by the xxx Congress,

WHEREAS it is essential to the national security that the Constitution of the United States of America be adhered to, it is also important that both the Executive and Legislative branches of federal government exercise constitutional, responsible and legal expenditures of taxpayer funds, case in point, foreign aid.  Foreign aide payments are not constitutional, and, therefor, shall be discontinued, henceforth, provided they do not meet the following criteria: 

SECTION 1:  National Defense Imperative.  The United States Constitution says this:  “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…”  The federal government has a duty to “…insure domestic Tranquility…“, “…provide for the common defense…“, “…promote the general Welfare“, and “…secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves, and out Posterity…“.  Viewed through the prism of the Constitution, any foreign aide payments are constrained to meet this.  If, for instance, a payment would secure a key ally in a conflict against the forces of terrorism and/or hostile governments, and have wider ranging consequences that could, and would, negatively affect the security of the United States, such payments may be authorized. 

Sub-Section 1:  Disqualified Payments.  Payments for such purposes as Economic Growth in LDCs (Less Developed Countries), Development of Basic Infrastructure, Establishment of Political Ties, Market Expansion, or to Exert Influence on Internal Politics are unauthorized and unconstitutional.  Payments on this basis are to be considered unconstitutional and unlawful, and all that approved such payments, and/or involved in them in any way, shall be subject to consideration for impeachment.  Charges under 18 U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records – shall also be levied by the United States Attorney General. 

SECTION 2:  Commerce Regulation.  The United States Constitution does not enumerate the power to regulate banking to Congress, with the exception of monitoring interstate and international transactions, to insure legality, under the Commerce Among the States Clause. 

“The Congress shall have Power To…regulate Commerce…among the several States…” -Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3

And in the Commerce With Foreign Nations Clause: 

“The Congress shall have the Power To…regulate Commerce with foreign Nations…” -Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3,

as well as among Indian tribes (Commerce with the Indian Tribes): 

“The Congress shall have the Power To…regulate Commerce…with Indian Tribes…” -Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 

To this end, Congress will no longer impose laws that will unconstitutionally give them regulatory control over in-state commerce, including banking. 

Sub Section 1:  United States Central Bank.  The US Congress and Executive Branch will work with American domestic banks to form what shall be called the United States Central Bank.  The only purpose of this financial institution is to provide banking loans to foreign governments and business.  These funds will not be drawn from, and, by law, cannot be drawn from, the United States Treasury, nor any other public funds.  Foreign banking interests cannot participate, and any bank that becomes majority owned by a foreign entity or government shall be immediately removed and banned from future participation, for as long as this condition remains.  Funding will be drawn from the resources of any single bank, or any number of banks involved in the United States Central Bank.  A joint action of Congress and the Executive Branch can remove any financial institution from the United States Central Bank, at any time, without cause.

Sub-Section 2:  Restrictions.  No monies can be loaned to any state that is not considered on good relations with the United States of America, or outright enemies. Circa 2017, examples include the United Mexican States, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Republic of Cuba, the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the Peoples’ Republic of China, the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran, for instance. Providing loans for such nations shall be grounds for the United States Attorney General to file charges pursuant to 18 § U.S.C. 115 – Treason, Sedition and Subversive Activities against all parties found involved. The Oversight is to keep a database of all restricted nations, which shall be transparently available for public scrutiny.

Sub-Section 3:  Oversight.  To insure the funds are going to legitimate claimants, and will not endanger the security of the United States, or it’s allies, the Executive Branch, including the President and Vice Presidents of the United States, the Secretaries of State, Defense and Homeland Security, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the National Security Council will review all applications for loans.  Additional oversight will come from the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and any appropriate subcommittees and the United States Senate Committee on Armed Forces Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, and Capabilities.  These bodies will consult with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for foreign intelligence and recommendations.  Upon review and approval by these bodies, the majority consensus is an approval of the loan, each will provide a signature to the United States Central Bank.

Sub-Section 4:  Loans.  The United States Central Bank is able to determine what rates of interest to attach to any loans, however, this cannot violate laws of usury in the United States, or the nation accepting the loan.  Furthermore, the Oversight bodies of the United States Central Bank shall decide among them what rate to attach to the loan as a federal export duty.  All payments will have an export duty, just as a lump sum payment would.  Terms of the loan shall be decided by the loaning body (or bodies, in the event of several banks cooperating on a loan).  Even with approval, as a conglomeration of private businesses, the United States Central Bank is not under any obligation to provide any loans to any applicant, and cannot constitutionally be compelled to do otherwise.  These loans must also be compliant with the laws of the nation that is to accept the monies, and can have 3rd parties (such as the United Nations) involved (be they foreign nations or business entities) as guarantors (though all must be investigated by Oversight).  The United States Central Bank is entitled to take steps to insure the loans will be repaid, taking such steps as using an applicant’s international banking collateral.  If, for instance, a nation had bank accounts in the Swiss Confederation, the Republic of Panama, the United States of America, the Russian Federation and United Arab Emirates,  the United States Central Bank can include those as collateral, and seize them all, in the event of of non-payment.

