Democratic Socialism

•December 17, 2017 • 19 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

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

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

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

Here’s the key bit…

 

Section 2

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

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

NUMBER:

1593

AUTHOR:

Benjamin Franklin (1706–90)

QUOTATION:

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

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

ATTRIBUTION:

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

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

SUBJECTS:

Republic

WORKS:

Benjamin Franklin Collection

Hmmm.

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

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

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

It’s funny you should say that:

democracy only works if the ‘right’ candidate wins

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

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

Well.

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

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

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

I quote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So much garbage to unpack.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

trump-lying-asshole

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

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

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

I’ve digressed.”

shocked face

Several times. Lied, too.

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

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

How about Segregation?

The Fugitive Slave Act?

The Black Codes?

Poll Taxes?

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

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

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

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

democracy only works if the ‘right’ candidate wins”

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

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

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

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

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

Nice try, but your digressions aren’t working.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hmm…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A constitutional republic. Question answered.

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

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

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

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

The goal of socialism is communism.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

democracy only works if the ‘right’ candidate wins”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Advertisements

Liberals: Get Over Yourselves

•December 13, 2017 • Leave a Comment

Tis I, Virus-X, that Conservative Republic Commando.

trigger warning

So, once again, Debbie Stabenow, one of the worst people in the US Senate is whining about funding unconstitutional government programs.

stabenow michild

Well intended as its ostensibly intended, its still unconstitutional.  If the People and the States want such programs, then they need to craft, legislate and fund them, themselves.  If your State’s constitution has allowances for the State doing this, then they should do it.  If the People have the money to make a program like this, they should do it, if that’s what they want to do.

Standing there with your hand out, demanding Uncle Sugar bankroll their kids, and everybody elses’.

uncle same broke

Unfunded Liability spending like this is driving America to the Poor House.  Fast.

Although the battle over a two-year budget deal and the national debt limit in 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 usdebtclock.org, federal unfunded liabilities are estimated at near $127 trillion, which is roughly $1.1 million per taxpayer and nearly double 2012’s total world output.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/01/17/you-think-the-deficit-is-bad-federal-unfunded-liabilities-exceed-127-trillion/#3a0caa3d9bf8

Now, we have this idiot Jimmy Kimmel shuffling out on stage with his damned kid, using him as a prop in his left wing sympathy play.  Pathetic.  I’m not impressed.

breakdown crying

Face facts:  Jimmy Kimmel is a Hollywood leftist multimillionare, and his kid is not on public assistance, and probably never will be.  If he, and other so-called celebrities really cared about children, they’d put their money where their big mouths are.  Cases in point, this no-talent dirtbag Mila Kunis:

Mila Kunis has been making monthly donations to Planned Parenthood in this politician’s name 

That’s one way to stick it to the man.

Mila Kunis appeared on “Conan” on Thursday, at which time she revealed that she’s been making donations to Planned Parenthood each month in Vice President Mike Pence’s name.

“This is when a lot of hate mail comes my way,” she said. “I apologize if I’m offending anybody.”

“I disagreed with some of the stuff that Pence was doing and was trying to do,” she continued. “And so, as a reminder that there are women out there in the world that may or may not agree with his platform, I put him on a list of reoccurring donations that are made in his name to Planned Parenthood.”

As a result of his name being on the reoccurring donations list, Pence —  who has been very public about his anti-abortion views and stance on women’s rights to birth control —  gets a reminder 12 times a year of Kunis’ peaceful dissonance.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/mila-kunis-donates-planned-parenthood-mike-pence-article-1.3609206

One of the many stupid things liberals like to claim is that Conservatives and Republicans stop caring about children, once their born.  Coming from people that don’t care about them before they’re born, and don’t really seem to care much afterwards, with the stupid people and things they expose their children to, that’s not saying much.

One trick pony, forgettable “actor” Mark Ruffalo – the replacement Hulk – is actually happy his mother couldn’t give a flying shit about her unborn kid, and killed it for convenience.

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/08/20/actor-mark-ruffalo-proud-of-his-mother-for-aborting-his-sibling/

Anyhow, let’s look at the degenerate named Ellen:

Talk show host Ellen DeGeneres contributed $2,700 to the Clinton campaign in October 2015. She’s also made contributions to Hillary Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee which allocates money to Hillary for America, the Democratic National Committee and state Democratic committees.

Nearly washed up actress Reese Witherspoon:

“Wild” star Reese Witherspoon contributed $2,700 to the Clinton campaign in June 2015.

Black Slave Party sellout that nobody’s heard of, Shonda Rhimes:

“Grey’s Anatomy” creator Shonda Rhimes donated $2,700 to the Clinton campaign in March 2016 and another $500 in July 2016.

How about a sexually promiscuous, Black sellout, athlete that got burned playing Russian roulette with his pee-pee:

Former NBA star Magic Johnson donated $2,700 in May 2015. He has also made contributions to Hillary Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee which allocates money to Hillary for America, the Democratic National Committee and state Democratic committees.

90 Year old hag, Glen Close:

“Guardians of the Galaxy” star Glenn Close donated $2,700 to Clinton’s campaign in April 2015.

https://www.amny.com/news/elections/hillary-clinton-s-celebrity-donors-campaign-contributions-from-kanye-west-olivia-wilde-and-more-1.12442699

Katy Perry Donates $10K to Planned Parenthood, Pens Essay on Turning ‘Words Into Action’

Katy Perry just revealed that she has donated $10,000 to Planned Parenthood.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/katy-perry-donates-10k-planned-parenthood-pens-essay/story?id=43489533

And let’s not forget the Veterans’ favorite person.

Jane Fonda Donates $100K to Defeat Issa

Donation from ‘Hanoi Jane’ aims to influence swing district with massive military presence

Jane Fonda has donated $100,000 to a political group solely aimed at defeating California GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, one of the most vulnerable Republicans in the country.

Fonda’s contribution amounts to nearly one-quarter of the group’s total $440,000 haul for the year.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/jane-fonda-donates-100k-defeat-issa/

The list goes on and on.  The bottom line is, again, if you want it done right, get off your lazy asses, and do it, yourselves.

How much money have liberals paid to Barack Obama?  Hillary Clinton?  Other Slave Party politicians?  How much good could they have done, if they’d’ve put that money towards housing and feeding the homeless?  How much good could they have done if, instead of making Clintons and Obamas richer, they’d’ve formed some kind of foundation, and dedicated it to providing health care to those that don’t have it?  Instead, they want government to force others to do what they won’t, at the barrel of a gun.

Mila Kunis has $45,000,000.00.

http://www.bankrate.com/lifestyle/celebrity-money/mila-kunis-net-worth/

Kunis, and that other irritating no-talent skin rash, Ashton Kutcher, bought a mansion in the Hollywood Hills, in a gated community for $10,000,000.00.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2627731/Mila-Kunis-Ashton-Kutcher-purchase-10MIL-home-exclusive-Beverly-Hills-gated-community-prepare-welcome-child.html

Ellen the degenerate – who’s only claim to fame is that she advertises that she likes to have lesbian sex – has $75,000,000.00.

https://www.aol.com/article/finance/2017/01/24/ellen-degeneres-net-worth-on-her-59th-birthday/21661733/

She bought a California “beach house” worth $18,600,000.00.

https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/77893-ellen-degeneres-buys-california-beach-house-for-18-6m

Reese Witherspoon?  $198,000,000.00.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maddieberg/2017/09/15/reese-witherspoons-198-million-plus-career-earnings-make-her-the-top-paid-primetime-emmy-nominee/#173b0e517d7e

Her “Pacific Palisades Mansion”?  Valued at $20,000,000.00.

http://variety.com/2016/dirt/real-estalker/reese-witherspoon-lists-pacific-palisades-mansion-1201870761/http://variety.com/2016/dirt/real-estalker/reese-witherspoon-lists-pacific-palisades-mansion-1201870761/

Jane Fonda?  $120,000,000.00.

https://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celeb/actress/jane-fonda-net-worth/

And her “townhouse”?

$5,450,000.00 (reduced from it’s original $5,650,000.00).

https://www.trulia.com/blog/celebrity-homes/jane-fonda-net-worth-townhouse-century-city-ca/

Find the rest out for yourself.

These are the same assholes that will take the streets crying about “income inequality”, or something, and how everyone should have free health care, and what are they doing about it?

Not a damned thing, except pulling crooked politicians out of their asses, that will force everybody else to pay for their pet projects.

horseshit

The same assholes that have the audacity to cry about corporations and CEOs making “too much” money, have corporations that they’re CEOs of, themselves, or are just plain rich.  The people that cry the loudest from their pulpits, tell us how much money we should pay employees,

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/ceos-are-ridiculed-for-huge-salaries-why-arent-athletes-and-entertainers/

tell us what schools we should be forced to send our kids to

https://pjmedia.com/parenting/2017/09/20/anti-school-choice-activist-hypocrite-matt-damon-sends-kids-private-school/

and pontificate to us about what kind of health care we should have

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/1/remove-congress-obamacare-exemption/

are the same assholes that are the least to contribute to society.  For all their money they make singing for their supper, playing dress up and make believe and playing with balls, they don’t do crap.

three-fifths

Yet they think they should have the authority to tell us, the rest of the country, what to do with our money.  Liberals are some of the richest, hypocritical assholes on the Earth.  They say “eat the rich”, and yet look who the rich really are:

https://www.therichest.com/top-lists/top-100-richest-celebrities/

Put your money where your mouth is, or, stick it up your ass, and stop telling everybody else how to live their lives, and how they should spend their money.

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

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Hoplite and Minuteman Act of 2017

•December 2, 2017 • 1 Comment

The Black Conservative is back.

liberal screaming trump

And, after serving up legislation for the Militias, it’s time we look to our Veterans, the invisible backbone of keeping America’s homeland safe.

