Hey, Republicans: at least have the decency to shut the lights off on the way out.

The GOP is officially dead.


It’s been killed by a terminal infection of Alt Right racists, liberals, crypto-democrats and various other leftist scum. They are openly calling, now, for ‘punishing’ those that do not follow their new and idiotic orthodoxy, and I think the punishment should be the complete and total destruction of their political party, once and for all. History repeats itself, because people are too stupid to read a book and educate themselves on it:


When new issues of nativism, prohibition, and anti-slavery burst on the scene in the mid-1850s, few looked to the quickly disintegrating Whig Party for answers. In the north most ex-Whigs joined the new Republican Party, and in the South, they flocked to a new short-lived American Party.

The election of 1852 marked the beginning of the end for the Whigs. The deaths of Henry Clay and Daniel Webster that year severely weakened the party. The Compromise of 1850 had fractured the Whigs along pro- and anti-slavery lines, with the anti-slavery faction having enough power to deny Fillmore the party’s nomination in 1852. The Whig Party’s 1852 convention in New York City saw the historic meeting between Alvan E. Bovay and The New York TribuneHorace Greeley, a meeting that led to correspondence between the men as the early Republican Party meetings in 1854 began to take place.

Attempting to repeat their earlier successes, the Whigs nominated popular General Winfield Scott, who lost decisively to the Democrats’ Franklin Pierce. The Democrats won the election by a large margin: Pierce won 27 of the 31 states, including Scott’s home state of New Jersey. Whig Representative Lewis D. Campbell of Ohio was particularly distraught by the defeat, exclaiming, “We are slain. The party is dead—dead—dead!” Increasingly, politicians realized that the party was a loser.

Whig Party (United States)


This breed of people have re-created the GOP in their own pathetic image. A co worker of mine – whom I do still regard as a friend – is one of these woefully uneducated people. He claims Thump is, basically, the Messiah, but his only reasoning is that he’s (somehow) “better than Hillary”. He advocates for universal health care (which my friend actually didn’t know the meaning of, and I literally had to explain it to him), gay “rights”, higher taxes, unconstitutional legislation to punish people he doesn’t like, personally, and considers himself above the law as he fleeces thousands of their savings, takes money from our enemies as the Clintons do, etc. Yet, somehow, this trumpanzee thinks that Thump will be “better”, though he absolute has zero ability to articulate <b>how</b>. I gave him the trumpanzee challenge (convince me to vote Thump, without mentioning Hillary), and he actually said HE COULDN’T. He has complete disdain for Christians and Conservatives (including myself), because he says they’re not voting Thump (which shows he admits that the people calling themselves “christians” and “conservatives” carrying Thump’s urine jug, aren’t, no matter how much they like to call themselves so). According to him, Thump’s poor polling is our fault, but when I ask him:

“If Christian Conservatives are able to sink him so badly in the national polls, how did we allow him to become nominee?”

…he can’t answer.


His frontal lobe has to open the Task Manager and shut down a few processes, or he’ll probably have a cardiac arrest, or lapse into a coma, due to too many processes going on, at once, in his 1.02 MHz NTSC processor brain.


But, hey. He insists on calling me a liberal, then admitting in the next breath that he has no evidence to support that stupid claim (aside from my not voting for Orange Julius, and, by default with his primitive brain, supporting Hillary Clinton).


Same as when he says Thump is a better candidate, than Hillary, yet has absolute zero power to back that claim up, with a scintilla of anything even remotely resembling evidence. When you present real evidence to refute his wild claims, he just gets mad, walks off or gets quiet, or he just repeats that Thump is better, though he can’t prove it.

He “feels” he will.

Now, make no mistake.  I despise Clintons.  All of them.  I do not vote Slave Party, and I don’t really talk about Hillary, because she’s such a non issue and non choice.  There are no circumstances under which I’d vote Slave Party.  Period.  However, I don’t go by feelings, either, like liberals/trumpanzees do.  I go by what I deduce through what I can uncover through a combination of written histories, video, audio and character deduction.

So, without much ado, let’s look at the contrasts between Orange Julius and Hillary.

Health Care:

Thump: Orange Julius advocates for full-blown communist universal health care, which has been such a crashing success in places like Canada.

Trump is demonstrably stupid, and his trumpanzees are even dumber.  If the government is providing universal health care, then the plans are not private.  I’ve touched on his stupid health care plan and magical thinking, earlier:  https://virusx.wordpress.com/2016/03/05/trump-and-his-magical-health-care-plan/

It’s funny, considering he thinks himself the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/24/donald-trump-likens-himself-ronald-reagan-truly-co/


…when Reagan clearly did not like the idea of federally mandated and regulated “health” “care”.