Sub-Section 5 Records.  The United States Central Bank shall maintain accurate records of all financial transactions.    These records are subject to audit by Congress, at any time, and all records will be presented within 8 hours, electronically, or all personnel that are responsible for non-compliance will be charged with Contempt of Congress, and subject to arrest by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate (or both), to be brought to the floor of the appropriate chamber for punishment.  In addition, SECTION 1, Sub-Section 2 shall apply, resulting in all affected personnel being prosecuted pursuant to 15 (USC) United States Code §78t (c) for hindering, delaying or obstructing the making or filing of any document, report or information pertaining to this crime.

Section 3:  Enforcement.  Any nation that defaults on a loan can have it’s case taken before the United States Supreme Court for arbitration with other international bodies.  The Executive Branch and Legislature are within their rights to take action against those that will not pay back their loans through enhanced tariffs, or even crafting sanctioning legislation.  The United States Central Bank is also free to petition the United States Supreme Court for the ability to seize any properties defaulters have on, or off, American soil (such as embassy buildings, businesses, etc.), up to, and including, an amount equal to what is owed.  For instance, if the Peoples’ Republic of China was eligible for a loan, and defaulted on a loan, the United States Central Bank could petition to seize Dongfeng Motor Corporation, which is a state-run automobile manufacturer, literally owned by the communist government of the Peoples’ Republic of China.  If China refused to comply, the United States could enact sanctions against the PRC, until such that is owed is repaid, or indefinitely, if the loan is not repaid.  If the Dongfeng Motor Corporation was not sufficient, the United States Central Bank is free to maintain ownership of the business entity, and collect the profits, or to sell the property at a profit, subject to the laws of concerned nations.  These sanctions could take virtually any form, be they economic, political, etc.  In addition, any bank accounts could be seized, as well, as in Section 2, Sub-Section 4.

Section 4:  Enactment.  This law will take place immediately after the President of the United States signs it into law.

liberal screaming trump

Damn.

It looks like no matter what I do, I just can’t make liberals (including those in the [NS]GOP) happy.  Oh, well.  This law would place the responsibility of such loans back where they belong:  in the Private Sector.  The People of the United States should never be on the fiscal hook for paying for other countries, no matter what the reason.  MAYbe in the case of humanitarian aide, MAYBE, but even then, maybe not.

3088xhi

Don’t you wish the politicians in Washington D.C. would care as much about the People, as they care about people in foreign countries?  I know I do.

giphy

America first” doesn’t mean grinding other countries beneath America’s boot heel, but it certainly doesn’t mean America lies face down, and continues to be a doormat, and have it’s pockets riffled, as though we’re the World’s ATM, either.

I am Virus-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO, and I approve this message.

great-seal-of-virus-x

But, before I go, here’s some music for you.

Illegal Alien Detection and Deportation Task Force

•December 30, 2017 • Leave a Comment

EXECUTIVE ORDER

ESTABLISHING THE ILLEGAL ALIEN DETECTION AND DEPORTATION TASK FORCE

WHEREAS it is essential that the federal government remain vigilant in it’s constitutionally enumerated task of protecting the nation, the United States must make the preservation of it’s borders a priority, as well as the expulsion of illegal aliens.  In the words of President Ronald Wilson Reagan, “a nation that cannot control it’s borders is not a nation”.  According to Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment: 

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the States wherein they reside.  No State shall make or enforce any laws which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any States deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny any person within it’s jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”  

This is the justification some use to defend the presence of illegal aliens, and their families, but it should be noted that this is not a valid defense, as this law was drafted into the Constitution of the United States as an amendment to protect Blacks and former slaves from deportation by the Democrat Party, due to their dissatisfaction with the out come of the Civil War.  This does not, and never did, apply to illegal aliens, nor was it meant to, in the future.  Senator Jacob Howard also stated: 

“Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction [meaning the states – their jurisdiction] is, by virtue of Natural Law, a citizen of the United States.  This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.  It settles the great question of citizenship, and removes all doubt as to what persons are, or are not, citizens of the United States.  This has long been a great issue in the jurisprudence and legislation of the country.” 

