Selfish Communists

•July 2, 2017 • Leave a Comment

So, still, leftist populist and self-professed NY liberal Donald Trump is pushing socialism, which should surprise no one, considering he’s pushed ideas even further out into the Red.

More than once, he’s sponsored and blathered about pushing unconstitutional and un-American “health care laws”, all for the sake of replacing an unconstitutional and un-American “health care law”.  And, every time, his ideas (even the one he turned on, and called “mean”, after he supported it, himself, and tried to pretend he didn’t: have been worse than ObamaCare:

After months of confusion and secrecy, House Republicans have finally revealed their Obamacare repeal legislation. While it’s useful to have House Republicans on the record with a legislative plan, the plan doesn’t offer any estimate for how much it would cost, or how many people it would (or wouldn’t) cover. In general, it’s not clear what problems this particular bill would actually solve.

The bill would replace Obamacare’s subsidies with a system of tax credits and halt the law’s Medicaid expansion at the end of the decade while grandfathering in many beneficiaries over the long term and giving states $100 billion in funding to work with to care for hard case patients. All in all, it’s a fairly conventional Republican plan, modified in ways designed to mitigate recent political objections.

The tax credit is, for the moment, the most controversial component of the legislation. As in previous drafts of the bill, the credits are refundable, meaning that individuals will be eligible for them even if their total tax liability is lower than the amount of the credit. The federal government would pay people, even if their federal tax bill was zero. It’s a subsidy, basically, rather like the one in Obamacare. Conservative legislators have argued that such a system would be little more than Obamacare lite. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) has complained that any refundable credit is tantamount to “a new entitlement program.”

Unlike Obamacare, which bases its credits on income, the GOP bills we’ve seen so far are based on age. That creates another set of political headaches, because it means that wealthier folks get tax credits, and because it means that older people would get less help than under Obamacare, in hopes of creating a scheme that lures more young and health people into the system.

The bill released tonight attempts to mitigate these problems by capping the refundable credit so that households earning more than $150,000 would be reduced, and individuals making more than $215,000 would get nothing at all. But that still leaves a credit that is refundable for most people, and adds a bit of additional administrative work: Under Obamacare, judging an individual’s employment and income has proven more than a little difficult, and the same would continue to be true here.

So Republicans would be replacing one set of insurance subsidies with another set of insurance subsidies, while killing the individual mandate but leaving many of the law’s insurance regulations intact (with a penalty for insurance gaps). There’s a reason that legislators like Michigan Rep. Justin Amash are already referring to it as “Obamacare 2.0.”

Let’s be certain of whom we’re dealing with:


That sounds familiar.

obama trump orange is the new black

I have absolutely zero respect for racist scumbag Thomas Jefferson (, but when he’s right, he’s right.

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

Everyone pushing for increasing socialism/communism in the US, in order to force people the live like they want to live, are naught more than selfish punks. So, because you want everybody to pay for your medical care (and contraceptives), we should all empty our wallets and purses for your benefit, even if we were doing just fine, and could afford our own expenses?  And what’s really funny is that fact that you swear up and down that this is because you care about people, when, in reality, you couldn’t give two shits about anybody, but yourself, and what you can get out of the system you’re continually rigging with crooked politicians.

zero fucks

Reagan was right.

Both you, and Thump, are wrong.

You are so selfish and pathetically infantilized by Big Government, Conservatism is far beyond the conception of you liberals – which includes trumpanzees, yes.

Why do I say you’re not even bright enough to have a conception of Conservatism?


Because it’s true.  Conservatism advocates constitutional, republican government, which precludes gravy train government.


It advocates the ending (in fact, it advocated never starting them in the first place) government handout programs, at the federal level.  It understands that some people, from time to time, may need a helping hand and “safety net”, but it also understands that they can’t be allowed to make this a career field.  You people seem to have become too stupid (thanks to public education social engineering) to understand this simple concept:


This “repeal and replace” drive is clearly populist liberalism.  Because the majority of the people screaming the loudest (most of whom are freeloaders, or aspire towards that career field) demand unconstitutional government health care, the (NS)GOP – led by a NY liberal – is more than happy to accommodate their irrational demands, and continue to ignore and violate the Constitution, every chance they get.


Republicans claim to be in favor of “nullification”.  Yes, they are.  Nullification of the Constitution, just like their Confederates of the Slave Party.

It’s beyond the capabilities of Rrepublicans and the Confederates to think.  They don’t want to put effort into things, they just want to get as much out of their efforts, as possible, which includes money, fame and power over others.  The Rrepublican/Confederate answer to everything, now, is to tax it.  When they want to look like the good guys that they most certainly aren’t, they propose some piddly tax cuts. They, including the Rrepublicans, refuse, now, to acknowledge constitutional limits on their power, and redefine it as it is convenient for them, in any given situation.  This should come as no surprise to those that have long ago learned that Rrepublicans and Confederates operate under sets of situational ethics that no other rational, honest Human Being would ever consider.  They refuse to look at the fact that, constitutionally, they are limited as to what they can tax, in the first place.

[Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which
shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of
all other Persons.]* Article 1, Section 2, United States Constitution

[No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.]* Article 1, Section 9, United States Constitution

*Note to dumbasses:  it does NOT say 3/5 OF A PERSON, or that someone is to be COUNTED as 3/5 OF A PERSON.  Stupidasses.   I guess you’re confusing it for something you liberals wrote.


Anyhow, I digress.

A capitation tax would be a direct tax (which the Framers and Founders never wanted), distributed by population in states.  A budget target would be set, and the larger states (that means you, Left Coast and New York) would pay more than the smaller states, in terms of dollar contribution.

Amendment XVI.
Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.
(Note: Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution was modified by
the 16th Amendment.)
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

This is the leftist creep into the Constitution, which allowed Congress to tax you, simply for getting paid.  Originally, income taxation was to help pay for a war that traitorous democrats/Confederates waged against their own nation and people, but liberals loved having such power over people, they just couldn’t give it up, and, by then, the (NS)GOP had already lost their spines.

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; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; -Article 1, Section 8, United States Constitution

That means they can tax what you buy, sell, import or export.

What is an ‘Excise Tax’

An excise tax is an indirect tax charged on the sale of a particular good. Indirect means the tax is not directly paid by an individual consumer; instead, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) levies the tax on the producer or merchant, who passes the tax onto the consumer by including it in the product’s price. It also refers to penalty taxation for ineligible transactions in retirement accounts.

Excise Tax


1. A tax levied on certain goods, services or transactions. Duties are enforceable by law and are imposed on commodities or financial transactions, instead of individuals.


Could a duty be used to tax things like health care transactions, legally?  Unfortunately, yes.  However, let’s remember that the US does not have an income problem; it has a spending problem.

Obama Has Collected $19,966,110,000,000 in Taxes; Incurred $8,795,689,333,049 in Debt

( – During the 90 full months President Barack Obama has completed serving in the White House—February 2009 through July 2016–the U.S. Treasury collected approximately $19,966,110,000,000 in tax revenues (in non-inflation-adjusted dollars), according to the Monthly Treasury Statements.

During those same 90 months, the federal debt rose from $10,632,005,246,736.97 to $19,427,694,579,786.64—an increase of $8,795,689,333,049.67.

