Does Planned Parenthood really want to see the destruction of the Right to Privacy with Intergalactic Background Checks?

 The right to privacy is the cornerstone of the primary business
model of Planned Parenthood. But what would happen to it with the push
for controls over everyone’s possessions?
Now that national Socialist-Left has come out of the authoritarian
closet with it’s ongoing obsession with gun confiscation along with
other attacks against the Bill of Rights. Perhaps some it’s more
virulent segments should take pause in going after that which are the
underpinnings of it’s very existence. We’re referring to none other than
Planned Parenthood. This is an organisation predicated on the “Right to Privacy” in the supreme court case justifying their existence.

Attacks against one Human Right weaken them all.

So, what will happen to said right in the Left’s zeal to destroy the
civil and human rights codified in the Constitution? Can one take away
the foundation of a house and still expect it to remain standing? What
should be of particular concern would be the demand for government
control over everyone’s private property with Intergalactic Background Checks.

What happens when the government acquires new controls over Liberty?

The same pattern of a government overreaching newly acquired power
has been repeatedly seen in history. What could start with control on
everyone’s Liberty with checks on the 2nd amendment could easily
metastasize into other areas of property.

For if the government power to dictate that one must have
it’s permission to buy or sell private property, what is to stop them
from controlling the circumstances of that property?
Perhaps extra taxes could be heaped on those possessions. The Democrats have already proposed an up to 50 percent tax on guns, ammo to fund research, safety programs  What’s to stop them from imposing property taxes on those firearms?

The Takeaway

The bottom line is that as soon as the government has control over private property through the expedient of ‘enhanced’ ‘universal’ or ‘Intergalactic’
background checks that will mean the end of any vestiges of privacy
with that property. While such draconian controls won’t directly impact
Planned Parenthood, the inevitable destruction of privacy will take it’s
toll on that which undergirds their primary business model. That should be a concern of anyone invested in the cause of Liberty.

 Originally published on the NOQ Report



300 Million Payer [“Single” Payer] Not going to happen!

One must confess to manifesting a certain level of melancholy over recent events with regard to the health care issue as exemplified by some writings. But a clear minded assessment of the overall situation is warranted and that should be reason to be optimistic.

Consider how Obamacare came to make it’s mark on the left’s continual history of failure. It came to be out of an extraordinary sequence of events beginning with the 2008 economic meltdown and election sweep of Obama and the DNC. As is typical the nation’s Socialist Left, it took full advantage of a “Serious Crisis” to make what they hoped would be permanent changes to the country’s psyche. In pushing the healthcare issue they at first hoped to have a ‘public option’, but that went nowhere and they had to settle for what they hoped would be a precursor of failure in Obamacare. Even in the midst of the extraordinary election where they took control of all of the levers of government, they still failed to ram this part of their agenda through and impose it on the nation.

The failure of socialized healthcare in the people’s republic of California.

Recently cooler heads prevailed in turning back the tide towards national socialist health care in California of all places. A “single payer” system was proposed and then rejected when those imbued with some measure of intelligence. They realised that funding a program of gargantuan proportions would have been impossible. Adoption of this kind of disaster would have considered, by the Left to be a watershed moment in their socialist national movement. But the conclusion can be reached as to how can it be said that the nation is moving towards socialized healthcare if it even failed to gain traction there?

We don’t have the money.

This should be painfully obvious to everyone – but we simply do not have the money provide as yet another unlimited entitlement designed to redistribute wealth. The nation is Trillions in debt with every other vote buying boondoggle the left has foisted upon the people, we cannot afford any more.

While socialists have the immoral belief that they have a right to someone else’s property, such theft rarely can sustain itself over the long run. People will inevitably refuse to have this take place and the system will fall apart – as it has over the past few centuries. Thus were the left to manage to force 300 Million payer on the people, it will inevitably implode leaving everyone without health care.

The ignominious failure of National Socialist healthcare elsewhere.

Supposedly national socialized healthcare will fix all of our problems. Well, the question becomes how did that work out in the UK with the National Healthcare Service? How are the people bearing up in the “Worker’s Paradise” of Venezuela. Yes, one can hear the vehement denunciations now – But that’s different!