“Once the Ferrrand bill is passed, this nation will be provided with a mechanism for socialized medicine capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population.”

Now, let’s look at Hillary Clinton’s position:

“I’ve fought for quality, affordable health care my entire career. As president, I’ll defend the Affordable Care Act, build on its successes, and go even further to reduce costs. My plan will crack down on drug companies charging excessive prices, slow the growth of out-of-pocket costs, and provide a new credit to those facing high health expenses.”

So, quite plainly, she’s pro ObamaCare.  Let’s look at how well that’s been doing, thus far:






I could go on, but why bother?  We all known Clintons embrace the principles and philosophies of failure for others.  Like all good little communists, your loss is their gain.

Bill Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton

Verdict:  they both suck the wet mop.


Supreme Court Picks:

The trumpanzees have been rattling their skulls about Thump’s alleged plan to put Conservatives on the Supreme Court.  Their evidence?  A little list Thump put out a little while ago.  What they don’t talk about is that a day later, he pretty much said he wasn’t serious about that, and proved Conservatives everywhere right, when they said he was lying or pandering.


I pointed this out to my favorite trumpanzee, and he couldn’t intelligently defend himself. It was like watching Woody Allen


…after eating something that gave him bad gas, trying to defend himself in the octogon against the UFC heavyweight champion.


He stammered and sputtered as his little brain overheated and threatened to shut down for self-protection.  He just kept insisting Thump would honor his promise (even though that list certainly wasn’t a promise).  When I brought this up to him, he couldn’t even talk, because he knew he’d do nothing but further embarrass himself.

Spreading fast on social media this Thursday morning is a story originally posted at the Huffington Post, which reports that Donald Trump is considering PayPal founder, gay marriage supporter, and culture war snob Peter Thiel for the Supreme Court. If appointed, Thiel would be the first openly gay Supreme Court Justice, a landmark I personally think Trump would find irresistible.


Hillary Clinton?


A ‘diversity’ ticket, chock full of liberals, and not a single Conservative ideal among them. There’s not much more to say, because nobody expected this turd to be Conservative-friendly.


Trumpanzees  like to say Thump is “honest”,”tells it like it is”, etc.  Well, he isn’t and doesn’t.  Let’s take a look at this guy’s level of corruption.

Trump University

Yes, Trump University Was a Massive Scam

by IAN TUTTLE February 26, 2016 5:18 PM


Many people believe that higher education is a de facto scam. Trump University, Donald Trump’s real-estate institution, was a de jure one. First thing first, Trump University was never a university. When the “school” was established in 2005, the New York State Education Department warned that it was in violation of state law for operating without a NYSED license. Trump ignored the warnings. (The institution is now called, ahem, “Trump Entrepreneur Initiative.”) Cue lawsuits.

Trump University is currently the defendant in three lawsuits — two class-action lawsuits filed in California, and one filed in New York by then-attorney general Eric Schneiderman, who told CNN’s New Day in 2013: “We started looking at Trump University and discovered that it was a classic bait-and-switch scheme. It was a scam, starting with the fact that it was not a university.” Trump U “students” say the same. In his affidavit, Richard Hewson reported that he and his wife “concluded that we had paid over $20,000 for nothing, based on our belief in Donald Trump and the promises made at the [organization’s] free seminar and three-day workshop.” But “the whole thing was a scam.” In fact, $20,000 is only a mid-range loss. The lead plaintiff in one of the California suits, yoga instructor Tarla Makaeff, says she was “scammed” out of $60,000 over the course of her time in Trump U. How could that have happened? The New York suit offers a suggestion: The free seminars were the first step in a bait and switch to induce prospective students to enroll in increasingly expensive seminars starting with the three-day $1495 seminar and ultimately one of respondents’ advanced seminars such as the “Gold Elite” program costing $35,000. At the “free” 90-minute introductory seminars to which Trump University advertisements and solicitations invited prospective students, Trump University instructors engaged in a methodical, systematic series of misrepresentations designed to convince students to sign up for the Trump University three-day seminar at a cost of $1495. The Atlantic, which got hold of a 41-page “Private & Confidential” playbook from Trump U, has attested to the same: The playbook says almost nothing about the guest speaker presentations, the ostensible reason why people showed up to the seminar in the first place. Instead, the playbook focuses on the seminars’ real purpose: to browbeat attendees into purchasing expensive Trump University course packages. To do that, instructors touted Trump’s own promises: that students would be “mentored” by “handpicked” real-estate experts, who would use Trump’s own real-estate strategies. Here’s Trump making the pitch himself:


Now, let’s see what the students have to say about Thump and his “school”:

Now, let’s look at his “foundation”.