ARMY:

Symbol of US Army

 

MARINES:

usmc

NAVY:

Navy_flag

AIR FORCE:

Flag_of_the_United_States_Air_Force.svg

We all have this in common:

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” 

See what’s missing?

THE EXPIRATION DATE.

As a Veteran, you will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and obey the orders of the President of the United States and officers appointed above you, according to the regulations of the UCMJ, FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE, whenever reasonable, and sometimes when it isn’t.  To that end, I give you this:

COMMITTEE: All Constitutional Conservatives of the United States of America

PRINCIPAL AUTHOR: VIRUS-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO

BILL NUMBER:

DELEGATION: The Conservatives

TITLE OF BILL: The Hoplite and Minuteman Act of 2017

Be it enacted by the xxx Congress,

WHEREAS the federal government of the United States of America has been criminally remiss in living up to its constitutional responsibility for national defense, this bill is to assist in reducing the damage that has been done by the past presidential administration of Barack Hussein Obama to national readiness through unwise force reductions and budget cuts. Enumerated authority for national defense is as follows:

“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;”

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, SPENDING CLAUSE

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, MARQUE AND REPRISAL CLAUSE

“To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;”

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, ARMY CLAUSE

To provide and maintain a Navy;”

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, NAVY CLAUSE

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;”

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, MILITARY REGULATIONS CLAUSE

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, MILITIA CLAUSE

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.”

To this end, Veterans of the armed forces of the United States of America can be recalled to active duty, reserve duty or the National Guard, acting as experienced reinforcements. The United States Department of Defense Military Departments are free to review the files of former service members and issue them through the mail a notice requesting their return to military service. In ancient Greece, Hoplites were citizen soldiers that remained on the ready to defend their country, and deploy when needed. Veterans of the armed forces of the United States of America can serve the same purpose, and be just as vital a resource, today, as they were considered to be thousands of years ago. In the colonies that would become the United States of America, the Minutemen were patriots that stood constantly ready to defend the colonies against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and were instrumental in deterring foreign aggressors that sought to prevent America’s independence. Once their tasks were done, they returned to their homes, awaiting another call to action. Again, these are missions that the Veteran of the armed forces of the United States of America can fulfill with distinction and honor, bringing prior military and life experience to any role.

SECTION 1: RECALLED OR PETITIONING VETERANS Veterans of the armed forces of the United States of America can be called back into active duty, or petition of their own accord to be reinstated. They can be voluntarily recalled into full-time active duty, reserve duty, or go into their State National Guard. The Veteran can also petition any of those branches, proactively, as opposed to waiting for a voluntary recall notice.

Subsection 1: Recalled or petitioning Veterans must not have a felony record, or have participated in actions that would be deemed to bring discredit upon the armed forces, or the United States of America.

Subsection 2: Recalled or petitioning Veterans must not have received a dishonorable discharge. Those that do not meet this standard will not be recalled, and their petition denied.

Subsection 3: Recalled or petitioning Veterans must prove that they are physically capable to return to active duty by meeting the physical and mental standards of the branch of service they are to be reinstated into, as well as meet weight requirement guidelines. This can be done through a PT test, or through another standard that the Service finds acceptable. Those that cannot meet these standards will not be recalled, and their petition denied.

Subsection 4: Recalled or petitioning Veterans must either demonstrate that they currently retain necessary levels of skill qualification, or enter into refresher training for the military specialization field they are attempting to re-enter. If the recalled or petitioning Veteran cannot meet these standards, they will not be recalled, and their petition denied.

SECTION 2: RANK AND FILE Recalled or petitioning Veterans will return to duty at their former rank, with the following exceptions:

Subsection 1: CAREER PURSUITS Recalled or petitioning Veterans that have pursued careers mirroring their military specialties and have been in those fields for over 365 continuous days will be promoted 1 grade. This promotion will be immediate upon reinstatement.

Subsection 2: CONTINUING EDUCATION, ARMY Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Army that have attained associates degrees or skilled trades certificates shall be promoted 1 grade. This promotion will be immediate upon reinstatement. Additionally, the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Army that have attained an associates degree or skilled trades certificate shall be given the option to attend BLC (Basic Leader Course) or USAWOCS (United States Army Warrant Officer Career School) WOCS (Warrant Officer Candidate School), and attain promotions into these ranks. Upon completion of BLC (Basic Leader Course), the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Army shall be promoted to the rank of corporal (E-4); upon completion of USAWOCS (United States Army Warrant Officer Career School) WOCS (Warrant Officer Candidate School), the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Army shall be promoted to the rank of Warrant Officer (WO-1). Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Army that have attained bachelors degrees shall be promoted to the rank of Warrant Officer and sent to USAWOCS (United States Army Warrant Officer Career School) WOCS (Warrant Officer Candidate School) at the earliest opportunity. Additionally, the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Army that has attained a bachelors degree shall be given the option to attend OCSUSA (Officer Candidate School of the United States Army), and attain promotion as a commissioned officer with the rank of O-1. This promotion shall be immediate upon reinstatement. Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Army that have attained a masters degree shall be eligible for a direct commission to the rank of captain (pay grade O-3), and sent to attend OCSUSA (Officer Candidate School of the United States Army) at the earliest opportunity. If deemed ineligible for direct commission, they shall be sent to attend classes at OCSUSA (Officer Candidate School of the United States Army), and, upon graduation, promoted to the rank of O-2.

Subsection 3: CONTINUING EDUCATION, NAVY Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Navy that have attained associates degrees or skilled trades certificates shall be promoted 1 grade. This promotion will be immediate upon reinstatement. Additionally, the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Navy that has attained an associates degree or skilled trades certificate shall be given the option to attend USNPOSLC (United States Navy Petty Officer Selectee Leadership Course) to attain promotion to the rate of petty officer third class (E4). Those that were separated at the pay grade of E-7 shall be permitted to attend the USNWOSP (Navy Warrant Officer Selection Program), to attain a promotion to Warrant Officer (WO-1). Upon completion of USNPOSLC (United States Navy Petty Officer Selectee Leadership Course), the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Navy shall be promoted to the rate of petty officer third class (E-4). The recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Navy that completes USNWOSP (Navy Warrant Officer Selection Program) shall be promoted to Warrant Officer (WO-1), upon graduation. Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Navy that have attained bachelors degrees shall be promoted to the rank of Warrant Officer and sent to USNWOSP (Navy Warrant Officer Selection Program) at the earliest opportunity. Additionally, the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Navy that has attained a bachelors degree shall be given the option to attend OCSUSN (Officer Candidate School of the United States Navy), and attain promotion as an ensign (O-1). This promotion shall be immediate upon graduation. Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Navy that have attained a masters degree shall be eligible for a direct commission to lieutenant (pay grade O-3), and sent to attend OCSUSN (Officer Candidate School of the United States Navy) at the earliest opportunity.. If deemed ineligible for direct commission, they will be sent to attend classes at OCSUSN (Officer Candidate School of the United States Navy), and, upon graduation, promoted to lieutenant, jg (O-2).

Subsection 4: CONTINUING EDUCATION, MARINE CORPS Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Marine Corps that have attained associates degrees or skilled trades certificates shall be promoted 1 grade. This promotion will be immediate upon reinstatement. Additionally, the recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Marine Corps that has attained an associates degree or skilled trades certificate shall be given the option to attend MCU (Marine Corps University) Command Sponsored Corporals Course (CSCC) to attain promotion to the rank of corporal (E4), or Warrant Officer (WO-1). Upon completion of MCU (Marine Corps University) Command Sponsored Corporals Course (CSCC), the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Marine Corps shall be promoted to the rank of corporal (E-4), or, upon completion of United States Marine Corps TBS (The Basic School) Warrant Officer Basic Course (WOBC), promoted to Warrant Officer (WO-1), whichever applies. Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Marine Corps that have attained bachelors degrees shall be promoted to the rank of Warrant Officer and sent to United States Marine Corps TBS (The Basic School) Warrant Officer Basic Course (WOBC) at the earliest opportunity. Additionally, the recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Marine Corps that has attained a bachelors degree shall be given the option to attend OCSUSMC (Officer Candidate School of the United States Marine Corps), and attain promotion as a commissioned officer with the rank of O-1. This promotion shall be immediate upon graduation. Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Marine Corps that have attained a masters degree shall be eligible for a direct commission to the rank of captain (pay grade O-3), and sent to attend OCSUSMC (Officer Candidate School of the United States Marine Corps) at the earliest opportunity. If deemed ineligible for direct commission, they will be sent to attend classes at OCSUSMC (Officer Candidate School of the United States Marine Corps), and, upon graduation, promoted to the rank of O-2.

Subsection 5: CONTINUING EDUCATION, AIR FORCE Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Air Force that have attained associates degrees or skilled trades certificates shall be promoted 1 grade. This promotion will be immediate upon reinstatement. Additionally, the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Air Force that has attained an associates degree or skilled trades certificate shall be given the option to attend ALS (Airman Leadership School) to attain promotion to the rank of senior airman (E4). Upon completion of ALS (Airman Leadership School), the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Air Force shall be promoted to the rank of senior airman (E-4). Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Air Force that have attained bachelors degrees shall be promoted to the rank of 2nd lieutenant (O-1) and sent to OTSUSAF (Officer Training School of the United States Air Force) at the earliest opportunity. Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the United States Air Force that have attained a masters degree shall be eligible for a direct commission to the rank of captain (pay grade O-3) and immediately sent to attend OTSUSAF (Officer Training School of the United States Air Force) at the earliest opportunity at the earliest opportunity. If deemed ineligible for direct commission, they will be sent to attend classes at OTSUSAF (Officer Training School of the United States Air Force) at the earliest opportunity, and, upon graduation, promoted to the rank of O-2.