Furthermore, Senator Lyman Trumbull of the Republican Party, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and a supporter of the 14th Amendment (as well as co-author of the 13th Amendment) stated May 30th, 1866, that the jurisdiction clause includes those ‘not owing allegiance to anybody else…Its only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens; and there can be no objection to the proposition that such persons should be citizens’.  

The Civil Rights act of 1866, which was unable to pass, due to opposition from the Democratic Party, defined citizens of the United States as ‘all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed’.  

Clearly, illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but to their home country that they left behind to illegally cross America’s borders, and wrongfully claim citizenship, and equally wrongfully claim citizenship for their succeeding generations.  It is the understanding of the vast majority of those knowledgeable with these subjects taht the immediate impulse of the passage of the 14th Amendment into law through constitutional amendment was to constitutionalize the Civil Rights act of 1866, and bypass the obstructionism of the Democratic Party, as well as to put questions of citizenship and matters of federal civil rights beyond the grasp of simple, and potentially biased, congressional majorities.  The idea of not owing any allegiance to any foreign power was, and remains, a central tenant to the understanding of the jurisdiction clause of the 14th Amendment.  It is this set of laws and understanding that I take action as President of the Untied States of America.

NOW THEREFORE, by virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, by the Constitution and the statutes of the United States, and as Commander in Chief of the armed services, it is hereby ordered as follows:

1. It is hereby declared that the Illegal Alien Detection and Task Force will be formed, which will include operatives from the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense.  

2. Operational command shall be executed by the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Defense, under the overall command of the Director of National Intelligence.

3. The Committee is authorized on behalf of the President to utilize the resources of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Security Agency and Department of Defense, and shall be authorized to data mine all intel pertaining to known illegal aliens.  This means that they are authorized to wiretap, tap into cellular phones, execute surveillance against all Internet searches, read all email and instant messaging, read any physical mail sent to, or from, anyone known to be an illegal alien, without a warrant.  Anyone suspected of being an illegal alien, with the provision of evidence, can have warrants sought against them, in order to empower these same searches to be executed.  Any others found to be illegal aliens, during the investigation of another, will be subject to the same surveillance.  Any American citizens that are uncovered during these surveillance operations, if suspicion exists that they are aware of the fact that they are dealing with illegal aliens, can have warrants sought against them for surveillance. 

4. When arrests are made of illegal aliens, all relatives that are illegal are to be arrested as well, including minor children and the elderly, and in accordance with the Illegal Alien Rectification Act, criminally charged as non-citizen illegal aliens.  

5. The Illegal Alien Detection and Deportation Task Force is authorized to utilize law enforcement officials from the Department of Homeland Security (such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Federal Protective Service and Customs and Border Protection), as well as the United States Marshals Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Army Military Police Corps and the United States Marine Corps Military Police.  City, county and State police forces can be commandeered to assist, as well.  It is also permissible to utilize the services of local Militia units with just compensation, provided they meet the requirements laid out in the Well Regulated Militia Act.

6. Under the supervision of the United States Congress and the Attorney General, the President of the United States is allowed to supplement immigration courts through the military, by granting temporary, direct commissions to experienced and reputable immigration judges, magistrates and attorneys.  These individuals will provide the foundation of an around the clock immigration and naturalization court, operating under United States Codes, and not the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  These individuals can resign their commissions, and their commissions can be rescinded at the discretion of the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense.  At such time their services are no longer deemed required, they will be released from duty, though if eligible under such acts as Hoplite and Minuteman Act of 2017, can elect to remain in the military.

Virus-X, Republic Commando

The White House
December 30, 2017

 

Democratic Socialism

•December 17, 2017 • 18 Comments

Democracy:  A system of “government” characterized by unwashed masses of leftists indulging in mob rule.  Typically, this system includes destructive impulses turned into law, persecution of those the majority deems worthy of such treatment, and deciding who is entitled to what rights, and who loses their rights, to make the unwashed masses feel better about themselves.  It is also not uncommon for democracies to experience great violence, when a faction doesn’t get what they want, and decide to take it from those that do, by force, up to, and including, premeditated murder.  Another characteristic of democracy is that the desires of the people commonly supersede the word of law, in favor of whatever desires they have at the moment.  Democracy is a system that morally bankrupt – and outright amoral – people gravitate to, using it to empower themselves at the expense of others.  It is not uncommon for the mobs to use democracy and “vote” themselves the “right” to victimize those that are an even smaller minority, than themselves, or unable to defend themselves against the mob.