In July, according to the Monthly Treasury Statement released today, the federal government took in $209,998,000,000 in taxes and spent $322,813,000,000—running a one-month deficit of $112,815,000,000.

So far in fiscal 2016, according the Treasury statement, the federal government has collected approximately $2,678,824,000,000 in taxes and spent approximately $3,192,487,000,000—running a deficit of $513,662,000,000 for the first ten months of the fiscal year.

Given that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported that there were 151,517,000 people employed in the United States in July, the $19,966,110,000,000 in taxes the Treasury has collected during Obama’s first 90 full months in office equals approximately $131,775 per worker.

The US has shown it has no problem squeezing money out of people, but where the problem lies is where that money goes.

unfunded liability spending

That right.  Unfunded Liabilities – which includes ObamaCare, and, apparently, TrumpCare – is what’s financially hurting the nation, and everybody in it.  This is purely unconstitutional spending, taken from taxpayers illegally, and against the collective will of the People.

You Think The Deficit Is Bad? Federal Unfunded Liabilities Exceed $127 Trillion

By Vance Ginn

Although the battle over a two-year budget deal and the national debt limitin Washington, D.C. has received the lion’s share of media attention recently , the bigger, more ominous threat facing taxpayers are unfunded liabilities—the difference between the net present value of expected future government spending and the net present value of projected future tax revenue, particularly those associated with Social Security and Medicare.

While federal unfunded liabilities are important, state-level unfunded pension liabilities also pose serious obstacles. In Texas, the recent 2013 Employees Retirement System (ERS) Valuation Report outlines the funding shortages this pension system faces and there is some indication it may be unable to pay beneficiaries by 2052.

The federal unfunded liabilities are catastrophic for future taxpayers and economic growth. At, 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.


With about 134,000 active members in Texas’ ERS at the end of fiscal year 2013, the total unfunded liability was $7.2 billion—or $54,000 per active member. Despite the much smaller future net debt obligations in ERS compared with federal programs, there are similarities how we got here.

Laurence Kotlikoff and Scott Burns’ book entitled The Coming Generational Storm: What You Need to Know About America’s Future argue federal unfunded liabilities are primarily from a generational accounting problem, in which the dependency ratio of retirees to taxpayers is declining from an aging population.


The authors’ state, “today there are about 4 payees for every 1 beneficiary, but by the year 2030 there will only be 2 payees for every 1 beneficiary. Simple arithmetic will note that this is not sustainable over the long run.”

To understand the magnitude of this problem, the authors note one solution that includes all the following: “raise income taxes by 17 percent, raise payroll taxes by 24 percent, cut federal purchases by 26 percent, and cut Social Security and Medicare benefits by 11 percent.”

In the current political and economic environment, these changes are highly unlikely, but it shows the substantial economic costs associated with these large unfunded liabilities.

State pensions across the country also face this generational accounting problem, whereby an author discusses his research in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed entitled “The Hidden Danger in Public Pension Funds” stating, “The ratio of active public employees to retirees has fallen drastically, according to the State Budget Crisis Task Force. Today it is 1.75 to 1; in 1950, it was 7 to 1. This means that a loss in pension investments has three times the impact on state and local budgets than 40 years ago.”

In addition to an aging population in Texas creating substantial challenges with funding ERS, it is also riddled with a problem many state pension portfolio managers face: low rates of return on risk-free assets, such as a one-year Treasury security that returns less than 1 percent.

As these managers choose riskier investments to gain a higher rate of return, the study cited in the WSJ op-ed notes that the standard deviation of public pension investments to state and local budgets—a good measure of risk—has increased 10-fold from about 2 percent in 1975 to 20 percent today. Along with fewer people contributing to these pensions, riskier investments should be of grave concern to all.

Since the actuarial funded ratio of ERS is 77 percent based on an 8 percent annual rate of return, this rate of return and the risk-taking portfolio managers must use to gain this return are vital. Over the last five years, the fund’s annual return was 6 percent and 7.1 percent over the last ten years. Although the ten-year annual average was close to 8 percent, there is no guarantee this will continue, which could dramatically lower the funded ratio.

Clearly, the generational accounting problem burdening programs at the federal level also burden Texas’ pensions and the more risky assets portfolio managers must invest in are increasing the susceptibility of an even lower funded ratio in the future.

File:Estimated Funding Gaps in Medicare and Social Security Programs.png

That’s $127,000,000,000,000.00 USD that should never have been spent.

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. -Article 1, Section 9, United States Constitution

This isn’t about “caring” about people.  If liberals really cared about people, instead of devising unconstitutional, immoral Machiavellian schemes to separate people from their money and freedom, they’d be doing things like adhering to the Constitution, and making greater charitable contributions.

Poorer conservatives more generous than wealthy liberals – new study

Less well-off families from red states donate a relatively higher – and growing – proportion of their money to charity, while those at the top have been giving a smaller share as their income has increased, a new extensive study has revealed.

Respected non-government sector newspaper The Philanthropy Chronicle collated the itemized charity deductions on the tax returns of hundreds of millions of Americans between 2006 and 2012, the latest year available. While only about a third of all givers write off their charity expenses, the sums included about 80 percent of all donations in the country.

The study noted that while the amount of charitable giving by the US as a nation has remained steady at 3 percent, the poorer people are, the greater amount they spend on charity. And this trend has been exacerbated in the years covered by the study, which showed that those earning $25,000 or less contributed 16.6 percent more of their income, while those with incomes of over $200,000 were spending 4.5 percent less of their money on charity in 2012 than in 2006. The study does not give the countrywide overall percentage of money donated by each group. 

Several explanations have been posited for the findings. 

“Lower and middle-income people know people who lost their jobs or are homeless, and they worry that they themselves are a day away from losing their jobs. They’re very sensitive to the needs of other people and recognize that these years have been hard,” explained Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

Meanwhile, the wealthier donors, who had been able to afford largesse during the fat years through the 90s and early 2000s, became “nervous and cautious” as the financial crisis struck in 2008, threatening their incomes, property and shares. 

The study also says in places like Las Vegas – whose giving went up 15 percent in real terms – charities redirected their fundraising efforts from the big businessmen, to poorer individuals they had no time and resources for earlier. 

Another explanation might be that charity giving can remain fairly inelastic in such a short period, despite fluctuating incomes. So, while the poorer people, hard hit by the crisis have struggled to maintain their giving commitments, America’s highest earners, who have recovered most quickly after the crash, have not yet readjusted their giving upwards. 

After all, the figures show that overall donations from the wealthiest Americans have gone up by $4.6 billion, adjusted for inflation, to $77.5 billion between 2006 and 2012, showing that they are giving more in absolute terms, just not as a proportion of their growing pay packets.


Like I’ve said, before, if you want people to kill unborn children willy-nilly, you pay for it.

If you want people that are indigent to have access to health care and contraceptives, why don’t you pay for it, yourselves, instead of burdening everyone else with your latest flavor-of-the-week pet project?

Oh, you think that the Constitution says we are all bound together by debts?

