Cheap lives & Cheap Virtue: Help the Leftists show they are completely vulnerable to crime.

What better way for everyone to come together than helping them show they are disarmed, keeping the rest of us safe and secure.

Many have seen the video of a Virginia congressional Democratic candidate creating herself a sweet sawed-off AR-15 [resulting in a visit from the ATF ] with nothing more than a Workmate, angle grinder, and her husband’s $1000 firearm.
Problem is, not everyone has the means to show their character (or lack
thereof), destroying a vital piece of safety equipment in a useless
gesture of virtue signaling. This isn’t the same as eating cheap, easy
to get Tide pods, these are expensive firearms that take a lot of effort
to acquire.

Leftists could destroy other crucial security items to show their
desire to be incapable of helping themselves. Instead of obliterating
safety items such as guns, they could wreck fire extinguishers or shred
first aid kits. But still, this might not be enough to demonstrate their
vicissitudes of virtuous victimhood. After all, doing anything to prove
their impotence would be contrary to the effort.

We on the Conservatarian, Pro-Liberty side can help the Leftists demonstrate their virtue in dependency.

This is where we on the Pro-Liberty side of the aisle can step in to help them out. We can offer the means for their ‘virtual’ salvation in showing their gun-free status, being unable to defend themselves.

There is no real reason that the virtuous Leftist need to go through
the cost or effort to buy a gun just to destroy it for demonstrating
they are helpless. Publicly announcing this fact will have a have the
same effect for very little cost – in terms of money for at least the
moment – medical bills or funeral expenses from being a crime victim
could be another story.

This is where we tell them: “Here’s your sign”

Rather than helping themselves, Leftists can publicly proclaim they cannot.
We can give them a sign announcing their gun free status as
defenseless, each will be sized to suit the circumstances in which it
will be displayed. For the domiciles of these potential crime victims a
two-faced sign of the 3 by 8-meter variety so every miscreant in the
area knows who to target. The back-end of a Prius would need to sport a
small but still prominent disarmed declaration – some carjackers may be
suffering from bad eyesight. No need to discriminate against those folks
after all. A Gun-free button would serve the same function on a
personal level. Of course, many a school, church or other
establishment have been already proudly displaying their status as a
‘Gun-free’ zone, so they are way ahead of us in this effort.

A win-win-win for everybody.

Leftists could show the illegal element who to victimize. We on the Conservatarian, Pro-Liberty side can be secure from these reprobates.
While the ‘job’ of the criminals would be that much easier knowing who
cannot defend themselves. This should be something everyone can support
especially the potential virtuous victims of the nation’s Socialist

Originally published on the NOQ Report



Help spread the hysteria: Create the next scary weather term and win the accolades of the climate cult.

It used to be that wintertime was cold and summertime was hot. Then
the climate cult decided that using words and phrases that made sense
failed to galvanize people to fear ‘global cooling’ or ‘global warming
and donate cash to Al Gore. Mundane terms like winter storm or even
‘nor’easter’ didn’t garner any notice so phrases such as ‘Polar Vortex’
or ‘Bomb cyclone’ had to be conjured up to grab attention.

Consider these reports about a recent winter storm:

[Washington Post]
First, a monster ocean storm is taking shape, which pasted parts of
Florida, Georgia and South Carolina with rare ice and snow early
Wednesday. By Thursday, the exploding storm will, in many ways, resemble
a winter hurricane, battering easternmost New England with potentially
damaging winds in addition to blinding snow. Blizzard warnings have been
issued for the Virginia Tidewater region up the coast to eastern Maine,
including Ocean City, Atlantic City, eastern Long Island, Boston and

[Boston Herald]The
powerful nor’easter barreling up the coast will “explode” tomorrow into
bombogenesis — a cyclone of snow that could dump a foot on Greater
Boston, meteorologists warn.

This used to be called ‘winter’ and people expected it to be cold and snowy, just like the summer was hot and humid.
But alas, those everyday terms don’t scare anyone and worse yet they
can’t get people to give up their liberty and purchase climate
indulgences. Problem is, even labeling something an ‘exploding’ ‘monster ocean storm’ of the ‘bombogenesis’ variety and calling it a ‘cyclone of snow’ will only terrify people for a limited amount of time.