Socialism:  A system of characterized by unwashed masses of leftists taking it upon themselves to decide how much of the fruits of your own labor you should be allowed to keep, and how much they should just take away and give to somebody else they deem more worthy of the fruits of your labors.  The government is virtually all-powerful, and the people are virtually all powerless.

Democratic Socialism:  A system of “government” characterized by unwashed masses of leftists indulging in mob rule.  Typically, this system includes destructive impulses turned into law, persecution of those the majority deems worthy of such treatment, and deciding who is entitled to what rights, and who loses their rights, to make the unwashed masses feel better about themselves.  It is also not uncommon for democracies to experience great violence, when a faction doesn’t get what they want, and decide to take it from those that do, by force, up to, and including, premeditated murder.  Another characteristic of democracy is that the desires of the people commonly supersede the word of law, in favor of whatever desires they have at the moment.  Combined with socialism, democracy transforms into a system of government characterized by unwashed masses of leftists taking it upon themselves to decide how much of the fruits of your own labor you should be allowed to keep, and how much they should just take away and give to somebody else they deem more worthy of the fruits of your labors.  When unwashed masses gain this kind of power, the result is the creation of “nanny states”:  nations filled with, and governed by, people that believe that their rights are a function of government, as opposed to Natural Law, and that they are entitled to everything that they have a desire for.  Things government should never be relied upon to provide, democratic socialist works to provide, even if it means virtually enslaving producers, by telling them that people are entitled to their goods and services.  To this end, unwashed masses of leftists indulging in mob rule raise taxes higher and higher, especially targeting the biggest producers unfortunate enough to have to live in their society, as their biggest cash cows, from which they can wring the most resources.  The government is virtually all-powerful, composed of unwashed masses of leftists indulging in mob rule and the people are virtually all powerless.  As is the penchant in democracies, socialist democracies are also very prone to taking advantage of the weak and powerless, even to the point of taking it upon themselves to legislate ways to legalize their mass murder, or outright extermination.

And there you have it.  Two systems of government the Framers did not like, smashed together, like a bad Reese’s Cup.

And this is what liberals think the country would be best run by.

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

Update:  Internet liberals took it upon themselves to criticize my page, and my disdain for socialism.  This is me fisking his long response that he tried to have me get into, on his own page.  I told him that if he had anything to say to me, next time, do it on my page, because I have no desire to go to  his.  I didn’t go to his page to challenge his viewpoint, he came to mine for that.  If you do that, you argue here, not elsewhere.  Anyhow, here’s the link to his blatherings that he believes I’m obligated to respond to, for context:

http://meerkatmusings.co.uk/democracy/

“Do we want to have a look at what an apparently hardcore defender of conservative values thinks of one of the US Constitution’s most important elements? For the record, if you think democracy is not enshrined in the Constitution, take a look here:

Here’s the key bit…

 

Section 2

1: The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.”

Like most apparent liberals, you choose to re-arrange language to suit your mood, at the moment. Nothing in the section you outlined even mentions the word “democracy”, and elections are not peculiar to democracies. Even communist governments have votes (but they’re just not for the people). Socialist governments, such as in the UK, have votes. Voting rights are not something that only exist in democracies. Apparently, you’re unfamiliar with basic history.

NUMBER:

1593

AUTHOR:

Benjamin Franklin (1706–90)

QUOTATION:

Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

ATTRIBUTION:

The response is attributed to BENJAMIN FRANKLIN—at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation—in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention.

McHenry’s notes were first published in The American Historical Review,vol. 11, 1906, and the anecdote on p. 618 reads: “A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy. A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.” When McHenry’s notes were included in The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, ed. Max Farrand, vol. 3, appendix A, p. 85 (1911, reprinted 1934), a footnote stated that the date this anecdote was written is uncertain.

SUBJECTS:

Republic

WORKS:

Benjamin Franklin Collection

Hmmm.

For some reason, Franklin didn’t call the emerging government a “democracy”. Perhaps there is a difference? Again, in your mental dishonesty to twist arguments and gain 5 minutes of Internet fame, you avoid looking into such differences. Here, let me do the 30 seconds of footwork for you:

http://madisonproject.com/2013/09/we-the-people-a-constitutional-republic-not-a-democracy/

You’ll see the word ‘election’ come up a few times too. I guess the principle of having the people choosing their representatives via a process of voting only applies when the people choose representatives that fit a specific niche. In other words, democracy only works if the ‘right’ candidate wins.”