Subsection 6: Recalled or petitioning Veterans of the armed forces of the United States of America that were separated at NCO, Warrant Office or Commissioned Officer rank can be moved up a pay grade, but if it requires additional education, that obligation must be fulfilled at the earliest opportunity. As an example, if a recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Army was separated at the rank of E-5 (sergeant), and attained an associates degree in the interim, upon reinstatement, in order to be promoted to E-6 (staff sergeant), the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Army must complete the United States Army Advanced Leader Course. A recalled or petitioning Veteran of the United States Marine Corps in the same situation, looking to move from E-5 to E-6 would need to attend and graduate from the MCU (Marine Corps University) Sergeants Course.

SECTION 4: DURATION Upon reinstatement, the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the armed forces of the United States of America shall have a contract drafted and completed, detailing the number of years of obligation that must be fulfilled (which varies with military specialties, branches of service, etc). After the satisfactory of said contract, the recalled or petitioning Veteran of the armed forces of the United States of America is free to seek another, alter the terms of service (such as go into another career field), or leave the armed forces.

SECTION 5: ENACTMENT The enactment of this bill shall be instituted immediately the day it is signed into law by the President of the United States of America.

Some will see this as a bill containing pure, unmitigated evil.

Some won’t.

We’re suffering in readiness.

http://taskandpurpose.com/army-navy-not-ready-fight-according-service-chiefs/

We are suffering in manpower.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/14/ed-feulner-obama-deep-cuts-to-defense-leaves-us-vu/

And face it; a lot of what we have to work with isn’t the best material to work with.

http://time.com/2938158/youth-fail-to-qualify-military-service/

Time to go back to the tried and true.

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

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

 

 

Executive Order 00001–Delegating Authority to the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security the Authority to Close the Southern Border

•November 21, 2017 • Leave a Comment

trigger warning

And now, Virus-X REPUBLIC COMMANDO, in light of the recent death of a Border Patrol agent, is ordering the border CLOSED.

Executive Order 00001–Delegating Authority to the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security the Authority to Close the Southern Border

Source: By virtue of the authority vested in me by the United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, the Commander In Chief and Commander of Militia Clauses, as President of the United States, it is ordered as follows:

Section 1. Subject to orders from the President of the United States of America, the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security will work jointly on securing the US Southern border.

Subsection 1: The Secretary of Defense will be subordinate to the Secretary of Defense. The SECDEF will be the senior of the two secretaries.

Subsection 2: United States Army Military Police Corps and the United States Marine Corps will deploy to the US Southern border with all necessary weapons, vehicles and equipment. They will have full authority to apprehend and detain any and all illegal aliens encountered on the American side of the border.

Subsection 3: Department of Homeland Security Border Patrol will continue their duties, but are subordinate to Military Police forces, and retain their ability to arrest any illegal aliens encountered.

Subsection 4: The military will construct strategically placed detention facilities and prisoners will be transported there for processing.

Subsection 5: The United States Department of Justice will maintain a presence in the detention facilities in the form of judges and defense attorneys. Expedited by Military Police forces, any and all prisoners will be processed, recorded and photographed, and those photographs will be retained by the Departments of Homeland Security, Defense and Justice. These sites will maintain court facilities open 24 hours/day to facilitate the prosecution of all captured illegal aliens.

Subsection 6: All prosecuted and processed illegal aliens will be moved in guarded military or DHS transports to be returned to their countries of origin (if they are in Latin America or Canada) by train, aircraft or truck.

Subsection 7: Military forces are not permitted to operated in residential areas, without Posse Comitatus. Nor are civilian or military forces permitted to cross the border without direct permission from the Commander In Chief.

Subsection 8: The military is authorized to use force against against anyone attempting to use force against them. This can be escalated to firing across the border, if attacks are actually trans-border. Leadership is to be circumspect in this, and not use force unnecessarily. This force should be proportionate to whatever is being used against them, whenever possible.

Subsection 9: US Army and USMC transport and attack helicopters will provide air support at all times, along with Department of Homeland Security aircraft. These will assist in surveillance, fire support, prisoner transport, deployment and prisoner transport. Unarmed drones are also authorized for surveillance.

Subsection 10: Military personnel will come from Regular forces, Army and Marine Corps Reserves and the United States Army National Guard. Tours of duty for non-Regular forces will be 2 weeks in length. Tours of duty for full time military personnel will be determined by the United States Army Chief of Staff and the Commandant of the Marine Corps.

Sec. 2. The United States Army will establish and maintain Combat Support Hospitals in conjunction with the bases of operations. They will be responsible for providing first line medical assistance to the military and Border Patrol agents, as well as examining all captured illegal aliens. This will include isolation facilities for anyone found to have dangerous, contagious diseases. Personnel with dangerous, contagious diseases will be segregated from all other prisoners, and kept in medical isolation, under guard.

Subsection 1: Any and all illegal aliens found to have contracted dangerous diseases will be contained, and, if possible, treated. If their conditions cannot be treated, they will be given whatever help possible, and transported back to their nations in medically reasonable transports, to keep the public safe, and keep the guards safe from infectious harm.

Subsection 2: Medical personnel are not authorized to cross the border, unless authorized by the Commander In Chief.

Sec. 3. The President of the United States retains the option to also deploy any militia units he deems qualified to assist in border security. Those selected will be paid, as follows: analogs to Non Commissioned Officers will be paid as an E-5. Analogs to lower enlisted will be paid as an E-3. Commissioned officer analogs will be paid as O-2. Any analog to a Warrant Officer will receive WO-1 pay. This pay will be allocated at the end of each month of service, based on a full month of service.

Subsection 1: Militia forces are subordinate to military forces, and Department of Justice officials. Militia forces will be able to use force for self-defense,but not permitted to direct hostilities across the boarder, unless given permission from military forces (which, in turn, must be cleared by the CinC, see Section 1, Subsection 8).

Subsection 2: Militia forces, if applicable, will – with military commander approval – be able to request and receive ammunition for weapons in service.

Subsection 3: Militia drones, if they possess any, are authorized for use as surveillance tools.

So, yeah, I’m pretty sure open borders liberals won’t like this one.

liberal screaming trump

Not that I care.

scooby laughing

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

great-seal-of-virus-x

 

The Political Positions of Virus-X, Republic Commando

•November 18, 2017 • Leave a Comment

trigger warning

OK, some people have wondered what my actual political positions are on certain, specific subjects.  Well, here you go.  Worts and all.

rod serling submitted for your approval

China
Virus-X is not a believer in the current “One China Policy”, which he believes is the product of cowardly politicians, afraid to confront the hard issues.  The so-called “One China Policy” says there is only one such nation, but Virus-X recognizes that there are two:  America’s communist enemies of the Peoples’ Republic of China (which is definitely no republic, but a communist dictatorship), and America’s allies in the Republic of China.  He is highly critical of the rampant Human Rights abuses perpetrated by the PRC, and advocates that instead of anti-Semites using BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanction) against Israel, which actually does uphold Human Rights, the cowardly hypocrites and liars of the BDS movement – including governments around the world – should be using these tactics against the PRC.  He’s been quoted as saying that if the US actually followed the Constitution, it could end all unnecessary tax and spend policies, and have more than enough money to pay off any monetary debts to the PRC, in relatively short order.  After that, no more American money or business should be anywhere in the PRC, and the PRC should be allowed to have no business stakes, or cash flow, anywhere in the United States, or anywhere else in the world that claims to revere freedom.  Virus-X is also a harsh critic of the PRC’s abuse of Tibet, which he regards as an independent nation, and not a part of the PRC.  He has criticized China using natural resources to attack other nations, such as choking off water supplies to India by damming rivers that source in the PRC mainland, causing harm to people in other nations as a substitution for outright warfare.   He is supportive of Chinese dissidents that speak up for freedom, and support efforts to help them get out of PRC prisons.

Colombia

While supporting, in principle, the Colombian free trade agreement, Virus-X believes a lot of corruption needs to be cleaned up in Columbia, or the agreement should either be heavily modified, or abrogated, altogether.  Also, he believes a full investigation of the Human Rights abuses allegations needs to be done, and if the allegations are proven true, Columbia should face a deadline to clean up shop, or face a total abrogation of the treaty.

Cuba

Virus-X is highly critical of leftists that oppose lifting restrictions on Cuba, and attempting to hold the US responsible for conditions in Cuba.  He agrees with Senator Marco Rubio, who says that things could change virtually overnight in Cuba, if they got rid of their communist dictatorship, and moved to an of-the-People, for-the-People model of government.  He regards Cuba as being every bit the enemy today, as they were during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and supports all travel bans and economic sanctions against them.

Iran

Virus-X regards Iran as a bitter enemy, and threat to both the Middle East, and world peace, as a whole.  He supports Israel in their efforts to fight back against the Iranian Hegemony, and says he would support the use of force to oppose Iran from getting nuclear weapons.  He also would support the use of resources like the US Army 5th SFG to train pro-freedom guerrillas for irregular warfare against the Iranian regime, looking to restore a form of government prior to the Iranian Revolution.  He also believes these guerrillas should be heavily screened by intelligence forces, before even being contacted, much less armed, funded and trained.

Turkey

Virus-X is a harsh critic of Turkey, and does believe in the 1915 killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks calling it an attempt at extermination, no different from that of the Nazis.   He opposes the inclusion of Turkey in NATO, and believes they are, in fact, an enemy nation, especially under the government of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, whom Virus-X regards as an evil dictator, no less dangerous than anyone in the Iranian regime.  Virus-X would renegotiate NATO, and exclude Turkey.  Even though they could help Russia, he believes they are already allies of America’s enemy, and it would change little.

Use of government aircraft

Virus-X would put a stop to the use of government aircraft by politicians, such as Nancy Pelosi, a member of the US Senate.  Any uses of them found to have been unnecessary should be reimbursed, and legal means brought to bear to insure that money is returned to taxpayers.