The nation’s Socialists should know their time has come and gone. After centuries of failure, it should be painfully evident that it’s Ideas that harken back 500 years are unworkable, especially in the field of healthcare. Then they play the “That wasn’t Real socialism game” with endless rewrites of the labels and definitions used for that parasitic ideology. The same goes for national socialist health care [Or it’s big lie equivalent ‘Single-payer’]

There is no reason to repeat the insanity.

So when Obamacare inevitably implodes, what should be the proper course of action? Would it be to compound the mistake made many times over. Or would it be to do something else? Something that WORKS!

It would be sheer insanity to do the same over again when Obamacare inevitably implodes.

Leftists pretend to have a corner on the market when it comes to compassion. They like to characterise themselves as favouring equality and fairness. But how compassionate is it to force a system of the people that will see the forcible theft of their property, rationing, death panels and healthcare reminiscent of the VA or Venezuela
No, the best course of action would be to head back to liberty and leave the parasite politics of socialistic force behind and renew the cause of liberty and liberal principles [The real Liberal principles, not the fake principles of liberal fascism]

Whether this is done by those in the GOP with some back bone or a new party to replace the GOP as the defenders of liberty, it will not matter. The nation’s socialist left course of action in an assured dead end, so it’s time to turn around.

Socialists Against Socialism

The national Socialist Left’s ongoing efforts to absolve themselves of their parasitic ideology’s past crimes against humanities has created many a contradiction to the point that they should seemingly be against their own agenda.

It would seem like we dreadfully misjudged the socialists over the many centuries they’ve been around. According to at least some socialist factions, they are against big government socialism.

Now, perhaps this is just another way of claiming failed socialist regimes of the past weren’t actually socialist, but that denial of reality places them in quite the quandary. For if they truly are against past government control of the economy, then it would stand to reason that they should be against the same in the future.

In other words, they can either be against big government or be absolved of socialism crimes against humanity….. BUT NOT BOTH. Consider this graphic from our comrades of the Official Socialist Party of Great Britain [SPGB]:

Instead of a group of government people owning and controlling the means of production, they want a group of people owning and controlling the means of production… or something.

Or Consider this video: Socialism in 5 Minutes

From Socialism Explained

Partial transcript:

“So what is socialism if we’re doing like the dictionary definition its defined as a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production distribution is exchanged be able to regulate it by the community as a whole”
But wait you may think doesn’t that mean Big Brother government comes in well short answer NO, long answer NO
Bonus round here’s what socialism is not libraries, public health care free tuition these are not socialism

Luminaries of the Left such as R.D. Wolf have made it abundantly clear that true socialism can only be when the people own and control the means of production, but not when those people are a government..

If you are a true masochist, there is this video: Socialism For Dummies.

Contrast these obfuscations with the partial Merriam Webster dictionary definition of the term Socialism:

a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

Therefore, in trying to deny their blood-soaked past, socialists are advocating the exact opposite of what they profess. Hence the slogan: Socialists against Socialism.

It should also follow that said Socialists should be against the government take-over with National Socialized Healthcare.

So, this places the nation’s socialist in a severe dilemma – oppose the nationalization of ‘the means of production’, which would include Obamacare and single payer.

Or, be permanently affixed to the mass murderer and oppression of their collectivist brethren.

Either they use this ruse and work against national Socialized Healthcare and other socialist schemes….

…Or they have to admit that socialist regimes of the past were actually Socialist.
P.S. I must add the proviso that the websites of the Official Socialist Party of Great Britain [SPGB] could merely be a parody site with some of the items they’ve posted.

GOP: You have no other choice than to repeal Obamacare

Every other option is a trap you are setting for yourself.

1. The GOP will be responsible for what ever happens to healthcare from now on. The media will hammer this point day and night.
2. Without a repeal, the midterms will be a blood bath.
Anything short of what you promised for 7 years will see Republicans staying home. While midterms in this situation are usually bad, it will be compounded by leftists out for revenge and the right failing to see a reason to vote GOP without a repeal.

3. When RINOcare inevitably collapses as intended and with the loss of Congress the Left will take this as grand opportunity to force national socialist healthcare upon the people as the only alternative.

Therefore, you have no other choice than to at least repeal Obamacare and set the country on a path towards free-market reforms. These will work far better than the left’s ultimate goal of national socialized healthcare and economic slavery.