It’s funny you should say that:

democracy only works if the ‘right’ candidate wins

because people that think like you (liberals) say exactly the same thing.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/306350-sudden-liberal-opposition-to-electoral-college-not

Well.

Isn’t that a coincidence? However, you can keep getting exercise walking the strawman, pretending elections are only aspects of democracies, and not republics and constitutional republics.

Cast your minds back to a discussion I had on the subject of guns and Constitutional rights. It appears that the Constitution is to be used selectively – we can apparently ignore it when it comes to support for representative ideals.” Yep. And I just posted an article about how leftists are doing that very thing. However, this isn’t about guns, it’s about government types. Maybe you should try keeping on topic. If you want to talk about guns, that can be done in another thread.

The same person that I sparred with on that occasion is the person responsible for this article.

I quote:

Democracy:  A system of “government” characterized by unwashed masses of leftists indulging in mob rule.  Typically, this system includes destructive impulses turned into law, persecution of those the majority deems worthy of such treatment, and deciding who is entitled to what rights, and who loses their rights, to make the unwashed masses feel better about themselves.  It is also not uncommon for democracies to experience great violence, when a faction doesn’t get what they want, and decide to take it from those that do, by force, up to, and including, premeditated murder.  Another characteristic of democracy is that the desires of the people commonly supersede the word of law, in favor of whatever desires they have at the moment.  Democracy is a system that morally bankrupt – and outright amoral – people gravitate to, using it to empower themselves at the expense of others.  It is not uncommon for the mobs to use democracy and “vote” themselves the “right” to victimize those that are an even smaller minority, than themselves, or unable to defend themselves against the mob.

No, actually the gamut, if there is one, is coming from you. Since you’re quite obviously ignorant of the mechanics of government, I’ll educate you: representative government is not endemic only to democracies, but also constitutional republics, like the United States of America. What you’re doing is throwing out yet another strawman, in publishing what is a clear lie, stating:

It appears the opening gambit is to accuse anyone who favours a system of representative rule of being an ‘unwashed leftie’, which, quite aside from being quite the insult to anyone who identifies as left wing, rather ignores all the right wing individuals who consider democracy to be a cornerstone of freedom.”

You seem to have quite a but of lies in you, even to the point of making up quotes and arguments (I don’t seem to recall calling anyone an “unwashed leftie”. Maybe you should show that quote, like you show others. Is there some reason you didn’t? I’ll bet there is.) I don’t know what country you’re from, but I’m from the USA, and, in this country, the Left has absolutely no regard for representative government. (By the way, in this country, we have GOVERNMENT, in the forms of such politicians as Representatives and Senators, and even Governors. We don’t have RULERS. I have found, however, that leftists, like yourself, do tend to like being “ruled”, and have no head for government. More evidence you’re really not well versed in what you’re arguing.) If leftists in this country favored “representative” GOVERNMENT (not “rule”), they wouldn’t have done things like lock other representatives with dissenting opinions out of policy meetings, and passed laws that were clearly against the constitutional laws that are the “…cornerstone of freedom…” in this country. I don’t know about how people behave in your country, and, furthermore, don’t care. In this country, leftists are constantly proposing and passing laws that are in clear violation of the constitutional “…cornerstone of freedom…”, which shows that they have no regard for representative government (but want to RULE, as you would suggest, through your language). Actual right wing politicians are few and far between. Many, for whatever reason, believe the GOP is the home of the Right Wing (which is patently untrue, as I know from personal experience). I couldn’t name even one such individual, off the top of my head. People that push identity politics, unconstitutional legislation, etc., are not on the right side of the political spectrum, and, are probably just as confused as you are, when it comes to words like “democracy”, and what kind of government this country actually has, and has had for hundreds of years.

Whilst Virus-X is keen to suggest that Trump is left wing (he even went as far as to assert Trump is a communist in one article of his), the fact remains that his support base is composed primarily of right wingers.”