Uh, no.  It doesn’t.  It binds us together under laws, none of which allow for federal spending on things like unfunded liabilities, and the laws on spending have to be based on the Constitution.  Hence, as I’ve already cited:

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. -Article 1, Section 9, United States Constitution

STATES and the PEOPLE (that means YOU, leftists) should be taking this up, not the federal government.

Stop sitting around with your hands out, and pointing fingers, simultaneously crying about what you think somebody owes you, and assigning responsibility and blame to someone else to facilitate your pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (which you’re more than happy to deny to other people, like the unborn, but that’s for another post).  How much did you raise to elect that loser Hillary Clinton?


Just think:  all that money could’ve actually gone to something you consider useful, like providing low-cost medical care to the indigent.

Don’t like my opinion, on this?

tough shit2

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




Trump’s “Accomplishments”, Thus Far…

•May 28, 2017 • Leave a Comment

trigger warning

So now the trumpanzees are putting out this meme, glorifying Cheeto Jesus, and showing him to be sooo accomplished.

trump accomplishments

scooby laughing

Yeah, that’s the way any reasonable person feels, after reading that garbage, even after losing a couple of points of IQ.

OK, let’s break this laughably unrealistic stupidity down, so even a trumpanzee can understand.

Unemployment: Through no effort of his own, unless you can show me some EO or legislation that had an actual, measurable effect (and he hasn’t signed ANY legislation, in all this time).

Reinvestment: Again, that’s the efforts of others, not Thump. If you’re going to say he inspires confidence in the market, he doesn’t .
Also, if you look into a lot of what Thump says, you’ll see he’s just flat-out lying.  For instance, when he claimed he was reponsble for the SoftBank investments:
Budget Surplus: Come one.
Budget is a congressional responsibility, not that of the Executive, and he literally hasn’t done CRAP.
Hell, the budget he’s looking to pass was approved by the Slave Party Confederates, meaning it’s definitely not good for America.


In fact, he’s even looking to keep funding Planned Parenthood.

Stock Market:  Now, it’s funny how, years ago, people decided that the Stock Market was not a reliable indicator of the economy.  It was decided that it was just something that showed how well certain corporate interests were doing, but not the nation, as a whole. Now, all of a sudden, when it rises under Thump, that’s showing that the national economy is doing like gangbusters.  Even funnier, though, that they don’t mention that that same market nosedived, and certainly won’t pin it on Thump.

Political turbulence in Washington finally morphed into market risk on Wall Street, putting a dent in the 401(k) account balances of investors who until now had been benefiting from the “Trump Rally.”

The Dow Jones industrial average closed down 372.82 points, or 1.8%, to 20,607, Wednesday — its biggest daily point and percentage drop in eight months — as mounting political troubles for Donald Trump have raised fears that the president will have difficulty getting his economic agenda passed through Congress.

“There’s a growing concern that the Republicans in Congress are going to become so preoccupied with the White House mess that they won’t be able to move on their agenda,” which includes a plan to cut taxes and sizable spending on infrastructure, said Tom Block, a policy strategist for Wall Street research firm Fundstrat Global Advisors.

Thanks to the market’s “Trump Bump,” someone who had invested $100,000 in an index fund tracking the 500 largest U.S. companies on Election Day would have seen that money grow to $112,300 at the market’s recent record high on May 15 after a 12.3% rally. But that same investor would have suffered a loss of roughly $2,044 in Wednesday’s stock selloff which resulted in a 1.8% loss for the S&P 500 stock index.

Stocks sold off on reports that Trump back in February allegedly asked then-F.B.I director James Comey if the law enforcement agency could shut down its probe of ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. This latest controversy follows news earlier this week that he disclosed classified information to Russian diplomats. There are also ongoing questions over the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia leading up to last year’s presidential election.

The U.S. stock market, which had been moving steadily higher in calm trading since Trump was elected, is suddenly showing signs of nervousness. Wednesday’s selloff marked the first time Trump’s woes have had an outsize negative effect on stocks. Investors had been focusing on an improving U.S. economy and strong corporate earnings in the first quarter rather than the president’s struggle to push forward his economic proposals.

shocked face

Consumer Confidence:   Not necessarily.  It’s higher than under Obama, but, again, it’s looking like a bubble that will burst, and burst soon.  Thump, himself, has delivered on absolutely nothing, and people are starting to see this.  The initial euphoria over a mediocre-to-piss-poor businessman

taking over after economic illiterate Obama is starting to wear off, now that they see Thump is just as much the economic illiterate that Obama ever was, or that Hillary Clinton could ever be.


Investor jitters were also visible in stocks’ wild price swings, with the Dow closing down more than 300 points for the first time since Sept. 9 and the market-leading Nasdaq composite declining 2.6%  Money also moved into so-called safe haven assets, such as gold, which rallied 2% to $1,260.40 per ounce, and U.S. government bonds, where the yield on the 10-year Treasury note dipped to 2.22%, its lowest level since mid-April. A closely watched Wall Street “fear gauge,” which had recently touched a 24-year low, jumped more than 40% Wednesday, although the fear level remains below its longer-term average.

The Conference Board measure of consumer confidence slipped modestly in January to 111.8 from a revised 113.3. In the last two months of the year, i.e. after the election, this gauge surged by almost 13 points to a 15-year high, so a small pullback in January is certainly not a cause for concern. The composition of the January results are encouraging at the margin. In December, the present situation component sank by 9 points while expectations soared by 12 points. In contrast, this month, assessments of the current situation rebounded by 6 points while expectations were tempered. In my view, this is a healthier mix, as a jump in confidence driven solely by expectations is of course subject to disappointment. The fact that households viewed the actual economic landscape as better in January provides a more robust basis on which to pin hopes of a continued strong consumer performance in 2017.

Just to put the overall consumer confidence picture into perspective, the January Conference Board reading is the second-best of the cycle and the third-best since 2001, while the University of Michigan sentiment gauge established its highest level since 2004 in January. Consumers are feeling pretty positive, hopeful that President Trump can deliver the goods on the economy.

Legislation:  So he’s passed & signed 32 bills.  What, or who, exactly, has he helped (besides Planned Parenthood, which he has unconstitutionally extended funding for)? One bill he wanted passed was the one where he increased Big Government involvement in private health care (and failed).  Signing laws isn’t necessarily a good accomplishment. Franklin Roosevelt beat Thump, and his regime was a racist atrocity.  Like the saying goes:  “quality, not quantity”.

Supreme Court:  I wouldn’t say anything positive about putting an ungodly abortionist on the bench.

If you claim you’re “pro-life” and fight to get a judge that lies about Roe v Wade being law – and not an opinion – and says unborn children aren’t entitled to 14th Amendment protections, you’re not pro-life.  People that kill children face a terrible punishment, and I imagine this crooked judge will reap what he sewed, and so will Thump.

“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” –Exodus 21:22-25

Killed the TPP:

spock bitch please

People stopped talking about this, back during the Obama Regime.  Now, he  (and his trumpanzees) thinks he’s accomplished something, because he “killed” a matter that was so far off the back burner, it fell off the fucking stove.

Border Security:  Honestly, while he’s called for increased security, there has been no such deployment, as far as I know.  Let’s also not forget that he’s got his special interest illegal alien group that he’s making a protected class in the country, instead of dealing with, in accordance to the law.