Abortion

Virus-X believes that life begins at conception, and is a staunch opponent of killing unborn children.  He believes that unborn children are entitled to constitutional protections, including the right to Life, and that funding organizations that kill them is unconstitutional.  If able to, he will choke off all such funding, and work to prevent it from being instituted at a federal level, ever again.  He would make it clear that the Supreme Court does not make law, and only issues opinion.  Only the Legislature can legislate, and that the Legislature does not have the enumerated power to legislate on childbirth.  He says this is a State issue, even though he’d oppose states legalizing abortion, as it is still a violation of the Constitution.  He supports killing the child only on the basis that the child’s birth poses a clear and present danger to the health of the mother.  He also opposes using taxpayer money to fund child killing overseas.

Gun laws

Virus-X is a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and is also a proponent of the controversial Well-Regulated Militia Act, which has been well recieved by a number of Conservatives.  He has called for the criminal prosecution of all state officials, from the governors’ offices, on down, that unconstitutionally infringe upon the 2nd Amendment Rights through unconstitutional, illegal so-called “gun control” laws, which are in clear and blatant violation of federal law.   There should be no restrictions on the types of firearms people should be able to purchase, and even larger weapon systems should be available for purchase.  He firmly believes that many more people would be alive today, if it wasn’t for liberals’ driving obsession to deprive people of two things:  the right to life, for unborn children, and the right to self defense, for people that are told they’re not allowed to have weapons, because liberals in local government don’t like firearms.

Fiscal/monetary policy

Virus-X favors the American Tax Code Reorganization Act, which could create a natural stimulus program, revitalizing the US economy, without unconstitutional government involvements, such as “quantitative easing”.  He believes that there should also be no federally imposed minimum wage for private businesses, but says that the States could do it, but it should best be left to market forces, or a combination of the two.  He believes that the Constitution was a fundamentally Conservative document, but that creeping liberalism has hampered it’s effectiveness, through the 16th Amendment, and has hurt the American citizen, and the Private Sector, ever since.  The Republic Commando also says the only real reform of the Welfare State is to completely eliminate it from the federal government.

Civil liberties

Virus-X is a firm believe in civil liberties, but doesn’t believe that liberals actually know the meaning of the word.  He refuses to believe that one person should have rights that trump those of another, such as what liberals normally espouse, such as when a person’s 1st Amendment Right to the free practice of their faith somehow clashes with another’s right to be a homosexual demanding the person of faith participate in something that goes against their faith.  He believes that the Constitution applies to all, not to some, not to some more than others, and certainly not to some more than others depending on the situation.  No government, at any level, is able to grant or revoke rights guaranteed by Natural Law, and no government is in any position to manufacture new rights, nor created ‘protected groups’ of people.

Confederate monuments

Virus-X is no fan of Confederates, and does not believe they should be revered as anything other than traitorous, murderous, villainous terrorists.  He says a monument to a Confederate is a monument to a liberal democrat, and they are not people that deserve monuments.  Monuments are for people of greatness.  However, he does not support the calls for wholesale vandalism, and thinks people participating in this should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of relevant law.

Contraception

While believing that contraception definitely has it’s uses, he does not believe the federal government should be in the business of subsidizing it’s purchases.

Education

Virus-X believes the public education system is a mess, and believes the Democratic Party is solely to blame, ranging all the way back in the era of James Earl Carter, and the creation of the unconstitutional Department of Education.  He believes that leftist ideology has no place in schools, because it has done no one any good, even as they have cast out Christendom, under the false guise of “separation of Church and State”.  He believes voluntary prayer should be returned to schools, and that the federal government should take a completely hands off approach with public schooling, leaving it completely to the States, counties, cities, organizations and individuals.  Like many things, he believes local education is best, and not standards dictated by un-elected, petty, bureaucratic, leftist elitists from Washington DC.  In his own words, he believes that schools should be answerable to the parents, and not the politicians.

Environment

Virus-X opposes government subsidies into companies like Solyndra, in the name of alternative fuels, and says this is the province of the Private Sector, as is any efforts to fund research conducted by private organizations.  He believes organizations like the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) should be immediately shut down, as the States should have control over their own lands, and because the States already had organizations dedicated to the protection of their environments, prior to Nixon’s violation of the Constitution, and formation of the EPA.  He supports oil and natural gas drilling, under the watchful eye of the states, as well as believes the federal government should return all unconstitutionally seized lands to the states they unlawfully took them from.  Fossil fuels, in his opinion, should be drilled for, here, and sold throughout the world to help America’s economy, as well as to undermine the oil economies of America’s enemies, such as the OPEC nations.  The research and development of alternatives to fossil fuels is for the Private Sector, not the government.

Health care

Virus-X believes the best way to help people get affordable health care is to minimize government involvement, and limit it’s involvement to creating fertile economic environments in which such things are possible.   Government health care, taxing health care providers and taxing people for having health care that’s “too good” (Obama’s so-called “Cadillac” plans) is thoroughly un-American and unconstitutional, which very much includes Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, supported by liberal politicians like Pelosi that exempted themselves from the very act that they forced down everybody elses’ throats,  under the guise of how great it was.  Virus-X says that if government was so concerned about making things affordable, they wouldn’t heavily tax health care providers, medical device manufacturers, pharmaceutical interests and people just for having medical insurance.  He also believes that programs like Medicare and Medicaid should be discontinued at the federal level, instead of expanded, and creating more debt.

Immigration

Virus-X says:  “America is not a nation of immigrants, it’s a nation of Americans.  Americans are people that were born here of American parents” Americans are people that legally immigrated to the country, proved their worth, and became Americans.”  People that come here, illegally, should be charged as felons, as should all that assist them.  Any president – regardless of political party – that attempts to give amnesty, or write their own immigration law, should be impeached.  Any person knowingly hiring an illegal alien for jobs, enrolling them in schools, etc., should be imprisoned and severely fined.

Iraq War

Virus-X was a supporter of war against Iraq, and strongly condemns in the most serious language any and all politicians – including Karl Rove – that perpetuated the lie that no WMD were found in Iraq.  He also vociferously critics Obama for his unwise withdrawal of troops from the Afghanistan and Iraq theaters, opening a power vacuum for the Islamic State to fill.  He supports doing more to help kill terrorist forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.  However, he is not in favor of permanently stationing troops in either Iraq, or Afghanistan.

Israel

Virus-X strongly condemns liberals like Nancy Pelosi, who mouths words like:   “America and Israel share an unbreakable bond: in peace and war; and in prosperity and in hardship”, and “a strong relationship between the United States and Israel has long been supported by both Democrats and Republicans. America’s commitment to the safety and security of the State of Israel is unwavering,…[h]owever, the war in Iraq has made both America and Israel less safe.”  Liberals, most recently under Obama, have shown their have complete disdain for the Jewish State, and have done nothing but impede Israel’s work to shore up their national security, especially against the terrorist para-state Palestine.  Making matters worse, the Democrats expect Israel to bargain away the Promised Land to    She agrees with the current U.S. stance in support of land-for-peace. Democrats were completely disdainful and disrespectful to Jewish leaders like Benjamin Netanyahu, ranging from waling out on his historic address of the US Congress, to Obama walking out on him, and leaving him sitting.  In Virus-X’s opinion, it’s time we start acting like allies.  We need to stand between them and the UN, and other leftist, anti-Semitic European countries that attack Israel politically and economically.  It’s time we militarily back Israel against their enemies, such as Syria, Iran and against the squatters on Israeli lands, calling themselves “Palestinians”.  In his own words:  “If I was in charge, I’d have a CSG parked right on Israel’s front door.  If anybody attacked, again, they wouldn’t only be fighting Israelis.”

First Gulf War

Virus-X supported the 1st war in the Gulf, but was unhappy with the failure to actually send troops to win it.  In his opinion, had it been done correctly, the first time, we would not have had to redeploy troops there, again.

LGBT rights

Virus-X believes that gays should have no special rights, and that they should have the rights afforded to them by the US Constitution, and the constitutions of the States.  They should not be beneficiaries of re-interpreted constitutional law, reformulated to cater to them, just as no one else should be.  While he opposes gay “marriage”, he also opposes any legislation made at the federal level regarding marriage as unconstitutional, and says that that is something to be addressed by the states, provided their own constitutions give them that power.  In his words, government should be out of the marriage business, starting with overturning Democrat pioneered laws, founded on a bedrock of their racism, that created “marriage licenses”, in the first place.  He supported Proposition 8, and calls for the impeachment of the judges that took it upon themselves to take away the rights of the People to vote on that matter, replacing it with the opinions of biased, gay judges, acting out of their own self interest, and against the interests of the People.  Virus-X does not endorse discrimination, but calls Democrats that claim they oppose it, considering their political party was founded on discrimination, bigotry and racism.   

Marijuana legalization

Virus-X does not support the legalization of any narcotics, but believes that the federal government, according to the US Constitution, should have the ability to regulate interstate and international commerce of the substance, where the US is concerned.

Military draft

As a Veteran of the US Army, Virus-X opposes the draft, on the grounds that it will do nothing but fill the ranks with the undeserving and the unfit.  Entry into the armed forces should be both voluntary, and subject to strict standards.

NSA Spying/PRISM Program

Virus-X supports NSA intelligence operations, provided they are against legitimate targets.  He opposes blanket surveillance, and believes that any politician fostering the surveillance and collection of intel against innocent Americans should be impeached, and possibly criminally charged.  He believes former NSA contractor Edward Snowden should be put on the CK List, and declared an HVT.

Syria

Virus-X believes that Obama should have been impeached for his unprovoked, unjustified attack on Syria, and that Trump should be, as well.  He believes Syria is not an American interest, unless they do something to become one, such as a declaration of war, assisting anti-American terrorist forces, or threatening Israel.  Syria is to be considered a “passive threat”, and should be monitored at all times, but not attacked without reason.