Your rank dishonesty and ignorance increases with every paragraph. I’m not a coward, and I don’t have to “suggest” anything. I don’t have to twist language, like you do, and pretend words mean something they don’t, or that they don’t mean something that they actually do. I never ‘suggested’ Trump was a communist, and you know that you’re just lying. If you actually believed such a stupid thing (which is par for your course, really), you’d’ve posted that, like you try to post everything else you believe supports your narrative. Trump, himself, supports putting people with mental illness into the Uniformed Services, which can pose a threat to the lives of others. He is in support of murdering unborn children, and of private corporations that do such deeds, to the point of illegally and unconstitutionally taking taxpayer funds to finance such activities, and defending organizations that use those funds on television. He has proclaimed he has mysteriously reversed his previous stance on firearms, and yet, has taken no actions, nor suggested any to the Congress, to protect 2nd Amendment rights, just as he doesn’t protect the right to life, of the unborn. Among the many other things you’ve demonstrated a classical ignorance of, it’s the political spectrum, and if you’re European, you have a completely backwards view of it, from America. What you would consider right wing in Europe, isn’t in America, and what you would consider “Conservative” in Europe, isn’t in America, either. Trump’s supporters, at best, are Paleo-Conservatives, which aren’t Conservatives. Now, wallowing in ignorance as you are, you should go and look up what a Paleo Conservative is, before you go on.

After all, Trump ran as a Republican, the GOP has traditionally been associated with the right of the US political system and Trump played to that audience. It is understandable that some on the right wish to distance themselves from Trump and the Republican Party he now leads, but it is dishonest to place the blame at the door of the left of the spectrum.”

So much garbage to unpack.

After all, Trump ran as a Republican,” Meaningless. Your mental dishonesty prevents you from mentioning that Trump was a decades long, hard core liberal, and even stated as much, in an interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHAHKGP10yc

In 2004, which wasn’t that long ago, he said he identifies more as a member of the Slave Party:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/21/politics/donald-trump-election-democrat/index.html

the GOP has traditionally been associated with the right of the US political system and Trump played to that audience.” More garbage. The only reason some people with Right Wing ideologies have moved towards the GOP is because the DNC is absolutely antithetical to them, and, as for the GOP, they haven’t been much better in their treatment of Conservatives. Ronald Reagan, for instance, was very much hated by many Republicans, unless they want to invoke his name to make themselves look like something they aren’t. Trump, himself, who was known to dislike Reagan, has done this more than once, and recently. Trump, himself, also said that the GOP is not a Conservative party, and that Conservatives should leave, if Conservatism is what they want.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/trump-republican-party-not-called-conservative-party/

Meerkat Musings’ own mental dishonesty wouldn’t let him state this, because it doesn’t go along with his narrative, and inhibits his ability to make baseless, false arguments.

The bottom line is, Trump is an egomaniac, who will use and exploit whatever element of the spectrum he needs to further his own interests.”

trump-lying-asshole

One of the only things you’ve said that had any truth to it, in the midst of every other lie you’ve told, and I’ve never disputed that. Maybe if you’d’ve actually read the blog, you’d see that I am highly critical of Trump. I guess that, again, would take too much mental honesty, and it’s more convenient to you to insinuate that I’m a Trump supporter (and insinuate, because you don’t have the guts to come out and flat out tell the lie).

He is not necessarily right wing, but not necessarily left wing either.”

He’s not “Right Wing”, at all, and he supports violating the Constitution for illegal, unethical purposes, so, yes, he’s a leftist. Probably like you are.

I’ve digressed.”

shocked face

Several times. Lied, too.

Returning to the quote above, what can we take from it? Well, the idea of the majority persecuting more vulnerable groups is not native to democracy…”

And, you’re back to the lies and manufacturing. Democrats are the ones that believe the US is a democracy, and they are famous for persecuting “…more vulnerable groups…”. Ever heard of Plessy v Ferguson?

How about Segregation?

The Fugitive Slave Act?

The Black Codes?

Poll Taxes?

All the result of people that believe the USA is a democracy, like you. Democracy is a pox, as are people like you that seek to spread it. My great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather once wrote a letter to my great, great, great, great, great, great grandmother regarding this. 

“I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy.  Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either.  Remember, democracy never lasts long.  It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.  There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.  it is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy.  It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history.  Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty.  When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation.  Individuals have conquered themselves.  Nations and large bodies of men, never.”  -John Adams, the Letters of John and Abigail Adams

…and in fact, democracy tends to offer the best safeguards against the persecution of minorities.”

You mean like when the pushers of democracy voted against every piece of civil rights legislation this country had put forth? The democrat pushers of the DNC voted against the civil rights legislation, since 1866, to 1957 to 1964? Or when they – going back to

democracy only works if the ‘right’ candidate wins”

decided they didn’t like democracy, and murdered the 1st president of an opposing political party, as well as created a racist terrorist organization that became a paramilitary wing of their party, and lasts to this very day? Or when those very same “democracy” lovers refused to have ethnic minorities in their political party? Or when those ethnic minorities they called “niggers” were going to be voting for them, for 200 years? Make yourself clear.