AP – President Donald Trump says young immigrants shielded from deportation — often referred to as “dreamers” — should “rest easy” about his immigration policies.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Trump says he is “not after the dreamers, we are after the criminals.” He says “that is our policy.”

President Barack Obama changed enforcement priorities to protect many young people brought to the country illegally as children from deportation.

However, deportations have increased, and this is, from what I understand, due to a direct order from the Executive (Thump), to the DHS.  This very much is a positive step.

$100,000,000.00 to Flint:  Not necessarily.

Also, be aware that I am no fan of Snopes, and consider them liars.  However, in this case, it looks substantiated.

seems legit


Then, there’s Communist China.  He lied on his pledge to name them currency manipulators, so they could do a couple of steps above diddly in dealing with the NORKS

And Russia.

And global warming BS.

Government Agencies:  He claims he’s looking to cut and trim them, yet he’s pushing for more government intervention in health care, and to truly make the State a nanny by getting into child care.

Energy:  Supposedly Thump is an energy champion, even though he’s signed a bill to make America more dependent on Canadian oil, instead of tapping our own, and he still won’t release lands back to the states, so that could happen.

Really, this is pathetic.  He’s no better than Obama.

Iobama trump orange is the new black

I’m not impressed.


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

If you don’t:

tough shit2


If You Want it Done Right…

•April 14, 2017 • 2 Comments

trigger warning

So I have a question for you leftists, out there:  why can’t you shut up, let the rubber hit the road, put your money where your mouths are, and lead by example?

Yep, it’s me, again.

So here’s the first question, with context.

We all know nothing makes liberals happier, than this:


That’s right:  dead babies.  Many of you are chomping at the bit at the chance to kill your own.

And now you’re complaining about the fact that there’s a Rrepublican-led effort to de-fund unconstitutional Planned Parenthood.  (Yes, it’s unconstitutional.  There is nothing in the United States Constitution allowing the federal government to provide, or pay for, the murder of unborn children.  If there is, show me:!/)

Planned Parenthood is a White supremacist organization, created, specifically, to murder the children of non-white babies.

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,”

And we all know that a lot of you liberals still hate Black people, and want us exterminated from the Earth.  You know that.  We know that.


Don’t worry.  This isn’t about naming you, and shaming you (though I should).  What this is about is why you’re not walking the talk (though I know most leftists don’t do that, anyway).  If you’re so up in arms about this possible (though I don’t know how probable) de-funding of Planned Parenthood, why aren’t you doing anything about it?

You idiots are still paying Barack Obama money.

Organizing for America, Organizing for Action, whatever.  You’re still paying them money.


You’re still dumping money into the pockets of the Slave Party, and you know they hate you people.

The Socialists?  Yeah, they really care.

bernie sanders millionaire

You raise money for all sorts of stupid, cockamamie causes, why don’t you raise money for this stupid, cockamamie cause?  Why don’t you totally fund Planned Parenthood, yourselves, with your own money, and cut Big Government out of the loop?


I know.  More than half of you just had your brains totally lock up.

Reboot your superior brains ( and use them, for a change.

You want government with unlimited pow-er,

but cry when it falls into the hands of someone you don’t want to have that kind of power.  (Liberal friends of mine even propose electioneering to prevent people that they don’t like from having representation in government.)


Why don’t you take Planned Parenthood totally off the government dole, turn it into a publicly-traded corporation, take it world-wide, and make LOTS OF MONEY KILLING INNOCENT, UNBORN BABIES!

shut up an take my money

This way, you’d be able to get your dark works done,

and make money doing what you love.  Why is it that you feel the need to compel everybody else to pay for what you want, yet contribute very little (or nothing), yourselves?  Wouldn’t that make sense?  You wouldn’t have to worry about those world-destroying Rrepublicans, Christians, Conservatives cramping your style, and you could keep continuing your hypocritical rants about those people not caring about children, once they’re born.

So why?

Why won’t you roll up your sleeves and actually do the work, yourselves?

You’ve got plenty of Hollywood scumbags that would probably give big money to have their name carved on a stone, saying they killed kids.  George Clooney, Katy Perry, Ellen the Degenerate, Sean Pendejo, Michael Moore, Danny Glover, Barbara “Babs” Streisand, Jane Fonda, Alec Baldwin, Susan Saranwrap, Janeane Garofalo, every hag from the View, etc.  I’m sure Bill Gates and George Soros would be willing to pitch in a few pennies, too. So what’s the deal?  Why aren’t you smart leftists doing this?


And another thing:  if you leftists think that paying higher taxes is the pathway to solvency and prosperity, why don’t you pay them?  Why are you waiting for government mandates to pay more, when you could just pay voluntarily?  You totally wasted your money on Organizing for Whatever, so why aren’t you smart enough to put your money to “good” use, and create a higher tax base, so the government can continue turning people into wards of the state?


Hey, here’s another one for your leftists:  since you guys love welfare and other programs like that, so much, why don’t you create a welfare organization, funded by your own money?  Your money would go where you want it to go, and go to whomever you wanted it to go to, and they’d have to do whatever you wanted, or lose funding.  You could fund illegal aliens, you could fund able bodied people that just don’t want to work (like “artists”:  Hey, you could even give people with no health care benefits, health care benefits, through your own organization.

But, for some reason, you just don’t seem to really want these things to happen.  Sure, that would be giving into CONSERVATIVE methodology and ideologies, but it would surely benefit your agenda, right?

I am VIRUS-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO, and I approve this message, and hope it pissed liberals off.



President Virus-X: the First 100 Days

•March 25, 2017 • Leave a Comment

trigger warning

So, what if the Electorate, instead of choosing NY leftist Orange Julius for president, had chosen a True Conservative for Chief Executive?  Like me, for example?  Let’s take a look at the first 100 days benchmark.

oprah fired

YOU’RE FIRED.  That’s right.  Mass terminations.  Every unconstitutional “czar” loses their job, with orders not to leave the District of Columbia.  Why?  Because I’m going to have my Department of Justice review EVERYTHING THEY’VE DONE in the event of any illegality.  If they’re broken any law that they can be punished and imprisoned for, that’s what I’m pushing for.  Time to send a big, clear message to the government ensconced New Left.  I’m also personally firing every single United States Attorney that has even craned their necks to so much as LOOK left.  If they’re not out by the C.O.B., deputy United States Marshals will assisting them in finding the door.  Needless to say, I’d be beating the bushes for Conservative attorneys to replace them, and can be trusted to do the right things in the best interests of the country.



I fully understand that some people in this country are living in a tough spot, like below the poverty line, and that, sometimes, you just need a hand.  I understand that some people, for whatever legitimate reason, just can’t do any better.  However, unfunded liabilities have to come to an end.  Period.

unfunded liability spending

unfunded liability spending2


I would hold a governors conference and tell them it’s time for them to do their jobs:  take care of their own citizens, in accordance to the Constitution.  All unfunded liability spending would be coming to a complete end.  Programs like Social Security would be put where, according to the Constitution, they belong:

“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.” -Constitution of the United States of America; 10th Amendment

People that are above a certain age (as determined through meetings with economists, actuaries and other experts) would be allowed to “die out” of the program, but no new enrollees would be accepted.  It’s up to the People and the States to come up with alternatives.  Now, yes, communist states like NY, Hawaii and California would try sticking with government run retirement programs, and they’d probably be looking at insolvency, real quick.  So you think state governments wouldn’t do it?  Well, that’s what impeachment is for.  If your state government won’t do it’s job to help you where it should, then you start removing those people that won’t do what they said they would, and replace them with those that will.  Caveat emptor, though:  voting in tax and spend liberals will ruin your state, just like they ruined this country.