And let’s look at his stealing money from Veterans:



I could go on, but I’ll move on to Clinton.

Treason.  Selling American uranium to our deadly enemies, the Russians.


Theft.  Setting up fake charity foundations to rake in the cash.


Fraud.  Stealing money from the people.



Blatant illegality.  “Filegate”.


Believe me, the list goes on.  I’m not trying to say who’s more dishonest, I’m saying THEY’RE BOTH DISHONEST, and NEITHER are mentally or morally qualified to be president.


The argument of the trumpanzee is ‘my fundamentally dishonest candidate is better than your fundamentally dishonest candidate’.  I accept neither, because that’s the argument of someone that is fundamentally dishonest.



Trump is a mediocre businessman,


who seems to not be extremely good at managing his own money, in comparison to his peers, or finding those that can.


He’s known to lie, shamelessly and continually, about his level of wealth and success,


and the foolish automatically believe that his word is some kind of gold standard on finances, just because he says he’s a billionaire.  People that went to Trump University found out the hard way that his word if more akin to fools gold.



In any event, Thump’s solutions to the economic crisis cloud that hangs over the country for the last near-decade?

Preventing ‘default’ by printing more money.



Apparently, he wasn’t a graduate of Wharton,




as much as he was the Cloward Piven School of Economics.


This is just rank ignorance, if not flat out stupidity.  Anybody with a knowledge of rudimentary history (which trumpanzees like my friend don’t, because he says he has better things to do, than read, such as watch football and push his son to play football, instead of getting good grades) know about what happened to Germany after the 1st World War.

Hyperinflation and Weimar Germany

Weimar Germany had greeted with total horror the financial punishment of Versailles. If Germany had paid off the sum of £6,600,000,000, she would have remained in debt to the Allies until 1987 !! However, by signing the Treaty of Versailles, she had agreed in principle to the issue of reparations and in 1921, Germany just about managed to pay its first installment of 2 billion gold marks. Weimar Germany was allowed to pay in kind (actual materials) as opposed to just cash. Most of this 2 billion was paid in coal, iron and wood.

In 1922, Weimar Germany simply could not manage to pay another installment. This the Allies did not believe – especially France where anger towards Germany still ran deep – and the German government was accused of trying to get out of her reparations responsibilities. This apparent refusal was only four years after the end of the war, and the attitude of the public towards Germany was still very hostile – and not just in France.

In 1923, French and Belgium troops invaded the Ruhr; Germany’s most valuable industrial area. The French and Belgium troops took over the iron and steel factories, coal mines and railways. Those Germans who lived in the Ruhr and were considered not to be co-operating with the Germans were imprisoned. Food was taken. That this action by the French and Belgium broke the rules of the League of Nations – which both belonged to – was ignored by both countries. France was considered one of the League’s most powerful members, and here she was violating its own code of conduct.

Weimar’s government responded by ordering the workers in the Ruhr to go on strike and it ordered all people in the Ruhr to passively resist the French and Belgium soldiers. This meant that they were not to openly confront the French and Belgium soldiers, simply that they were not to help them in any way whatsoever. This lead to violence and over the next 8 months of the occupation, 132 people were killed and over 150,000 Ruhr Germans expelled from their homes.

The order for workers to go on a general strike may have been patriotic but it had disastrous consequences for Germany as a whole. The Ruhr was Germany’s richest economic area and produced a great deal of wealth for the country as a whole. The huge Krupps steelworks was there. By not producing any goods whatsoever, Germany’s economy started to suffer. The striking workers had to be paid and the people expelled from their homes had to be looked after. To do this, the government did the worst thing possible – it printed money to cover the cost. This signalled to the outside world that Germany did not have enough money to pay for her day-to-day needs and whatever money may have been invested in Germany was removed by foreign investors.

Such a drop in confidence also caused a crisis in Weimar Germany itself when prices started to rise to match inflation. Very quickly, things got out of control and what is known as hyperinflation set in. Prices went up quicker than people could spend their money.

In 1922, a loaf of bread cost 163 marks. 

By September 1923, this figure had reached 1,500,000 marks and at the peak of hyperinflation, November 1923, a loaf of bread cost 200,000,000,000 marks.