Waterboarding

 

Virus-X is a proponent of waterboarding, and says it is very mild, compared to what other countries do to captured war criminals, such as Russia or China.  He believes that waterboarding helped uncover actionable intel against Osama bin-Laden, thanks to captured al-Qaeda terrorist Kalid Sheikh Mohammed.  He also notes that waterboarding wasn’t completely effective against the man, and he was able to resist for quite some time.

liberal screaming trump

And I’m VIRUS-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO, and I approve this message.  Hopefully, trumpanzees, and other subhumans, don’t like it.

ice-cold-conservative

A Brief History of the Slave Party and Civil Rights

•November 12, 2017 • 2 Comments

trigger warning

And today’s stupid answer to a legitimate question comes from Cliff Gilley, a guy that probably considers himself an expert on the subject, because he studied some “Constitutional Law” at Seattle University, a known outlet of leftist thought, which commonly runs contrary to everything the Constitution stands for.

liberal lies about the slave party

You deserve to be laughed at, with a stupid answer like that.

The Northern members of the Slave Party were still members of the Slave Party, some of whom even had slaves.  They joined the very same party as the asshats from the South, which stated, and I quote:

“Resolved, That congress has no power, under the constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states, and that such states are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts by abolitionists or others, made to induce congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people, and endanger the stability and permanency of the union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend to our political institutions.”  –1840 Democratic Party Platform
May 6, 1840

They joined the party of Jefferson Davis:

My own convictions as to negro slavery are strong. It has its evils and abuses…We recognize the negro as God and God’s Book and God’s Laws, in nature, tell us to recognize him – our inferior, fitted expressly for servitude…You cannot transform the negro into anything one-tenth as useful or as good as what slavery enables them to be.”  -Jefferson Davis, Traitor to the Republic, and false president to the Democrat pseudo-state calling itself the “Confederacy”

The Slave Party in the North was like the Republicans?  You have to be incredibly stupid to think that, much less put something like that on the Internet, with you name and face attached to it.  The Republicans actually fought the liberal Democrats – calling themselves “Confederates” (liberals, for some reason, don’t like being called what they are; instead, they want hid behind other names, ranging from Confederate to progressive) – and defeated them to preserve the Union, and to end slavery.  The Slave Party?  They’ve always fought civil rights legislation.  And, since you’re still talking about party switches, we’ve already covered that.  More than once.

https://virusx.wordpress.com/2017/10/30/the-big-switch/

Then, we have other latter day imbeciles, like this trumpanzee:

trumpanzee liford

Sometimes, fisking the ignorant is fun.

“SLAVE PARTY”, that is and always has been the Democratic Party.

Has there been another political party in this country that was Hell bent on spreading and perpetuating slavery?  If there was, it’s funny he didn’t mention that political party, by name.  I wonder why not.

“They started the KKK, and they voted against every civil rights piece of legislation ever proposed.”

OK, let’s take a look at that.

The percentage of House Democrats who supported the legislation? 61 percent. House Republicans? 80 percent. In the Senate, 69 percent of Democrats voted yes, compared with 82 percent of Republicans. (Barry Goldwater, a supporter of the NAACP, voted no because he thought it was unconstitutional.)

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420321/whitewashing-democratic-partys-history-mona-charen

Doesn’t look like they were too hot on this legislation passing, to me.  Oh, and let’s not forget this:

“We come to celebrate and give thanks for the remarkable life of J. William Fulbright, a life that changed our country and our world forever and for the better. . . . In the work he did, the words he spoke and the life he lived, Bill Fulbright stood against the 20th century’s most destructive forces and fought to advance its brightest hopes.”

So spoke President William J. Clinton in 1995 of a man was among the 99 Democrats in Congress to sign the “Southern Manifesto” in 1956. (Two Republicans also signed it.) The Southern Manifesto declared the signatories’ opposition to the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education and their commitment to segregation forever. Fulbright was also among those who filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That filibuster continued for 83 days.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420321/whitewashing-democratic-partys-history-mona-charen

The “Southern Manifesto“.  The Mein Kampf/Communist Manifesto of the Slave Party’s most racist of the racist, who actually created their own political party dedicated to preserving the ideals of their racist South, and White Supremacy, which they called the Dixiecrats.

What is a Dixiecrat, you ask?  What was the Dixiecrat Party?  Liars say they were Conservative Democrats, but that’s an oxymoron.  There are no Conservatives in the Slave Party, because what the Slave Party stands for is antithetical to Conservatism.  Here’s a short explanation:

Dixiecrat

(Redirected from Dixiecrats)
 

Dixiecrat was the informal term for Southern Democrats who in 1948 refused to support President Harry S. Truman for reelection because he was too liberal on racial issues. The official name was the States Rights Party. They formed a third party that nominated South Carolina Governor Strom Thurmond, who carried four states in the Deep South where he was the official nominee of the Democratic party, gaining 39 electoral votes. Thurmond had 1.2 million popular votes, or 2.4% of the national total. The party did not nominate any other candidates at any level, and dissolved after Truman won the election. The Dixiecrats went back to the Democrats, where they came into increasingly more conflict with the liberal sections of the party, and eventually abandoned the Democratic Party for the Republican Party after the presidency of Lyndon Johnson.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Dixiecrat

OK, the “official” name was the “States Rights Party“.  After all, they wanted to look like something they weren’t, which is legitimate.  Their bawling about ‘states’ rights’ harkens back to those of their predecessor party, the Confederacy, which some other left wing revisionist historians and neo-confederates claim fought for states rights”.  This is a lie.

The South seceded over states’ rights.

Confederate states did claim the right to secede, but no state claimed to be seceding for that right. In fact, Confederates opposed states’ rights — that is, the right of Northern states not to support slavery.

On Dec. 24, 1860, delegates at South Carolina’s secession convention adopted a “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” It noted “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery” and protested that Northern states had failed to “fulfill their constitutional obligations” by interfering with the return of fugitive slaves to bondage. Slavery, not states’ rights, birthed the Civil War.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths-about-why-the-south-seceded/2011/01/03/ABHr6jD_story.html?utm_term=.0f9b59fbdc42

And what was this “manifesto” of theirs?

THE SOUTHERN MANIFESTO

[From Congressional Record, 84th Congress Second Session. Vol. 102, part 4 (March 12, 1956). Washington, D.C.: Governmental Printing Office, 1956. 4459-4460.]

THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE SCHOOL CASES ­ DECLARATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES

Mr. [Walter F.] GEORGE. Mr. President, the increasing gravity of the situation following the decision of the Supreme Court in the so-called segregation cases, and the peculiar stress in sections of the country where this decision has created many difficulties, unknown and unappreciated, perhaps, by many people residing in other parts of the country, have led some Senators and some Members of the House of Representatives to prepare a statement of the position which they have felt and now feel to be imperative.

I now wish to present to the Senate a statement on behalf of 19 Senators, representing 11 States, and 77 House Members, representing a considerable number of States likewise. . . 

DECLARATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES

The unwarranted decision of the Supreme Court in the public school cases is now bearing the fruit always produced when men substitute naked power for established law.

The Founding Fathers gave us a Constitution of checks and balances because they realized the inescapable lesson of history that no man or group of men can be safely entrusted with unlimited power. They framed this Constitution with its provisions for change by amendment in order to secure the fundamentals of government against the dangers of temporary popular passion or the personal predilections of public officeholders.

We regard the decisions of the Supreme Court in the school cases as a clear abuse of judicial power. It climaxes a trend in the Federal Judiciary undertaking to legislate, in derogation of the authority of Congress, and to encroach upon the reserved rights of the States and the people.

The original Constitution does not mention education. Neither does the 14th Amendment nor any other amendment. The debates preceding the submission of the 14th Amendment clearly show that there was no intent that it should affect the system of education maintained by the States.

The very Congress which proposed the amendment subsequently provided for segregated schools in the District of Columbia.

When the amendment was adopted in 1868, there were 37 States of the Union. . . .

Every one of the 26 States that had any substantial racial differences among its people, either approved the operation of segregated schools already in existence or subsequently established such schools by action of the same law-making body which considered the 14th Amendment.

As admitted by the Supreme Court in the public school case (Brown v. Board of Education), the doctrine of separate but equal schools “apparently originated in Roberts v. City of Boston (1849), upholding school segregation against attack as being violative of a State constitutional guarantee of equality.” This constitutional doctrine began in the North, not in the South, and it was followed not only in Massachusetts, but in Connecticut, New York, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania and other northern states until they, exercising their rights as states through the constitutional processes of local self-government, changed their school systems.

In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 the Supreme Court expressly declared that under the 14th Amendment no person was denied any of his rights if the States provided separate but equal facilities. This decision has been followed in many other cases. It is notable that the Supreme Court, speaking through Chief Justice Taft, a former President of the United States, unanimously declared in 1927 in Lum v. Rice that the “separate but equal” principle is “within the discretion of the State in regulating its public schools and does not conflict with the 14th Amendment.”

This interpretation, restated time and again, became a part of the life of the people of many of the States and confirmed their habits, traditions, and way of life. It is founded on elemental humanity and commonsense, for parents should not be deprived by Government of the right to direct the lives and education of their own children.

Though there has been no constitutional amendment or act of Congress changing this established legal principle almost a century old, the Supreme Court of the United States, with no legal basis for such action, undertook to exercise their naked judicial power and substituted their personal political and social ideas for the established law of the land.

This unwarranted exercise of power by the Court, contrary to the Constitution, is creating chaos and confusion in the States principally affected. It is destroying the amicable relations between the white and Negro races that have been created through 90 years of patient effort by the good people of both races. It has planted hatred and suspicion where there has been heretofore friendship and understanding.