Also, all foreign aide, even to allies, comes to an end.  In it’s place will be Congressionally approved programs where they can get loans from banks.  Banks are in the business of giving out money on interest, not the United States Federal Government.  It’s high time Uncle Sugar stop irresponsibly handing out taxpayer monies for every pet project and flavor of the week.  Oh, and you know that also includes Premeditated Infanticide Planned Parenthood, right?  In all, we’re looking at a savings of trillions, annually, which can go towards legitimate ends, like PAYING OUR WAY OUT OF DEBT, ESPECIALLY TO OUR ENEMIES, LIKE THE PEOPLES’ REPUBLIC OF CHINA.

uncle same broke

We’re spending ourselves into insolvency, and this has got to stop.  NOW.

WE HAD A BAD RUN.  All unconstitutional agencies – since Congress has refused to get rid of them – will be ended by me, by ending their funding.  One of the few constitutional things Barack Obama ever did was not give allocated funding to a bureau or department that was earmarked for them (and leftists like John Conyers had a conniption about it, too).  I would do the same.  The funds can’t be spent, elsewhere, but they’re not going to keep propping up these unconstitutional agencies, many of which are out to harm the American People.

You can get mad about this all you want, and think I give two shits about what you are mad about.  The Constitution prohibits them, and that’s what I’m going by.  If they means so much to you, have your state take them up (like they’ll be taking up unfunded liability programs), or fund them, yourselves, privately.  If it’s not a legitimate government function, then it goes.  That includes agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (, Department of Education (, the Social Security Administration (, etc.

With the shuttering of the leftist created Department of Education (founded by James Earl Carter, formerly #1 worst president evar, overtaken by Barry), that means college subsidies and grants and loans dry up, overnight.  Sorry, but the federal government isn’t in the money loaning business, constitutionally.  If that’s what you want, go to the people that do it for a living, legally:  the banks.  Schools, seeing the Big Education gravy train collide with a wall and stop, would have to quickly realize that they can’t charge the moon and stars for tuition, anymore, because Uncle Sam isn’t going to pay their ransom for college degrees.  Schools that realize this and catch on will lower their costs, and make school affordable again.  Those that don’t?:

States are free to regulate the banks in their jurisdictions, and schools can have a cooperative hand in it, too, to prevent predatory lending.

WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?  One of the hot button problems is illegal immigration.

Illegal Immigration Sign

Illegal immigration is a criminal act, and I don’t care why you did it.  You’re not American citizens, and neither are your spawn.

I would work with Congress on stiffening the laws against illegal immigration, criminalizing it into an E-CLASS FEDERAL FELONY.  The DOD’s (Department of Defense) NSA (National Security Agency) would turn it’s ears to the US in order to look for illegal aliens, working alongside the DHS (Department of Homeland Security).  Every illegal alien located would be subject to full surveillance, ranging from electronic to physical, and a web will be constructed to determine all others that are illegal aliens connected to the subject, and all that knew that the individual subject was an illegal alien.  When the web is large enough, each and every single person involved will be subject to mass arrest and deportation.  This includes every single member of families of illegal aliens.  Relatives that were aware of the violation of law will be subject to prosecution under federal law, and face prison time and heavy fines.  Illegal aliens not wishing permanent deportation can comply with something like this I’ll work to get through Congress:

So, they’ll be legal residents, but can NEVER be citizens, because their criminality for selfish reasons will not be rewarded with something as precious as American citizenship. However, if the DHS catches you, first, you get no deal.

Once caught and deported, you can’t even get so much as a green card.

Ever again.

In lieu of a costly physical wall that would not actually solve much of the problem, due to not being feasible, for a variety of reasons…

…the military would be deployed to border areas.

Yep.  That’s right.  Regular United States Army and Reserve and Guard units – especially Military Police, and some Marine Corps law enforcement, would be patrolling the border, alongside a beefed up DHS Border Patrol.

Operation Vigilant Star

They would be doing what they do best:  law enforcement.  And they would take no crap, from anyone.  That goes double for the Mexican military

and criminal organizations.

The military would have higher jurisdiction, as they would erect Bases of Operations (BASEOPS) in various places, complete with detention facilities manned by Army and Marine Corps corrections personnel, and there would be court facilities on-site, along with military judges. Illegal alien detainees would be held and processed and receive immediate court hearings (along with felony charges and a criminal record).  From there, it’s mass, regular deportation, and the host countries would take them back, or risk conflict with the US in such forms as barring from (bank) loans, cessation of any sort of DOD, DOJ or DHS assistance, and even revocation of all visas of any visiting citizens, permanently.

GET THE US OUT OF THE UN.  Yes, at long last, I would choke off all funding for the United Nations, permanently.

un building collapse

It is unconstitutional for the US to pay taxpayer monies for the United Nations, and if it isn’t, why don’t you show me where in the Constitution that it isn’t?

This anti-American, anti-Israel/Jewish organization is not something the United States should be participating in, in the first place.  If nations want to deal with others, like ours, that’s why we (legitimately) pay billions of dollars to things like the US Department of State.

If a nation needs a go-between, they can find another nation with a similar agency.  The UN building needs to be put under a heavy, annual lease payment, and the occupants need to start paying the State of NY for their services (like police, fire, etc.), and the federal government for it’s own (like military protection).  No longer recognized, their ambassadors would no longer enjoy diplomatic immunity to prosecution in the US.  If they don’t like it, they can move to another safe nation, like France.

muslim riots in france

STOP THEFT UNDER THE GUISE OF TAXATION.  Work with Congress on a REAL tax reform, which is a return to the parameters intended by the Founders and the Framers:  no direct taxation.

“Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: 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; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”  -Constitution of the United States of America

This means overturning the XVI Amendment.

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” -Constitution of the United States of America

With the elimination of the spending of trillions in unfunded liabilities ( and other unconstitutional expenditures, returning to the intended, constitutional model will allow the US to have more than enough money to operate within it’s means.  This current model of confiscatory taxation is nothing but government theft, plain and simple.  It damages individuals, it destroys businesses, and it helps prevent other businesses from outside the country from coming in and taking root.


The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. -17th Amendment, Constitution of the United States of America

The House of Representatives is supposed to be the direct representative of the People.


They are elected, directly, by We the People.

The President of the United States is supposed to be a representative of the Country.


That position is elected not by a popular vote, like a Representative, but by the Electoral College, staffed by Electors put in place by the People.

The SENATE is supposed to be a representative of the STATES, and as such, Senators are to be elected/appointed by each State’s own, individual Senate.