Whilst democracies can experience violence, these events are nothing like the violence that erupted during the Arab Spring, or the era of religious persecution under monarchies during the Dark and Middle Ages.”

Again, you digress into bullshit. The Arab Spring involved nations under dictatorships, looking to move into uncertain political futures that may, or may not, have involved democracy. And America is in political turmoil, thanks to you “democracy” lovers, and your calls for war and murder in the streets. If you count socialist nations as democracies, Venezuela is also a good example of violence.

http://www.newsweek.com/antifa-civil-war-november-4-really-just-few-protests-against-trump-702150

And now you’re trying to talk about religion, to create another strawman argument, in your alleged arguments against my politics.

Nice try, but your digressions aren’t working.

Here we had a set of very conservative, religiously motivated dictatorships, that sought to rule through fear and the idea of God-ordained leadership. This was not a good era for humanity.” More strawman arguments. Save it for someone discussing religion.

Another concept is that the desires of the people somehow override the rule of law – well, in another forms of government (such as a theocracy or monarchy) the rule of law is heavily dependent upon interpretation of texts and the whim of the successor. Neither options are going to offer any meaningful protection under law for the vulnerable or minorities.”

Again, go back to the link: ANTIFA (who are actually violent fascist liberals) have advocated for overthrowing the government, and the last big liberal president – Obama – got in trouble with the Supreme Court for interpreting the Constitution the way he wanted to.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/06/26/obama-recess-appointments-illegal-unanimous-supreme-court-finds

Is there some reason you didn’t mention that, Meerkat Musings?

It isn’t made clear by Virus-X who the ‘mobs’ are victimising,” To you, abortion isn’t victimizing anyone, so why would I expect you to be mentally honest enough to see who is victimized by violating the Constitution? ANTIFA has victimized people through violence, and the DNC has victimized people by violating the Constitution, and driving this country further into insolvency, creating a crushing tax burden, and destroying businesses, and the economy. When the economy is damaged, everyone suffers, but I guess you don’t care about that. After all, DEMOCRACY!

…but to take an example that’s popular with the religious right, they have argued (all around the world) that the advent of LGBT rights is an affront to their freedom.”

Actually, while you sit up on your high horse of dishonesty, watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhp_DDHe_X0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

Hmm…

Are those people on your “...religious right...” (which you demonstratively know nothing about)?

In your world, it’s about what makes you feel good. In the world of Conservatism, the rights of one do not trump those of another. The Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to make a ruling on the matter, and the rights of gays do not trump those of those that are not. When you put their wants above others, you’re manufacturing rights, and creating ‘protected classes’ of people, something the US does not need.

It matters not that the religious right in the US greatly outnumbers the LGBT community,”

No, it doesn’t. What does matter is that democracy (that thing you love so much) specializes in the tyranny of the majority, and this is a case in point.

it matters not that everyone is still free (under the Constitution no less) to practice their beliefs – apparently it is unfair that the religious right doesn’t get to force its beliefs upon a minority that doesn’t share them.”

Truth, to you, also doesn’t matter, very clearly. If a person’s religious conscience does not allow them to participate in ceremonies that they disagree with, you, and others say their opinions don’t matter, because DEMOCRACY! They have equal rights, because you ‘allow’ them to practice their religion, but they can’t live by their faiths, because you won’t allow them to, because the rights of the “…more vulnerable groups…” trump their own?

I would be curious to know what alternative form of government Virus-X has in mind.”

A constitutional republic. Question answered.

There’s another way of looking at socialism. It provides equality of opportunity and outcome and bases what a person receives from the system on what that person puts into the system. In other words, it (provided it functions properly) rewards hard work. Virus-X is following the classic trap of mixing up socialism with elements of communism – whilst the two ideas do share some values, they are certainly not one and the same.”

And there’s another way of looking at socialism: it’s a corrupt system in which the chosen few pick winners and losers. America already has equal opportunity. What socialism wants is EQUAL OUTCOME. Meerkat Musings, you lie when you say people “put” things into “the system”. Socialism TAKES from you, because it’s a system of government based solely on taking from one man, to give to another, or, as a man I’m sure you idolized said:

From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need.”

That’s socialism. And what is the goal of socialism?

The goal of socialism is communism.”