It should be clear to those with even the hardest mindset that repeal of Obamacare is the only choice. It was solemnly promised by the party for 7 long years. It should also be clear that it was only meant to fail and be a precursor to national socialized healthcare. The voters were told time and time again that the party needed all three branches of the government under control, and they delivered. Now is the time for the GOP to fulfill it’s end of the bargain.

There will be no reason to support the party any longer if it cannot accomplish this one task set before it. If you cannot fulfill this promise it will signal the end of the party and the birth of another.

#CharlieGard and the danger of national Socialized Medicine

In many ways one has to marvel at how events tend to play out. Just as we in the states are to decide the fate of national Socialized Medicine the case of Charlie Gard across the Atlantic has cropped up illustrating it’s extreme danger to humanity at large. We are at a crossroads where we can reject the vestiges of Socialism and hopefully see it fade into the deeps of history or we can give it a lifeline that will have far reaching implications for the future of the nation.

“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” George Santayana

For various reasons we don’t usually directly comment on current events. However, the case of Charlie Gard warrants an exception to that precept since time is critical in two major respects. The child referenced is under a literal death sentence from the cause of national Socialized Medicine. Meanwhile, we in the states are on the brink of a decision to throw a lifeline to Obamacare implosion or scrap it and start over.

Recently The Glen Beck program had a great discussion on the dangerous ramifications of the Charlie Gard caseUK Death Panel Rules Baby Should ‘Die With Dignity,’ History Teaches Brutal Lesson of What Comes Next

Believe it or not, this isn’t the first time in history this issue has come up — and the first time, things didn’t go well at all.

“If you can’t justify yourself, if you can’t say, I will, I will produce more than I eat, you’re just a useless eater, and that hurts all of Germany,” Glenn said on radio Wednesday.

“Baby Knauer was the first baby and the first victim of the Holocaust. It started with compassion. It started exactly the way it’s starting now in the West, in England. And if we don’t know history on this particular case, we will be destined to repeat it.”

No doubt the nation’s Socialist left will have conniptions over the comparison of that actions one Socialist Worker’s party with the actions of another of a similar ideology. Never the less, it does bear witness to how the degradation of life can lead to serious consequences. And it raises the very important question of why anyone would care to implement such a system. However, the Media doesn’t even want to address the issue, much less consider it’s long term implications.

And before the Left’s loses it’s collective mind over the temerity of comparing historical events, let us replay the actual words of one George Bernard Shaw: Justify Your Existence:


His First Life Ministry
From The soviet story. [Documentary footage]. Brussels, Belgium. Snore, E. (Author/director). (2008).

It’s is only logical that when one’s opposition is desirous of certain acts, one should avoid that action since they will not have one’s best interests at heart. Such is the case with the Slate article: The Right Is Turning the Charlie Gard Tragedy into a Case Against Single-Payer Health Care. It’s the Opposite.

Sidenote: The national Socialist media’s usual tactic is to construct it’s headline as a one line editorial for those who don’t read the attached article. As is also typical, the article spends a great deal of time discussing the case and condemning the Right for daring to bring up this glaring example of the danger of their socialist national agenda while neglecting the point raised in the headline. It’s only towards the end of the piece and long after the point that most people would read that the author tries to make the rather weak pleading mentioned way up in the headline that everyone would have read.

She bases her assertions on the dubious contention that “Trumpcare Will Probably Kill Thousands Each Year, And it is neither alarmist nor uncivil to say so.” [Another Slate article – is everyone detecting the trend here?] Oddly enough, neither piece mentioned the cuts to the National Health Service that will have an adverse effect on 23 Million people – this with the left’s ideal of a national socialist health care system.

Hysterics aside, the essential contention is that better one child die than thousands. Well, this is not a foregone conclusion by any means – hence the ’Probably’ in the headline of the Slate piece. That the left is warning us off this issue should be a red flag that this is their Achilles’ heel in the matter. Besides, shouldn’t everyone keep that George Santayana quote in mind? [And it is neither alarmist nor uncivil to say so. – to borrow a phrase]

The fact is, government run health care systems are imploding everywhere with skyrocketing costs and severely reduced care. And the question becomes, what will happen to the people when these systems inevitably collapse? How many people will die when Obamacare or the National Health Service implodes? Shouldn’t we take these hard questions into account instead of the hysterical polemics of the national socialist left?