What we have now is just a populist system that has done the country no good.  It was a change in the Constitution that was intended as electioneering to help make sure a party was able to keep their members in power, with the popular vote.  Nothing more.  That means more Conservative states would appoint more Conservative senators, and leftist states would follow suit.  They wouldn’t be elected by mobs of leftists, out for political domination.


For the foreseeable future, if not indefinitely, NO MORE PRINTING MONEY.  Part of the problem behind America’s economic woes is the reduction of our currency value, thanks to presidents like Obama (and Thump wants to try it, too:  Besides eliminating unconstitutional spending, we need to rehab our currency, even if it means reducing some of what’s in circulation.  Look into the possibility of returning our money to a standard, be it gold, platinum, oil, whatever, or a combination thereof, but our money has to stand for something again.  Fiat money is worthless paper, and that’s what the Almighty Dollar is, right now.


The USD has got to be restored to it’s status as the world’s preferred currency, and the US economy has to be restored.  This is just one of many steps towards accomplishing that goal.

NO MO’ NATO.  Like it, or not, I’d eliminate our participation in NATO.  Too many countries are involved that can not contribute to the common defense pact, and thus are relying on hiding behind the US for protection.  I would negotiate individual defense pacts, with individual nations, and each would probably be different.  For instance, I would definitely want to remain in a pact with Poland, but their mutual defense pact would be different from that of England/UK.  And their’s would be different from one with France. And then there would be one with Israel.  Don’t like that I would enter one with Israel? Tough shit, haters.


And the Israel pact would include a combined arms CSG (, complete with Navy, Marine Corps and Army personnel, ready to storm the beaches in defense of Israel, being just a phone call away.  If there’s another Operation:  Cast Lead (, it’s going to be very different, once my ass is in the chair in the Oval Office.

We’re not entering a mutual defense pact with Turkey.  However, if forced to, it wouldn’t be anything as stringent as NATO, especially with that Satanic psycho Recep Tayyip Erdoğan running the show, over there.


So, no, I’m not proposing we become a bunch of isolationists, like Rand Paul suggests.  I’m just saying we renegotiate our standings with every nation, and not continue with this bullshit “one size fits all” military diplomacy.

GOOD PAY, FOR GOOD WORK:  With a lot of the unconstitutional spending eliminated, military budgets can be expanded.  Working with Congress, I’d be looking to create a new pay scale for the military.  In the forces, you’re offering to die for your country.

military sacrifice

They should be paid like they are potentially sacrificing their lives for America’s freedom.  An E-1 should be getting no less than $41.6k.

Don’t like it?

tough shit2

And I’ll also include things like getting rid of the ancient M4 and M16 from the regular arsenal, for something more modern.  Possibly even eliminate the 5.56mm round from service.  National defense is a legitimate cause for federal spending and social security and welfare are not, like it, or not.

D100_8575_img masada

Then, there’s the elimination of socialist, inefficient, inhuman “medical care” from the Veterans Administration.  It’s high time this card:


meant you can go into any hospital, clinic, dental office, whatever, and get full, free-of-charge treatment and any pharmaceuticals required, all compensated for – 100% – by the United States Government, via the Veterans Administration.  No more negligent homicide of our Veterans by uncaring civilians.  If the government can, in a timely fashion, demand money from citizens and businesses, they can pay their debts, just as fast.  Veterans can find doctors they like, and they can keep them (not echoing the false promises of the idiot brothers, Obama and Thump).

trump obama trumpcare

ACTUALLY DO YOUR DAMNED JOB.  Constantly, Congress and the “Supreme” Court are overstepping the bounds of their authority.  One example has resulted in millions of deaths, thanks to Congress stupidly considering the uninformed decision of the “Supreme” Court as some kind of default “law”.  As Chief Executive, I would work to prevent that from happening, by whatever constitutional means necessary.  I would not sign unconstitutional legislation.  I would block the “Supreme” Court from hearing cases they lack the enumerated jurisdiction to hear, and ignore all past and present decisions that are not law and enshrined in the United States Constitution, including such travesties as Roe vs Wade.  I would also push for impeachment of all sitting “Supreme” Court “justices” that have rendered any unconstitutional verdicts, as well as for the impeachment of all sitting members of Congress that have done the same, regardless of how long ago it happened.

After all this, I’m sure you get my drift.  The answer to the continuing stream of woes this country faces is not the Slave Party,


and it’s not the Rrepublican Party.


It’s Conservatism.


And as long as you settle for something less, that’s exactly what you’ll get.

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

I Have No Problem in Saying “We Told You So”.

•March 12, 2017 • Leave a Comment

trigger warning

So now republicans (small “r”, because they deserve as much respect as a pimple on an ass) are crying “irony”, because of this:

Yeah, so this left-wing jackass is whining because Rrepublicans aren’t ‘coming to the Slave Party with open arms’, begging their help in ‘fixing’ this bill that’s up for a vote, designed to pound another nail in America’s health care system.  Let’s not forget the tactics the Slave Party pulled, when they were pushing and passing ObamaCare.

Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) locked Republicans out of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee room to keep them from meeting when Democrats aren’t present.

Towns’ action came after repeated public ridicule from the leading Republican on the committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), over Towns’s failure to launch an investigation into Countrywide Mortgage’s reported sweetheart deals to VIPs.

For months Towns has refused Republican requests to subpoena records in the case. Last Thursday Committee Republicans, led by Issa, were poised to force an open vote on the subpoenas at a Committee mark-up meeting. The mark-up was abruptly canceled. Only Republicans showed up while Democrats chairs remained empty.

Republicans charged that Towns canceled the meeting to avoid the subpoena vote. Democrats first claimed the mark-up was canceled due to a conflict with the Financial Services Committee. Later they said it was abandoned after a disagreement among Democratic members on whether to subpoena records on the mortgage industry’s political contributions to Republicans.

A GOP committee staffer captured video of Democrats leaving their separate meeting in private chambers after the mark-up was supposed to have begun. He spliced the video to other footage of the Democrats’ empty chairs at the hearing room, set it to the tune of “Hit the Road, Jack” and posted it on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s minority webpage, where it remained as of press time.

Towns’s staffers told Republicans they were not happy about the presence of the video camera in the hearing room when they were not present. Issa’s spokesman said the Democrats readily acknowledged to Republicans that they changed the locks in retaliation to the videotape of the Democrats’ absence from the business meeting even though committee rules allow meetings to be taped.

Then, let’s not forget this piece of left wing horse crap:

As debate over health-care reform draws to a close, Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives have indicated they may use a little-known procedural rule called “deem-and-pass” to approve health reform. While proponents maintain that “deem-and-pass” is standard legislative procedure, critics suggest that, by using the rule, Dems are trying to pass health-care reform “without [actually] voting on it.” What is “deem-and-pass,” and why are Democrats considering using it? Following, a quick guide:

What is “deem-and-pass”?
Anytime the House considers a bill, the entire body votes on a set of debate rules prior to considering the bill itself. Though “deem-and-pass” is just one of many potential rules, it comes with with a special twist: When it’s approved, the underlying piece of legislation is automatically passed.

Why use it for health-care reform?
Democrats in the House are eager to pass health-care reform, but without directly voting “yes” on the version of the bill the Senate passed in December, which many members find objectionable. They would prefer to cast their “yes” vote for a set of changes that would make that Senate bill more to their liking. That’s where “deem-and-pass” comes in: If the House approves the use of “deem-and-pass” on ObamaCare, Democrats get to skip approving the Senate bill and can jump immediately to voting on ways to (in their eyes) improve it. If the strategy is successful, those improvements will be present in the version of the bill Obama ultimately signs into law.


House may try to pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it

After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers “deem” the health-care bill to be passed.

The tactic — known as a “self-executing rule” or a “deem and pass” — has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

“It’s more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know,” the speaker said in a roundtable discussion with bloggers Monday. “But I like it,” she said, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.”

Republicans quickly condemned the strategy, framing it as an effort to avoid responsibility for passing the legislation, and some suggested that Pelosi’s plan would be unconstitutional.

Pardon my ignorance, but am I missing something, here?

Where, in all that, were the Slave Party nobodies running to the (Not So) Grand Ol’ Party for help in improving that unconstitutional piece of shit that they unconstitutionally passed, with the assistance of the “Supreme” Court justices that totally ignored the Constitution?  Didn’t that happen?

And, quickly, Booker runs to defend the rate/premium increases that ObamaCare exacerbated, claiming they were  happening, anyway.

Health plans sold on Michigan’s insurance exchange could see an average 17.3% increase next year, and if recent history is any guide, state regulators could approve the insurance companies’ rate hike requests without many — if any — changes.

The rate increases would mean a financial hit for taxpayers in general and the 345,000 Michiganders who buy their health insurance on the exchange, created under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Guess what, Cory.  It was the policies of your own party that you sold out to (the SLAVE PARTY) that is, in part, responsible for these outrageous rate hikes, and the NS(GOP) is an accomplice.  And, to make it worse, you Slave Party scumbags, knowing what kind of shit sandwich you created, EXEMPTED YOURSELVES, and the OBAMA FAMILY.


And, now, today, with a Rrepublican majority in both Houses of Congress and a Democratic Republican ( in the White House, what do they do?

They push their own version of unconstitutional legislation, designed to further erode – if not destroy – the American health care system.

Yep, the Rrepublicans have NO INTEREST in doing what’s right.  Like Thump, they give ZERO FOXTROTS about that People, the Constitution or doing what’s right.

zero fucks

That’s right.

Thump’s reaction to the little push-back from the NS(GOP)?:

President Trump has told Republican leaders that he’s prepared to play hardball with congressional conservatives to pass the GOP healthcare bill, including by supporting the 2018 primary challengers of any Republican who votes against the bill.

Sources told the Washington Examiner that Trump made that threat in a White House meeting on Tuesday with House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., and other members of the House GOP whip team that helps line up votes.

Trump’s threat is one that could resonate. Most of the Republicans who oppose the GOP’s American Health Care Act represent ruby red districts that strongly support Trump and his agenda.

Therefore, they could be the most susceptible to a midterm primary challenge, especially if Trump tells those voters that their member of Congress is blocking him from fulfilling his promise to repeal President Obama‘s healthcare law.

trump feet to the fire

So his first impulse is to threaten all those who oppose his already imperial presidency.  Remember those promises he made about ‘draining the swamp’?  That’s precisely what he’s doing.  He’s getting rid of the swamp of people that could/would oppose him, and filling it with brown-nosed yes men, just like the ones that used to work for him.

brown noser

And what does Eddy Munster (Paul Ryan) have to say?


Ryan says there will be a bloodbath, if they (the Rrepublicans) don’t keep their word.  Well, guess what, Eddy?  The promise was a complete repeal, not a repeal and replace with something just as bad, if not worse.   All the complaining Rrepublicans are doing about the Slave Party (and everyone else) complaining about this piece of legislation amounts to nothing.

You could’ve fought to de-fund ObamaCare.  You didn’t.

You lied and said you’d completely repeal this monstrosity.  You won’t.  Instead, you’ll just tweak it, to make it worse, then strut around telling the world how you polished a turd.

I can’t say, for sure, but it looks highly likely that a ‘bloodbath’ could very well happen, just as it did for the Slave Party, just a few years back.

The Rrepublicans could have very well handed the Slave Party exactly what they needed to turn the tables on them:

1:  A president that seems to have more of an invested interest in Twitter and intentionally making people angry, than to govern like a statesman.


Sure, he’s done some good things, but he’s looking to completely overshadow them with the bad he promised.

2:  Bad legislation that the Slave Party and the New Left can hypocritically complain about, and turn into some rallying cry.

My trumpanzee coworker said he didn’t give a fuck about what the Constitution said, and it’s very clear and apparent that his mentality is what is the norm in the Rrepublican Party.  If the (NS)GOP is pushed back into the minority (and after so short a time as the majority), then you and this Democratic Republican ( “president” had better be prepared to see ‘gridlock’ that will make the Obama Regime years look like nothing.

There are constitutional solutions to this situation, but neither the Slave Party, nor the Rrepublicans are interested in the Constitution, because they are so firmly convinced that they are the law.

congress heads up asses

One of the worst things for me is that I saw all this coming, with the rest of the Conservatives.  However, you can’t talk sensibly to a trumpanzee, because, like any other liberal, they’re just incapable of seeing sense, or talking sensibly.  Common sense is not a genetic trait in the liberal, including the liberal trumpanzee.  Any trumpanzee that had it would be considered a mutant, and probably killed by his/her peers.

bad legislation

You can’t say anything critical about Thump, or else you’re a liberal…

goodfellas laughing at trump voters2

or a traitor (to someone you were never stupid enough to pledge allegiance to, in the first place).  And anything bad Thump does, even if it’s exactly something Obama did, is all A-OK.  Why?  I guess it’s only bad when a Slave Party member does it.














•February 6, 2017 • Leave a Comment

So, since there are a lot of stupid people out there, let’s get something straight:


          1:  (adj) A trump supporter/voter that mindlessly rubber-stamps everything he says and does, and has an absolute inability to think critically, or independently of him.  A person that engages in mindless Apologetics to justify Trump’s mistakes, gaffes and outright poor choices, due to their inability to deal with the fact that they backed a political candidate for the wrong reasons (“he’s not Hillary”), and that he will lie to them, constantly, because he knows they’re stupid enough to believe every word he says, or won’t speak out, if they realize he’s lying.

          2:  A racist leftist pretending to be a Conservative that supports/votes for Trump, because he/she wants a white president, after years of resentment for 2 back-to-back administrations of a half-Black president.
If you don’t fall under that category, then guess what.  Even if you did vote for Orange Julius, you’re not a trumpanzee. Congratulations.  

If you DO fall under those categories, you’re a steaming pile of money manure, and couldn’t be a Human Being, if someone gave you an instruction book.  As for “cuckservative”, that’s a racist statement (invented by trumpanzees, by the way).  Since they view Blacks as being animalistic creatures lower than they are, it brings “cuckhold” to a new low.  A “cuckhold” is a guy that gets off on watching people have sex with their wives.  A “cuckservative”, or “cuck” gets some pleasure on watching Black men have sex with their wives.  If you use that as an insult to anyone:

1:  You’re a racist, and probably wouldn’t have the guts to say that to the face of a Black guy that knows what you’re talking about.