Without regard to the consent of the governed, outside mediators are threatening immediate and revolutionary changes in our public schools systems. If done, this is certain to destroy the system of public education in some of the States.

With the gravest concern for the explosive and dangerous condition created by this decision and inflamed by outside meddlers:

We reaffirm our reliance on the Constitution as the fundamental law of the land.

We decry the Supreme Court’s encroachment on the rights reserved to the States and to the people, contrary to established law, and to the Constitution.

We commend the motives of those States which have declared the intention to resist forced integration by any lawful means.

We appeal to the States and people who are not directly affected by these decisions to consider the constitutional principles involved against the time when they too, on issues vital to them may be the victims of judicial encroachment.

Even though we constitute a minority in the present Congress, we have full faith that a majority of the American people believe in the dual system of government which has enabled us to achieve our greatness and will in time demand that the reserved rights of the States and of the people be made secure against judicial usurpation.

We pledge ourselves to use all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision which is contrary to the Constitution and to prevent the use of force in its implementation.

In this trying period, as we all seek to right this wrong, we appeal to our people not to be provoked by the agitators and troublemakers invading our States and to scrupulously refrain from disorder and lawless acts.

http://sti.clemson.edu/component/content/article/192-general-info/790-1956-qsouthern-manifestoq

A racist document, full of lies, by racist people.  The rank dishonesty, racism and outright stupidity of this thing should be able to speak for itself, quite frankly.

And who were the signatories of this stupid thing?:

Signatories and non-signatories

In many southern States, signing was much more common than not signing, with signatories including the entire delegations from Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Virginia. Those from southern States who refused to sign are noted below.[1] Refusal to sign occurred most prominently among the Texas and Tennessee delegations, in both of which the majority of members of the United States House of Representatives refused to sign.[1]

United States Senate (in state order)

Signatories:

Non-signatories:

United States House of Representatives (in state order)

Signatories:

Alabama:

Arkansas:

Florida:

Non-Signatories:

Georgia:

Louisiana:

Mississippi:

North Carolina:

Non-Signatories:

South Carolina:

Tennessee:

Non-signatories:

Texas: Signatories:

Non-signatories:

Virginia: Signatories:

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

So a pair of left wing Republicans signed it, huh?  And everyone else involved was a White, southern Slave Party alumni.  Well, as a man greater than the person I’m fisking said:

“…Sir, it is evident that there is in this country a purely slavery party- a party which exists for no other earthly purpose than to promote the interests of slavery….For the present, the best representative of the slavery party in politics is the Democratic party.” -Fredrick Douglass

And:

“It is not true that the Republican party has not endeavored to protect the negro in his right to vote.  The whole moral power of the party has been, from first to last, on the side of justice to the negro, and it has only been baffled, in it’s efforts to protect the negro in his vote, by the Democratic party.”   -Fredrick Douglass, June 1888

And lets’ not forget:

I knew that however bad the Republican party was, the Democratic party was much worse. The elements of which the Republican party was composed gave better ground for the ultimate hope of the success of the colored man’s cause than those of the Democratic party.

As quoted in Life and Times of Frederick Douglass (1941), chapter 47, p. 579

Finally, there’s this:

Civil Rights Filibuster Ended

1964-Present

June 10, 1964
Civil Rights Filibuster Ended

At 9:51 on the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert C. Byrd completed an address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier. The subject was the pending Civil Rights Act of 1964, a measure that occupied the Senate for 60 working days, including seven Saturdays. A day earlier, Senate whips Hubert Humphrey (D-MN) and Thomas Kuchel (R-CA), the bill’s floor managers, concluded they had the 67 votes required at that time to end the debate.

The Civil Rights Act provided protection of voting rights; banned discrimination in public facilities—including private businesses offering public services—such as lunch counters, hotels, and theaters; and established equal employment opportunity as the law of the land.

As Senator Byrd took his seat, House members, former senators, and others—150 of them—vied for limited standing space at the back of the chamber. With all gallery seats taken, hundreds waited outside in hopelessly extended lines.

Georgia Democrat Richard Russell offered the final arguments in opposition. Minority Leader Everett Dirksen, who had enlisted the Republican votes that made cloture a realistic option, spoke for the proponents with his customary eloquence. Noting that the day marked the 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s nomination to a second term, the Illinois Republican proclaimed, in the words of Victor Hugo, “Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come.” He continued, “The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!”

Never in history had the Senate been able to muster enough votes to cut off a filibuster on a civil rights bill. And only five times in the 47 years since the cloture rule was established had the Senate agreed to cloture for any measure.

The clerk proceeded to call the roll. When he reached “Mr. Engle,” there was no response. A brain tumor had robbed California’s mortally ill Clair Engle of his ability to speak. Slowly lifting a crippled arm, he pointed to his eye, thereby signaling his affirmative vote. Few of those who witnessed this heroic gesture ever forgot it. When Delaware’s John Williams provided the decisive 67th vote, Majority Leader Mike Mansfield exclaimed, “That’s it!”; Richard Russell slumped; and Hubert Humphrey beamed. With six wavering senators providing a four-vote victory margin, the final tally stood at 71 to 29. Nine days later the Senate approved the act itself—producing one of the 20th century’s towering legislative achievements.

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Civil_Rights_Filibuster_Ended.htm

Robert Byrd…Where have I heard that name, before?

byrd meme

It sounds familiar.

Well, doesn’t sound like they were big into civil rights legislation, to me.  Oh, and President Dwight D. Eisenhower also tried introducing one, earlier.  Why didn’t it pass?

Because of the Slave Party.

In 1957, President Eisenhower sent Congress a proposal for civil rights legislation. The result was the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the first civil rights legislation since Reconstruction. The new act established the Civil Rights Section of the Justice Department and empowered federal prosecutors to obtain court injunctions against interference with the right to vote. It also established a federal Civil Rights Commission with authority to investigate discriminatory conditions and recommend corrective measures. The final act was weakened by Congress due to lack of support among the Democrats.

https://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/research/online_documents/civil_rights_act.html

Then, there was this one:

1866 Civil Rights Act

The Civil Rights Act (1866) was passed by Congress on 9th April 1866 over the veto of President Andrew Johnson. The act declared that all persons born in the United States were now citizens, without regard to race, color, or previous condition. As citizens they could make and enforce contracts, sue and be sued, give evidence in court, and inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property. Persons who denied these rights to former slaves were guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction faced a fine not exceeding $1,000, or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both. The activities of organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan undermined the workings of this act and it failed to guarantee the civil rights of African Americans.

http://spartacus-educational.com/USAcivil1866.htm

Ku Klux Klan, i.e.:  DEMOCRATS.

Now, the idiot I’m fisking is clearly implying that the Slave Party isn’t like that, anymore.

Even far left, anti-American, uber-liberal has to admit that this is still around with the Slave Party:

Hillary Clinton seems pretty modern for a Slave Party alumni, to me.

How about Nancy Pelosi?  Click the Facebook icon to see the article.

So, it looks like you’re wrong, Liford.

And stupid.  Anyhow, back to his idiocy:

“They started the KKK, and they voted against every piece of civil rights legislation ever proposed.”

Well, I’ve already covered that their support for all pieces of landmark legislation on civil rights has been either quite underwhelming, or outright non-existent.  The Ku Klux Klan?

More intel?  OK.  Even liberal dominated Wikipedia admits that the Ku Klux Klan came from Democrats of the ersatz government calling itself the “Confederacy”, after they got their asses kicked in a war they fired the first shot of.

The first Klan was founded in Pulaski, Tennessee, sometime between December 1865 and August 1866 by six former officers of the Confederate army as a fraternal social club inspired at least in part by the then largely defunct Sons of Malta. It borrowed parts of the initiation ceremony from that group, with the same purpose: “ludicrous initiations, the baffling of public curiosity, and the amusement for members were the only objects of the Klan”, according to Albert Stevens in 1907. The name is probably derived from the Greek word kuklos (κύκλος) which means circle; the word had previously been used for other fraternal organizations in the South such as Kuklos Adelphon. The manual of rituals was printed by Laps D. McCord of Pulaski.

According to The Cyclopædia of Fraternities (1907), “Beginning in April, 1867, there was a gradual transformation … The members had conjured up a veritable Frankenstein. They had played with an engine of power and mystery, though organized on entirely innocent lines, and found themselves overcome by a belief that something must lie behind it all—that there was, after all, a serious purpose, a work for the Klan to do.”

Although there was little organizational structure above the local level, similar groups rose across the South and adopted the same name and methods. Klan groups spread throughout the South as an insurgent movement promoting resistance and white supremacy during the Reconstruction Era. For example, Confederate veteran John W. Morton founded a chapter in Nashville, Tennessee. As a secret vigilante group, the Klan targeted freedmen and their allies; it sought to restore white supremacy by threats and violence, including murder, against black and white Republicans. In 1870 and 1871, the federal government passed the Enforcement Acts, which were intended to prosecute and suppress Klan crimes.

The first Klan had mixed results in terms of achieving its objectives. It seriously weakened the black political establishment through its use of assassinations and threats of violence; it drove some people out of politics. On the other hand, it caused a sharp backlash, with passage of federal laws that historian Eric Foner says were a success in terms of “restoring order, reinvigorating the morale of Southern Republicans, and enabling blacks to exercise their rights as citizens”. Historian George C. Rable argues that the Klan was a political failure and therefore was discarded by the Democratic leaders of the South. He says:

the Klan declined in strength in part because of internal weaknesses; its lack of central organization and the failure of its leaders to control criminal elements and sadists. More fundamentally, it declined because it failed to achieve its central objective – the overthrow of Republican state governments in the South.

After the Klan was suppressed, similar insurgent paramilitary groups arose that were explicitly directed at suppressing Republican voting and turning Republicans out of office: the White League, which started in Louisiana in 1874; and the Red Shirts, which started in Mississippi and developed chapters in the Carolinas. For instance, the Red Shirts are credited with helping elect Wade Hampton as governor in South Carolina. They were described as acting as the military arm of the Democratic Party and are attributed with helping white Democrats regain control of state legislatures throughout the South.  In addition, there were thousands of Confederate veterans in what were called rifle clubs.

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

As for the Slave Party not having anything to do with them, the idiot’s wrong there, too (which should come as no surprise to anyone).

 

Yep, you heard right.  That march included Slave Party Democrats from the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Supreme Court.  Let’s also not forget that Woodrow Wilson, one of the worst of the racist, White Slave Party Confederates Democrat , showed a Ku Klux Klan recruiting film in the White House, while he was president.

“When we call to mind the fact that this [Klan] persecution is waged against men for the simple reason that they dare vote with the [Republican] Party, . . . [t]he question is sometimes asked, ‘Why do not the courts of law afford redress?’ . . . We answer, that the courts are in many instances under the control of those [Democrats] who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of law and equity. What benefit would result from appeal to tribunals [courts] whose officers are secretly in sympathy with the very evil against which we are striving? . . .
I will say that in the State of South Carolina, there is no disturbance of an alarming character in any one of the counties in which the Republicans have a majority. The troubles are usually in those sections in which the Democrats have [control]. . . . I say . . . to the entire membership of the Democratic Party, that upon your hands rests the blood of the loyal men of the South. Disclaim it as you will; the stain is there to prove your criminality before God and the world in the day of retribution which will surely come.”
-Representative Joseph Hayne Rainey, the first Black American elected to the United States House of Representatives (not a member of the Slave Party Confederates)

Back to the dummy.

“President LBJ said with the start of the welfare state he’d have ni%%^s voting for democrats for 50 years.”

quotes from liberal democrat heroes lbj

Yep.

The idiot I’m fisking says he’ll believe Thump is a Conservative…

…but for some reason, can’t believe a known racist and apparent member of the Ku Klux Klan (https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32129399.pdf), could say such a thing.

Quite frankly, its no secret:  the Democratic Slave Party Confederacy of the United States of America is an organization made by White Supremacists, for White Supremacists, and have been the source of the vast majority of racism in the country, ever since.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/345274/progressive-racism-paul-rahe

If you don’t know this, you’re either incredibly ignorant, or really stupid.  If you do know this, and you’re denying it, you’re both stupid, and, more than likely, just as racist as any Slave Party Confederate.

It’s all there, if you look.

I am VIRUS-X, REPUBLIC COMMANDO, and I approve this message.  If you’re offended by this, GOOD.

great-seal-of-virus-x

The Big Switch

•October 30, 2017 • 1 Comment

trigger warning

So.  Once again, I’m forced to confront the liberal talking point about the Slave Party and the (NS)GOP [Not So Grand Ol’ Party] having some sort of switch.  According to this pathetic urban legend, at some undisclosed point in the past, the parties basically switched, so the Slave Party of today (the Democrats) is – in the Bizarro World reality of liberals – the Republican Party of yesteryear.  Yeah, quite obviously the product of a special kind of stupid, appreciated only by liberals, and other leftist undesirables.

bizarro

(Believe it, or not, liberals would vote for this guy, too.)

No liberal will ever put a date on this so-called “party shift”.  And it’s funny, considering one of the arguments they use to fuel this is Rrepublican racism.  Looking back on political racism, though, it makes this argument really hard not to laugh at.

Let’s take a look at Exhibit ARobert “Sheets” Byrd of the Slave Party.

byrd meme

He only went back home to Hell in 2010.  That’s just 7 years back, at this point in time.  The Slave Party called him the “Conscience of the Senate”.

Reporting from Washington — Robert Carlyle Byrd, the West Virginia Democrat who was often called the conscience of the Senate for his devotion to the system of constitutional checks and balances and the prerogatives of power, died early Monday. He was 92.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun/29/local/la-me-byrd-20100628

But there was more about him, than just that.

“We talk about race too much…”

Working as a butcher in the early 1940s, a young Robert Byrd formed a new chapter of the Ku Klux Klan in Sophia, West Virginia.

In his 2005 book, Robert C. Byrd: Child of the Appalachian Coalfields, Byrd recalled how his ability to quickly recruit 150 of his friends to the group impressed a top Klan official who told him, “You have a talent for leadership, Bob … The country needs young men like you in the leadership of the nation.” Byrd later recalled, “Suddenly lights flashed in my mind! Someone important had recognized my abilities!” Byrd led the growing chapter and was eventually elected Exalted Cyclops of the local Klan unit.

https://www.thoughtco.com/robert-byrd-kkk-4147055

Yeah, this guy not only was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, but started his own chapter, where there previously was not one.  In any event, what else did this non-racist say, or do?

In a 1944 letter to segregationist Mississippi Senator Theodore G. Bilbo, Byrd wrote, “I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”

As late as 1946, Byrd wrote to the Klan’s Grand Wizard stating, “The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation.”

https://www.thoughtco.com/robert-byrd-kkk-4147055

Oh, and by the way, with his statement of not wanting to serve next to Black people, he was too much of a punk to do so, anyway, and never joined the armed forces.  He only quit the Klan, because he went into politics.  Of course that meant the Slave Party made sure he got onto the Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veteran Affairs,  as well as put him on the Committee on Armed Services.  In any event, he got into politics on the backs of dirtbags, like himself, back in 1950.  So, did the switch take place between 1950 and 2010?  I’ll bet liberals won’t answer that one.  They haven’t, yet, so they probably won’t start, now.  And, as I seem to recall, Slave Party people came up with the stupid saying:

“I’d vote for a yellow dog, if he ran on the Democratic ticket!” 

And, I do believe that when Byrd finally made his flight to the fires of Hell, he was still a member of the Slave Party.  Correct me, if I’m wrong.

burning-in-hell

Then, let’s look at J. William Fullbrightsegregationist and arch racist.

Fulbright racist

He was one of them thar Dixiecrats.  Now, you liberals who love to lie about things and twist words like to pretend these are Conservatives and/or Rrepublicans.  They’re not.  They’re Slave Party scumbags (like yourselves).

 

Dixiecrat was the informal term for Southern Democrats who in 1948 refused to support President Harry S. Truman for reelection because he was too liberal on racial issues. The official name was the States Rights Party. They formed a third party that nominated South Carolina Governor Strom Thurmond, who carried four states in the Deep South where he was the official nominee of the Democratic party, gaining 39 electoral votes. Thurmond had 1.2 million popular votes, or 2.4% of the national total. The party did not nominate any other candidates at any level, and dissolved after Truman won the election. The Dixiecrats went back to the Democrats, where they came into increasingly more conflict with the liberal sections of the party, and eventually abandoned the Democratic Party for the Republican Party after the presidency of Lyndon Johnson.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Dixiecrat

However, there is a flaw, even in that description, which I will address, later in.

Hmmm.  Liberal scumbags of the Slave Party crying about “states rights”.  Where have I heard that, before?

“Resolved, That congress has no power, under the constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states, and that such states are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts by abolitionists or others, made to induce congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people, and endanger the stability and permanency of the union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend to our political institutions.”  –1840 Democratic Party Platform
May 6, 1840

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29572

Racist southern Ddemocrats claimed that kidnapping, torture, maiming, rape and murder were all issues of states rights, when done to Black people, or anyone else they deemed inferior to themselves.

slave ship meme 1

In any event, back to Little Willy.  Little Willy Fullbright was a signatory of one of the most racist documents the Slave Party has produced in the modern day (and I count 1956 as being modern), considering many people born then are still very much alive), called the Southern Manifesto:

TRANSCRIPT

The unwarranted decision of the Supreme Court in the public school cases is now bearing the fruit always produced when men substitute naked power for established law.

The Founding Fathers gave us a Constitution of checks and balances because they realized the inescapable lesson of history that no man or group of men can be safely entrusted with unlimited power. They framed this Constitution with its provisions for change by amendment in order to secure the fundamentals of government against the dangers of temporary popular passion or the personal predilections of public officeholders. 

We regard the decision of the Supreme Court in the school cases as clear abuse of judicial power. It climaxes a trend in the Federal judiciary undertaking to legislate, in derogation of the authority of Congress, and to encroach upon the reserved rights of the states and the people. 

The original Constitutional does not mention education. Neither does the Fourteenth Amendment nor any other amendment. The debates preceding the submission of the Fourteenth Amendment clearly show that there was no intent that it should affect the systems of education maintained by the states. 

The very Congress which proposed the amendment subsequently provided for segregated schools in the District of Columbia. 

When the amendment was adopted in 1868, there were thirty-seven states of the Union. Every one of the twenty-six states that had any substantial racial differences among its people either approved the operation of segregated schools already in existence or subsequently established such schools by action of the same law-making body which considered the Fourteenth Amendment. 

As admitted by the Supreme Court in the public school case (Brown v. Board of Education), the doctrine of separate but equal schools “apparently originated in Roberts v. City of Boston (1849), upholding school segregation against attack as being violative of a state constitutional guarantee of equality.” This constitutional doctrine began in the North-not in the South-and it was followed not only in Massachusetts but in Connecticut, New York, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania and other northern states until they, exercising their rights as states through the constitutional processes of local self-government, changed their school systems. 

In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 the Supreme Court expressly declared that under the Fourteenth Amendment no person was denied any of his rights if the states provided separate but equal public facilities. This decision has been followed in many other cases. It is notable that the Supreme Court, speaking through Chief Justice Taft, a former President of the United States, unanimously declared in 1927 in Lum v. Rice that the “separate but equal” principle is “* * * within the discretion of the state in regulating its public schools and does not conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment.” 

This interpretation, restated time and again, became a part of the life of the people of many of the states and confirmed their habits, customs, traditions and way of life. It is founded on elemental humanity and common sense, for parents should not be deprived by Government of the right to direct the lives and education of their own children. 

Though there has been no constitutional amendment or act of Congress changing this established legal principle almost a century old, the Supreme Court of the United States, with no legal basis for such action, undertook to exercise their naked judicial power and substituted their personal political and social ideas for the established law of the land. 

This unwarranted exercise of power by the court, contrary to the Constitution, is creating chaos and confusion in the states principally affected. It is destroying the amicable relations between the white and Negro races that have been created through ninety years of patient effort by the good people of both races. It has planted hatred and suspicion where there has been heretofore friendship and understanding. 

Without regard to the consent of the governed, outside agitators are threatening immediate and revolutionary changes in our public school systems. If done, this is certain to destroy the system of public education in some of the states. 

With the gravest concern for the explosive and dangerous condition created by this decision and inflamed by outside meddlers. 

We reaffirm our reliance on the Constitution as the fundamental law of the land. 

We decry the Supreme Court’s encroachments on rights reserved to the states and to the people, contrary to established law and to the Constitution. 

We commend the motives of those states which have declared the intention to resist forced integration by any lawful means. 

We appeal to the states and people who are not directly affected by these decisions to consider the constitutional principles involved against the time when they too, on issues vital to them, may be the victims of judicial encroachment. 

Even though we constitute a minority in the present congress, we have full faith that a majority of the American people believe in the dual system of government which has enabled us to achieve our greatness and will in time demand that the reserved rights of the states and of the people be made secure against judicial usurpation. 

We pledge ourselves to use all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision which is contrary to the Constitution and to prevent the use of force in its implementation. 

In this trying period, as we all seek to right this wrong, we appeal to our people not to be provoked by the agitators and troublemakers invading our states and to scrupulously refrain from disorder and lawless acts. 

https://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/sources_document2.html

thats-racist

Yep.  Them thar nigras be gettin’ too many rights, an’ them dangled court-types be a-helpin’ them, too.  Yes, you Slave Party monkeys, this was written by members of your party.  Now, in addressing the spurious “party switch”, let’s look at the signatories of this anti-American document:

Signed by: 

Members of the United States Senate: 

Alabama-John Sparkman and Lister Hill. 

Arkansas-J. W. Fulbright and John L. McClellan. 

Florida-George A. Smathers and Spessard L. Holland. 

Georgia-Walter F. George and Richard B. Russell. 

Louisiana-Allen J. Ellender and Russell B. Lono. 

Mississippi-John Stennis and James O. Eastland. 

North Carolina-Sam J. Ervin Jr. and W. Kerr Scott. 

South Carolina-Strom Thurmon and Olin D. Johnston. 

Texas-Price Daniel. 

Virginia-Harry F. Bird and A. Willis Robertson. 

Members of the United States House of Representatives: 

Alabama-Frank J. Boykin, George M. Grant, George M. Andrews, Kenneth R. Roberts, Albert Rains, Armistead I. Selden Jr., Carl Elliott, Robert E. Jones and George Huddleston Jr. 

Arkansas-E. C. Gathings, Wilbur D. Mills, James W. Trimble, Oren Harris, Brooks Hays, F. W. Norrell. 

Florida-Charles E. Bennett Robert L. Sikes, A. S. Her Jr., Paul G. Rogers, James A. Haley, D. R. Matthews. 

Georgia-Prince H. Preston, John L. Pilcher, E. L. Forrester, John James Flint Jr., James C. Davis, Carl Vinson, Henderson Lanham, Iris F. Blitch, Phil M. Landrum, Paul Brown. 

Louisiana-F. Edward Hebert, Hale Boggs, Edwin E. Willis, Overton Brooks, Otto E. Passman, James H. Morrison, T. Ashton Thompson, George S. Long. 

Mississippi-Thomas G. Abernethy, Jamie L. Whitten, Frank E. Smith, John Bell Williams, Arthur Winsted, William M. Colmer. 

North Carolina-Herbert C. Bonner, L. H. Fountain, Graham A. Barden, Carl T. Durham, F. Ertel Carlyle, Hugh Q. Alexander, Woodrow W. Jones, George A. Shuford. 

South Carolina-L. Mendel Rivers, John J. Riley, W. J. Bryan Dorn, Robert T. Ashmore, James P. Richards, John L. McMillan. 

Tennessee-James B. Frazier Jr., Tom Murray, Jere Cooper, Clifford Davis. 

Texas-Wright Patman, John Dowdy, Walter Rogers, O. C. Fisher. 

Virginia-Edward J. Robeson Jr., Porter Hardy Jr., J. Vaughan Gary, Watkins M. Abbitt, William M. Tuck, Richard H. Poff, Burr P. Harrison, Howard W. Smith, W. Pat Jennings, Joel T. Brothill. 

Now, to be fair, a couple of Rrepublicans signed off on this, too, but they were VERY much a minority in their political party, unlike the Ddemocrats, who were very much a MAJORITY.

Hmmm.  Remember this?:

The Dixiecrats went back to the Democrats, where they came into increasingly more conflict with the liberal sections of the party, and eventually abandoned the Democratic Party for the Republican Party after the presidency of Lyndon Johnson.

Now, look above, at the aforementioned list of racist scallywags.  Tell me:  how many of those people died as members of the Slave Party, and how many of those people made their way into the dark unknown as members of the (NS)GOP?

I’ll tell you.

ONE.  Strom Thurmon, of South Carolina.

Yep.

That’s it.

scooby laughing

Not much of a “party switch”, is it?  Remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964?  It was opposed by Slave Party politicians that launched what was literally the longest filibuster in Senate history.

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/CivilRightsAct1964.htm

Robert “Sheets” Byrd was the ringleader of this 80+ day blabberfest, as the Slave Party tried DESPERATELY to stop Blacks from getting their due Civil Rights.  And guess who else was involved:

The Southern Manifesto declared the signatories’ opposition to the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education and their commitment to segregation forever. Fulbright was also among those who filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That filibuster continued for 83 days.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420321/whitewashing-democratic-partys-history-mona-charen

So, looking at this example, too, there was no crossover.

Hey, let’s look at LBJ.

quotes from liberal democrat heroes lbj

Hey, didn’t federal sources confirm this guy was in the Ku Klux Klan, too?:

lbj kkk membership

Shocker.

In any event, let’s look at him.

Hmmm.  Sounds racist to me, and what political party was he in?  Oh, yeah.  The Slave Party.  When he made his pilgrimage to Hell, what political party was he leaving after a lifetime of loyalty to their un-American causes?  Oh, yeah.  The Slave Party, again.

OK, let’s try leftist icon JFK.  Oh, wait a minute.  SENATOR Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act, as proposed by (REPUBLICAN) President Eisenhower.

Imagine that.

There’s example, after example, right back to Slave Party president Woodrow Wilson, who re-segregated the federal government, was a vociferous defender of his BFFs in the Ku Klux Klan and famously said:

“The white men of the South were aroused by the mere instinct of self-preservation to rid themselves, by fair means or foul, of the intolerable burden of governments sustained by the votes of ignorant negroes and conducted in the interest of adventurers.”

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/11/20/9766896/woodrow-wilson-racist

And:

“The Policy of the congressional leaders wrought…a veritable overthrow of civilization in the South.…in their determination to “put the white South under the heel of the black South.”

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/11/20/9766896/woodrow-wilson-racist

Oh, and here’s another gem:

“Negro rule under unscrupulous adventurers had been finally put an end to in the South, and the natural, inevitable ascendancy of the whites, the responsible class, established.” In a 1881 article that went unpublished, Wilson defended the South’s suppression of black voters, saying that they were being denied the vote not because their skin was dark but because their minds were dark.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/11/20/9766896/woodrow-wilson-racist

He was a member of the Slave Party, and died a member of the Slave Party.  Never crossed over.  In fact, with the exception of Strom Thurmon, I’m not seeing any crossover, or “party switch”.

Oh, and before we go, let’s touch a little on the Clintons.  With all the racism of Fulbright, the Clintons were his ACOLYTES.  They attended all sorts of fuctions with him, participated in his foundation, etc.  They supported him, and never once mentioned what kind of guy he really was.  Oh, and what did Slick Willy the Rapist have to say about Ku Klux Klan man, Robert “Sheets” Byrd?:

So, Clinton’s justifications include a “fleeting” association with the Klue Klux Klan (because the Rhodes Scholar is too stupid to say the name right), being a country boy, and needing votes.  He claims he spent “…the rest of his life making it up…”.  Does that include starting a filibuster against civil rights legislation, I wonder?

In any event, to be fair, yes, there are racist Rrepublicans.  If you really want to see a crossover, it’s not there, but there is somewhat of a migration.  There definitely were some people that were liberals (the stock of the Slave Party loyalists) that may’ve found the (NS)GOP policies would be better for their bottom lines, and those of their friends.  Hence, they joined the (NS)GOP, but remained as liberal, and as racist, as they ever were.  Some also, I’m sure, joined for the purpose of “fighting the system, from the inside”.  However, that, in now way, shows a “party switch”, because there’s certainly no evidence of the opposite happening, where a lot of non-liberals migrated to the Slave Party, because they were on a similar mission of getting something they wanted by furthering the cause of the Slave Party, or trying to fight them within their own ranks.  Didn’t happen.  If it did, show me.

There’s your history lesson, and Reality Wake Up Call.

This whole “party switch” myth is just that:  leftist mythology.  It’s designed to smear people they don’t like, for having the audacity to disagree with them on sociopolitical matters, and espouse something they don’t like, or approve.  It’s nothing but a smokescreen to project their own terrible, racist history onto other people, because they they’re afraid their own past will come back and deservedly bite them in their collective ass, like it should.

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

great-seal-of-virus-x