Communism. You know. The thing you accused me of insinuating Trump was, in one of your many lies. Meerkat Musings, you accuse me of “…following the classic trap of mixing up socialism with elements of communism – whilst…” knowing nothing about either, and knowing nothing about American government, democracy, or what a constitutional republic is.

Natural Law should be based on morals and ethics, but whose morals and ethics?”

And, again, falling back on your liberality, you want to reinterpret what Natural Law means, according to your wants and needs. Sorry, socialism isn’t going to get that for you, and Natural Law is clearly defined.

This is the basic recipe for the political philosophy of liberalism—Locke’s philosophy. Locke speaks of a state of nature where men are free, equal, and independent. … The Founding Fathers, in the Declaration of Independence, speak of both naturalrights and natural laws. Locke does likewise.”

http://www.nlnrac.org/earlymodern/locke

Don’t confuse the liberality of Locke with your socialist dogma driven ideology. They’re nothing alike. Again, though: less than 5 seconds of research, and you could’ve found what Natural Law was, or, if you were mentally honest, you could’ve asked what I meant, when I brought it up. However, you’re lazy and mentally dishonest, you and I both know that’s not going to happen.

Whenever I have seen this expression used, it is almost invariably linked to religion. ‘Natural Law’ is the Word of God, for example (which ironically, makes it supernatural and not natural law).”

Asked and answered. You’re heading back into the fields to pick more straw for another strawman.

It is a personal view of mine that if you possess the power to help someone, you help them.”

Another lie. YOU believe the GOVERNMENT should FORCE people to help others, out of a sense of false charity. That’s called SOCIALISM.

If governments possess the means to help their people by providing health care services, they should.”

Not if they do not have the authority to. Let’s go back to your previous statement:

democracy only works if the ‘right’ candidate wins”

If you’re being critical of the USA, you’re stating, quite clearly, that law, as laid out in the Constitution of the United States, should only be given lip service, until it becomes inconvenient, or when defying it will give you something that you want. The Constitution does not give the federal government in this nation the enumerated power to grant health care, nor interfere in such decisions. Another thing you need to look up is “enumerated powers”. Something else you’re woefully ignorant of, quite obviously.

No one should end up bankrupt or having to choose between medical bills and food.”

True, but it’s not the job of the federal government, nor the enumerated responsibility of that government, to make sure people have the amount of money in their pockets that you think is adequate, nor to make them fiscally responsible with what they do with their money. Nor is it to PROVIDE money. I can tell you’ve never read the Constitution. As a probable foreigner, I’m not advocating that you do, but you’d sound less foolish and child-like when trying to debate constitutional matters.

“‘Natural Law’ (we could go as far as to apply true nature and survival of the fittest) leads only to the powerful dominating the weak, affording no protection or help for society’s most vulnerable.”

Another lie by Meerkat Musings. Must mean another minute has passed. If any philosophy has shown it’s all about dominating of the weak, it’s liberalism, which states, in this country, that people shouldn’t have the right to lethal self defense, and that unborn children aren’t to be considered Human, until it’s convenient to consider them as such. It’s resulted in more megadeaths, than the dropping of a nuclear weapon in a crowded city.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_United_States

Communism has also shown itself to be about Darwinism, in it’s death toll. Take a look at the Soviets and the communist Chinese. Constitutional conservatism has never done such a thing, and Natural Law (that thing you don’t know about) also rails against it.

It props up people like Donald Trump. Is that really what we want?”

You clearly don’t know your ass from a hole in the ground, with a stupid argument, like this.

You started this off with quoting the Constitution of the United States. One thing you didn’t mention is the fact that the word “democracy” is never mentioned anywhere in it, and yet, somehow, it supports your ignorant notion that the US is not a constitutional republic. Instead of taking a document you know nothing about out of context, maybe you should heed the words of the men that wrote it.

“To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.” –Thomas Jefferson

“A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.” –Thomas Jefferson

“Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!” –Patrick Henry

“Democracy is the most vile form of government. … democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as the have been violent in their deaths.” –James Madison (1751-1836) Father of the Constitution, 4th President of the U. S.

We are a Republic. Real Liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy.”

Alexander Hamilton (1755-1804) Lawyer, Secretary of the Treasury & Secretary of State

A simple democracy is the devil’s own government.” –Benjamin Rush (1745-1813) Founding Father& signer of the Declaration of Independence

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” – Thomas Jefferson, Author of the Declaration of Independence, 3rd President of the U. S.

A democracy is a volcano, which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption, and carry desolation in their way.” – Fisher Ames (1758-1808) Founding Father and framer of the First Amendment to the Constitution