This is where we can help the climate cult terrorize a new
generation, surrender their freedom and donate to them. Because if
anything can stop a monstrous bomb cyclone exploding on the scene, it
would be cold hard cash to pay Al Gore’s power bill.

So, how does one create a new scary weather term? Good question! Glad we asked it.

Well, first, it has to have some sort of word signifying an immense and sudden power impulse – such as ‘Bomb, exploding, etc.’
Of course, it must have something implying atmospheric turbulence and
chaos brought on by climate change. Throw in an extra word denoting the
Arctic region and look out for the grant avalanche.

So we will have three columns of the various terms to be combined to see which sound the scariest.

Column 1






Blow up




Hydrogen bomb






Column 2








Column 3












We can also just coin new words combining terms for tropical weather for arctic maelstroms.

Blizzard + Hurricane Blizzarcane

Arctic + Tornado Arcnado

So have at. Who knows, by next year people could be running scared with new creations we created here!


Originally published on the NOQ Report

New Years Resolutions

Well, it’s about that time when people start thinking about new years resolutions, such as to resolving to Smile More and Complain less…

So, in that spirit …

For the President: Please stop getting into petty fights with leftists on twitter.

Mr. President, Twitter can be a double edged sword at times – a way
to be instantly in touch with constituents, and a way to get off track
in petty battles over irrelevant subjects. You need to show some
restraint in picking your battles and perhaps have another pair of eyes
to be sure of what is being disseminated. You have a powerful weapon of
mass communication in social media. However, you need to be mindful that
the backlash from inadvertent slip-ups can be devastating.

For the Conservative-Right: Resolve to stop complimenting Leftists with the term ‘Liberal’.

We all know that it’s hard to kick a bad habit and easy to confuse the terms ‘Leftist’ and ‘Liberal’.
Nevertheless, we must be mindful that these terms signify two entirely
different and antithetical concepts.  Besides that, Leftists love the
deception having their authoritarian designs labelled as “Liberalism’.

Leftists are advocates of Collective rights – Socialism, Marxism, etc. while Liberals [from the same root word as Liberty] are by definition, advocates of individual rights and freedoms. At it’s core, Socialism is the subjugation of the individual to the collective and anathema to personal freedom and Liberty. Liberal implies a support of liberty, but if they advocate the economic slavery of socialism, that isn’t the case.

There is a silent split taking place in the formally unified Leftist sphere. Search on YouTube for “Leaving the Left” and you will see there is a whole series of videos on ‘Leaving the Left’ , including one from Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report ‘The Left is No Longer Liberal.’

So, how does one distinguish between the two?

If someone advocates for the collective rights of socialism, they are
Leftist. If someone advocates for individual liberty and free trade,
they are Liberal. [‘Classic Liberal’ in the vernacular – perhaps it is time to reclaim the original word…]

For the Socialist-Left: Resolve to give up on Gun Confiscation.

We are all well aware that this is your obsession and the lynch pin
in depriving the people of their Liberty. Never the less, you people
should realise that it’s just not going to happen.

We also know that you are working tirelessly day and night to chip
away at out common sense civil rights. Everything from incremental steps
like Intergalactic Background Checks and registration to ‘hail Mary’ attempts with the banning of undefined ‘assault weapons’.

This is why we resist (how’s that for a word) your efforts to use every ‘serious crisis’ and falsely pretend gun are unregulated and need something – anything – to clamp down on those who are innocent.

And for everyone else: Resolve to go back to the logical colours for two political sides – Red for the Socialist-Left and Blue for the Conservative-Right.

For years the common held designation had the Left as Red and the Right as Blue,
then back during the year 2000 election some folks decided to turn
things upside down. Well, now is the time to change them back to their
rational form. Even the New York Times has acknowledged this with it’s “Red Century” series, and this would just be common sense to all involved.