It would be far better to see the Charlie Gard case as warning to us all and make the correct choice in the healthcare debate. Just as it would be to take into account what truly works in the real world outside the echo chamber of the Left. Merely prolonging the legacy of Obamacare will only usher in a far worse alternative – national socialized medicine – an alternative that is a disaster in the making.

#Socialists Against Big Government Part III

In the first two parts of this series of essays we eviscerated the leftist fallacy that a collective [Group] of people somehow isn’t a government when they decree it to be so. It was also pointed out it that it would be impossible to implement their socialist national agenda without the intervention of a governmental body and that these rarely if ever dissipate themselves.
Part III will take the leftists at their word [A dubious proposition to be sure] and explore its policy implications in the left’s socialist national agenda.

As we determined in part I, the futile attempt by the nation’s socialist left to deceive and absolve themselves of the blood soaked history of their base ideology can be easily eviscerated with a logical analysis of the phraseology they utilised in this endeavour.

To reprise the point: ‘The people collectively’ in the phrase ‘The people collectively and directly own the means of production’. Equates to a ‘group of people’ as in the definition of ‘government’.
Thus, the logical “progression”: The people collectively = Group of people = Government.

Therefore, the equivalent phrase is ‘The [Government] directly own(s) the means of production’, so once again socialism has been proven to be socialism despite the protestations of the nation’s Left.

Part II Demonstrated that this ideological deception is also an impossibility within the confines of the Left’s socialist national agenda.

But let us take them at their word and examine what they should be advocating to further demolish this ideological deception of theirs. Moreover, this won’t even touch on the point that there have been socialist societies that fall within the realm the left’s definitional deceptions that have also failed.

Logically extending this to the left’s national agenda, examine the words of the ‘FAQ’ of the Socialist Party of Great Britain(SPGB), part of the World Socialist Movement (WSM):

Isn’t socialism what they had in Russia, or in China or Cuba, or in Sweden?
No. Socialism, as understood by the World Socialist Movement, was never established in any country. A short definition of what we understand to be socialism: a system of society based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of society as a whole.

If there are wages and salaries, it is not socialism.
State ownership is not socialism.
Social programs are not socialism.
Socialism means democracy at all levels of society, including the workplace.
Socialism means a wageless, moneyless society.
Socialism means voluntary labour.
Socialism means free access to the goods produced by society.

With this understanding of socialism, the Socialist Party of Great Britain noted in its journal, the Socialist Standard (August 1918, page 87), that the supposedly “Marxist” Russian Revolution of November 1917 was not socialist.

[Our emphasis on the item about Social programs are not socialism.]

This is straight from the source as it were. We should note the proviso that this could very well be some sort of parody site given it’s contradictions, but these policy positions have also been reflected in other sources.

As previously discussed, this alleged disconnection to the current set of socialists can only exist within a thin veneer of credibility. The mere examination of their words exposes that they are merely talking about government owning or regulating the means of production.

Nevertheless, were one to take them at their word they should be against any form of nationalization of any industry or system. Since they supposedly do not want the government to own the means of production. In particular, they should be against national socialized medicine in the form of Obamacare and single payer. Theoretically, they should be against confiscatory taxation since this administered and expended by government (However, this is contradicted by their redistribute the wealth mantra).

The current set of socialists has no admonitions in this regard. Thus this whole edifice of ideological deception comes crashing down. For the nation’s socialist left cannot advocate the nationalization of industry in the present tense without showing that this is exactly what their ideological brethren of the past has done.

They have a choice in the matter. They can either dispense with the fiction that socialists of the past weren’t socialists. Or dispense with most, if not all of their policy agenda.

Our guess is that they will do neither and still issue their ideological lies while contradicting them at every turn with what they continue to advocate.




Remy: People Will Die!

Remy channels his inner Elizabeth Warren to vilify the other side.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
Like us on Facebook:…
Follow us on Twitter:
Subscribe to our podcast at iTunes:

Reason is the planet’s leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to for a point of view you won’t get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.