The impact of hyperinflation was huge :

People were paid by the hour and rushed to pass money to loved ones so that it could be spent before its value meant it was worthless.


Hell, if you’re too trifling to read a book, surf the Internet.  The knowledge is out there, and there’s no excuse for you not to have it.  Intentional ignorance is stupidity.  Plain and simple.

Then, there’s his other plan:


Yep.  We should borrow more money, instead of even trying to reduce our $19,000,000,000,000 debt.

(And one of the things he’ll be spending that money on is universal health care.)

So, obviously, Orange Julius is nothing more than a common, cheap, garden variety tax and spend liberal.

Oh, and let’s not forget his love of tariffs (taxes):

The Problem with Trump’s Protectionist Tariffs

by JIM GERAGHTY March 8, 2016 4:00 AM

Donald Trump has pitched himself to voters as a proud protectionist, intent on punishing the Chinese companies that he says are hurting American workers. In his January meeting with the editorial board of the New York Times, he said he would impose a 45 percent tariff on all products imported from China. Luckily, we don’t have to guess how such a tariff would impact the economy, because the Obama administration attempted a version of Trump’s idea seven years ago. It did not go well.

“It’s basically a real-world case study on what would happen if we imposed 35 percent tariffs on Chinese imports,” says Scott Lincicome, an international trade attorney and adjunct fellow at the Cato Institute. “In this case, we saw huge costs for consumers, gains by other foreign competitors, and almost no gains for American workers, even under the most generous of assumptions.” By 2009, the United States was importing tires from China at a rate of about 50 million per year. The United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial, and Service Workers International Union complained to the Obama administration that there was a “large, rapid, and continuing” increase in the number of Chinese-made tires entering American markets. In September of that year, Obama approved relief for domestic producers by increasing tariffs on most new tire imports for three years.

“The president decided to remedy the clear disruption to the U.S. tire industry based on the facts and the law in this case,” then–White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said at the time. Economists Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Sean Lowry note that the number of Americans employed in tire manufacturing increased from 50,800 in September 2009 to 52,000 in September 2011. If all 1,200 jobs were attributed to the tariff — an exceedingly generous assumption — they calculate that Obama’s move could be credited with saving or creating $48 million of additional worker income and purchasing power.

But the tariff also forced consumers to spend $1.1 billion more on tires than they otherwise would have — or roughly $900,000 per U.S. tire industry job created. And retaliatory tariffs imposed by the Chinese further hurt our economy. In early 2010, China’s Ministry of Commerce imposed tariffs ranging from 50.3 to 105.4 percent on American poultry imports, which “reduced exports by $1 billion as U.S. poultry firms experienced a 90 percent collapse in their exports of chicken parts to China,” according to Hufbauer and Lowry.



Trump either is an exceedingly ignorant person, that couldn’t have understood much of his classes at Wharton (meaning he was a piss poor student), or he’s just advocating policies to hurt the country, and aid Hillary Clinton.  Or both.

And speaking of Hillary Clinton:


“We need to raise pay, create good-paying jobs, and build an economy that works for everyone—not just those at the top. I’ll cut taxes for the middle class, raise the minimum wage, and ensure the wealthiest pay their fair share. I’ll invest in infrastructure and education. And I’ll help parents balance work and family.”


Oh?  That’s funny, because government doesn’t create jobs.  It takes them from the Private Sector.  Nor does the federal government have the constitutionally enumerated power to tell people how much they can, or can’t, pay.  Telling people how much they have to pay is not building an “…economy that works for everyone—not just those at the top…”, it’s hurting the bottom line for small businesses that can’t afford to pay as much as the best friend of thieving robber-barons like Clintons and Thumps:  Big Business.


Let’s not forget, though, that Thump says Obama was right in saying people should see a ‘maximum wage’ (meaning there should be a government enforced limit on how much people can be financially compensated):


I’ll cut taxes for the middle class…



A slip of the lip and tongue?  Possibly, but I see there’s been no correction on this, and the crowd ate it up.


Maybe we need to look into the dietary habits of the liberals, later on.

…raise the minimum wage…

Even an idiot (unless you’re Thump:  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jul/28/donald-trump/donald-trump-gets-full-flop-stance-minimum-wage/) knows how destructively stupid that would be.