2:  You’re probably a trumpanzee.

Herman Cain, Trumpanzee of the Day

•January 15, 2017 • 2 Comments

trigger warning

So, today, one of Thump’s most reliable trumpanzees has to throw another handful of his poo-poo…


…for what he believes is a good cause.


Trump critics still not satisfied, even as he donates all foreign hotel profits to U.S. Treasury


And you know darn well they never will be.

Of all the things people said about my run for the presidency, the funniest was that I did it to make money. Get your 15 minutes of fame, build your brand, and voila! Book sales, speaking fees, etc.


If only.

Anyone who has actually run for president can tell you that you give up a lot more than you can ever hope to get. And I didn’t spend millions of my own money like Donald Trump did.

Trump isn’t done giving up his money either. He announced last week that not only will he turn over control of his business enterprise to his sons and a longtime colleague, but get this: Trump intends to donate all hotel profits that come from foreign payments to the U.S. Treasury.

You realize, of course, that he is under no obligation to do any of this. He doesn’t have to give up his business interests. He doesn’t have to give up the money they make. They’re his, after all, and he built them. There is no law that says that, upon becoming president, you have to give all that up.

Or give any of it up.

Trump is choosing to do so, I think, mainly to avoid any appearance of a conflict. There may be some real conflicts, like the fact that the federal government leases some space in Trump Tower. That makes Trump his own landlord. It’s nothing on the order of politicians taking campaign contributions from public employee unions and then rewarding them with fat contracts at taxpayer expense. But it’s something, and it’s wise for Trump to let someone else handle the leasing decisions for as long as he’s president.

Still, he didn’t have to do it, and he certainly doesn’t have to take the extraordinary step of donating all hotel profits that come from foreign payments to the Treasury.

So you’d think that, having gone above and beyond anything that’s required of him, Trump would have mollified his critics and gotten them to stop yelping about his supposed conflicts of interest.

But you’d be wrong! Of course they haven’t stopped yelping!

Time Magazine is sadly typical of the whiny complainers who demand he completely divest of his entire business enterprise. That’s simply insane. For one thing, it’s not that easy to do. For another thing, if you immediately liquidate all your business holdings, you’re almost certainly not going to get full value in cash. That means that after all the years you spend building these businesses, you now have to give up realizing their true value.

Why would you do that? No one with a brain would. But the political class seems to think that business profits are evil, and that if a president is realizing profits from any business while he’s in office, that somehow puts him at odds with the best interests of the American people.

I’m sure Trump realized his critics would never be satisfied, no matter what he did. But what he’s done is beyond anything that could or should have been asked of him, and it speaks to his seriousness in embracing the presidency and turning the problems of this nation around.

And I know he isn’t doing it for gratitude, and that’s a good thing. Because while some people will surely thank him for the hard work he’s going to do, it’s clear he’s going to get a lot more grief than gratitude – at least from the people who yell the loudest.

I’ve had about enough of listening to them.

Get your copy of Herman Cain’s new book, The Right Problems Solutions, here!

Notice that he dishonestly portrays all “Thump critics” as unwashed leftists in that picture.  He is a trumpanzee.  His main interest is [political] party and defending Cheeto Jesus.

Thump could’ve eliminated conflicts of interest a while ago, by turning a lot of his holdings over to his children…


In any event, Cain is acting like Thump is something special, and that he’s making some special sacrifice for the country, just because he’s one of the richer richies that ever became president.

For one:  Thump took the job after his monumentally dishonest campaign for it.  Obama whined like a girl for quite a few months after becoming president, too, and Conservatives (and a handful of republicans) gave him the same answer.  He campaigned for it.  If he didn’t want to make the sacrifices, he was more than able to not take the job, and not even campaign for it.  I’m sure Thump can set up blind trusts, just like his buddy Obama did, so he can keep collecting money from his little real estate empire, and continue to be rich. Once this is over, guess what Herman Cain?  Thump will still be rich.  Richer, in fact, because he’ll have been accumulating money.  The profits of his hotels aren’t his only sources of income, in case you’re not aware of that.

For two:   Why, exactly, am I supposed to be impressed, by this?  This is OK, but doesn’t just absolve him of everything else he’s said and done. Plus, after stealing money from Veterans, after lying about that and how much he claimed to love them, why couldn’t he donate that to Veterans?

Or pro-life causes?

Why not to foster children?

Disadvantaged schools?

How about to universities and community colleges, as a general availability scholarship?

Maybe Thump will do some of these thing, but look at what kind of guy he is.  He says on thing, does another.  Or he’ll say several things, mean none.

And let’s not forget Thump’s usual pattern.


Herman Cain is a guy I’ve lost a lot of respect for, and this just makes it worse.  Not all people critical of Thump are these unwashed leftists.  On the contrary; Thump supporters/trumpanzees are the leftists.  People like Herman Cain are supporting with their votes a guy that praised an organization that literally profits off the murder of unborn children…

…advocates for economy destroying socialist/communist medical practices, where the federal government illegally, unconstitutionally and unethically moves even deeper into the doctor-patient relationship, so as to take control over both sides…

…something that even Obama was afraid to push.

…advocates job destroying policies that are both unconstitutional and antithetical to this constitutional republic…

and has a problem condemning the Ku Klux Klan, for some reason.

In true trumpanee fashion, the mentally dishonest Herman Cain refuses to make distinctions between leftists that dislike Trump, just because he’s a republican and not the other liberal they voted for, and those that are actually principled Conservatives, who take issues with Trump’s abrasive, grating personality as well as his leftist politics.  I guess Herman Cain would count William F. Buckley, Senior in this skewed, utterly disingenuous picture, as well, in his childish attempt to vilify any and all critics of Thump.


Because he was prescient enough to see what Thump really was, almost 20 years ago.

“Look for the narcissist. The most obvious target in today’s lineup is, of course, Donald Trump. When he looks at a glass, he is mesmerized by its reflection. If Donald Trump were shaped a little differently, he would compete for Miss America. But whatever the depths of self-enchantment, the demagogue has to say something. So what does Trump say? That he is a successful businessman and that that is what America needs in the Oval Office. There is some plausibility in this, though not much. The greatest deeds of American Presidents — midwifing the new republic; freeing the slaves; harnessing the energies and vision needed to win the Cold War — had little to do with a bottom line.”

This is, quite obviously, something Herman Cain and the rest of the trumpanzees are totally unable to cope with hearing/reading, which means they’d not like Teddy Roosevelt, either.  Why?  Because he probably wouldn’t be a big ban of a Thump.


“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”

― Theodore Roosevelt

So how does Herman Cain and the rest of the trumpanzees react to criticism of Thump?


No different from any other liberal, when they don’t get their way, or you threaten their way of life and thinking.  They can’t take it, when someone calls out their false god on things he’s really done, and presents legitimate criticism.


No, he has to be lumped in with the liberals, which, ironically, includes all trumpanzees, even though their either too stupid to know it, or just won’t admit it.

I am VIRUS-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO, and I approve this message.  If you trumpanzees don’t, that’s just tough shit.