When Republicans Were Blue and Democrats Were Red
not everyone liked the shift. Republican operative Clark Bensen wrotean analysis in 2004 titled “RED STATE BLUES: Did I Miss That Memo?” “There are two general reasons why blue for Republican and Red for Democrat make the most sense: connotation and practice,” Bensen wrote. “First, there has been a generally understood meaning to the two colors inasmuch as they relate to politics. That is, the cooler color blue more closely represented the rational thinker and cold-hearted and the
hotter red more closely represented the passionate and hot-blooded. This would translate into blue for Republicans and red for Democrats. Put another way, red was also the color most associated with socialism and the party of the Democrats was clearly the more socialistic of the two major parties.

“The second reason why blue for Republicans makes sense is that
traditional political mapmakers have used blue for the modern-day
Republicans, and the Federalists before that, throughout the 20th
century. Perhaps this was a holdover from the days of the Civil War when
the predominantly Republican North was ‘Blue’.”

Originally published on the NOQ Report


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.

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.

Friday Night Fights: Liberty Vs. Tyranny [Capitalism Vs. Socialism]

“We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others, the same word many mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name- liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names – liberty and tyranny.”
Abraham Lincoln
Source:April 18, 1864 – Address at Sanitary Fair, Baltimore, Maryland

We present two videos that will helpfully explain Economic Freedom (Capitalism) and Economic Slavery (Socialism)

PragerU!: Why You Love Capitalism

Do you use an iPhone? Watch Netflix? Listen to Spotify? Then you love capitalism and can’t stand big government. How do we know? Jared Meyer of the Foundation for Government Accountability explains.
Donate today to PragerU!

What Is Socialism?


Y2K And Why The Marxist Scheme Of The State Withering Away Is History’s Most Cynical Bait And Switch.

According to Marxist theory, after a glorious worker’s revolution or evolution will come the establishment of a ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ and the state will supposedly ‘wither away’. In other words, groups of people will magically give up the power they wield over other people. Then the world will be witness to a new classless Utopian society with skittle farting unicorns happily prancing about. Of course, this never happens and astoundingly enough, Marxists and Socialists the world over use this little ‘feature’ as proof that true socialism has yet to be tried.

As they say, this is a feature and not a bug of the Marxist programme. They use it to take in new generations who think they’ve discovered the perfect political system and a way to get free goodies for no effort. This while having the ideal method to excuse failure and a reason why it will work the next time around.


To hear the socialists tell it, the Socialist regimes of it’s storied past weren’t really socialist. This is because things are supposed to be run by the people as a group and instead was run by a group of people, which isn’t the same thing according to them. Marxian theory held that socialism meant that the people as a group run the economy, but if a group of people run the economy that isn’t socialism. It was perfectly fine if a collection of people ran the show, but not if done by a collection of people.

Governments are merely groups of people in charge, and their owning and controlling the means of production was perfectly acceptable. But it wasn’t acceptable if a group of people governmentally owned and controlled the means of production. A system was Socialist only if the people owned and controlled the means of production instead of the people owning and controlling the means of production.

Supposedly a “Worker’s Paradise” will be born after the state ‘withers away’ because of there is one constant in the universe, it’s that people wielding great power over others will always want to give it away as quickly as possible. Yes, bureaucrats are often eager to rid themselves of their cushy positions and pay because they eschew having power and using other people’s money for their benefit.

So why does the title refer to the term‘Y2K’? For most readers under the age of 20, that reference will be meaningless. In short Y2K stood for potential computer errors that were to occur in the year 2000. Because early systems used only two digits to signify the year with the assumption that the first portion will always be ‘19’ for the previous century. This was supposed to be the imminent danger of the day. Without knowing the proper year computer systems would supposedly go haywire and launch nuclear weapons, cats and dogs would live together and mass hysteria would rein free or something.

Of course, nothing happened and the world kept on a spinning. This is being brought up because bureaucratic rules tasked with fixing this issue were only recently eliminated, 17 years after the fact. This small example is a prime illustration why ‘the state withering away’ is worse than it being a bizarre fantasy, it is a cynical scheme to sucker many into buying into an ideology than only serves to enslave rather than liberate.

Groups of people wielding power over others never willingly give it up, the historic record is quite clear on that point. But that doesn’t dissuade Marxists and Socialists from using this cynical scam to sucker new acolytes while excusing the repetitive failure of their base ideology.