(Updating Backgrounder No. 1033, “Why Raising the Minimum Wage Is a Bad Idea,” May 17, 1995.) Congress once again is debating an increase in the minimum wage, this time from $4.25 an hour to $5.15. Although proponents argue that declining real wages require an increase to provide a decent living wage for low-incomeworkers, a minimum wage hike in fact will harm unskilled Americans by destroying entry-level job opportunities. I Further, it will do nothing to increase the income of nonworking families, while raising prices for both the poor and non-poor. Decreeing an increase in the minimum wage does not address the underlying cause of stagnant wages: slow productivity growth. Before raising the minimum wage, Congress must ask itself a fundamental ques- tion: Should it be illegal for Americans, young or old, to work at even a part-time job for $4.50 or $5.00 an hour? While proponents make emotionally appealing arguments for raising the minimum wage, these argu- ments are n-dsleading. To be sure, increasing the minimum wage will help some low-income workers, but it will have the opposite effect for many more Americans. It is also an inefficient way to boost the income of poor households. Among the reasons: X Increasing the minimum wage to $5.15 will harm the nonworking poor by raising prices and de- stroying over 200,000 entry4evel job opportunities by 1999. The minimum wage is an uncompas- sionate tax by which some low-wage workers increase their earnings while others lose their opportunity to earn anything at all. Raising it will effectively prohibit people from working unless their skills are worth at least $5.15 per hour. X Raising the minimum wage generally does not help low-income households. The reason? Over half of the increased income from minimum wage jobs would go to youth and spouses living in families that are well-off, rather than to poor minimum wage workers.2 Moreover, because almost half of mini- mum wage workers work voluntarily part time, many working only part year, 90 cents more per hour will not substantially increase their annual income but could cost them their jobs.


If you want a job that pays good, don’t take one that pays minimum wage.  It’s not hard to figure out.  If you do, don’t demand to have your pay nearly doubled, with no doubling of ROI for your employer(s).


Clinton went on to say she’d “…ensure the wealthiest pay their fair share…”





You’re not fooling me, bitch.

I’ll invest in infrastructure and education…

There’s an old saying:  it takes money to make  money, or you have to spend money, to make money.  Neither applies to government.  The federal government has zero constitutionally enumerated power or authority to take American taxpayer monies and “…invest…” into anything, outside of things like federal highways and byways.

Let’s look at this thing called the Appropriations Clause (which both candidates have pledged to violate, repeatedly, and as often as possible, in the most blatant, stupid, costly and destructive ways):

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.



Plain and simple, unless it’s within the constitutional authority of Congress, they can’t use taxpayer funds to pay for it, and the Executive can’t draw taxpayer funds for anything, because they don’t have the power to.  They have to ask Congress for funds, which Congress should deny, if the expenditure is unconstitutional.  Liberals have been funding things like abortion, calling it ‘women’s health’ or ‘reproductive rights’.  They’ve funded private corporations, like Solyndra, and Hillary Clinton is very familiar with this.


And I’ll help parents balance work and family.

In the Age of Liberal Democrats (which includes Thump), villages raise idiots, not children.

That government is best which governs least.”

-Henry David Thoreau


In the great determination of Big Government liberals to invade peoples’ private lives for the purpose of taking them over, this is their master plan.  To impose their version of work/life balance.  No thanks.  You don’t have the responsibility of doing that.  The People do.  Leave us alone, and mind your own business, before you start something you can’t finish.

I’ll pick this discussion up, later.  In the meantime, just realize that trumpanzees are not going to acknowledge a single point, and neither will the asshats pushing for Hillary Clinton and the Slave Party.  However, I will leave you with this parting note, for now:


I am Virus-X:  Republic Commando, and I approve this message.  If trumpanzees and Slave Party scum don’t, tough shit.




~ by Virus-X REPUBLIC COMMANDO on September 18, 2016.

4 Responses to “Hey, Republicans: at least have the decency to shut the lights off on the way out.”

  1. Greetings Virus, I’m sure you probably remember me – if not, I used to go by the ID Sothis, many moons ago now.

    I’m not going to go into detail about this post here and now – it’s half ten in the evening here so I’m actually about to hop to bed – but I did want to ask one thing – what is your stance on same-sex marriage?

  2. TIMON! It’s been forever! As for the same sex thing, no. At least I think the federal government should get out of the marriage business, and not throw it’s weight behind any marriage. True, traditional marriage is more society beneficial, as it create offspring and perpetuates society, but, again, get government out of the marriage business. States should decide such questions, and courts should stay out of it, too. Really, I think even states should stay out of the marriage biz, too, unless it’s to protect against society detrimental things like marriage between close relatives.

  3. The most well written article I’ve ever read about this ass backwards election of two demonstratively incompetent and crooked fucks. Hopefully people will read this.

  4. Thank you very much!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: