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.




23 million people WILL DIE because of cuts to healthcare…. But not where you think.

These days the play-book on the subject healthcare from the left seems to consist of screaming that people will die no matter what is proposed. Their ‘solution’ is some version of national socialized healthcare, but shouldn’t we look at it’s failure elsewhere BEFORE imposing it on the states?

Word has it that 23 million people will DIE because of cuts to healthcare. But this isn’t taking place in the states, no this is occurring in a bastion of national socialized healthcare with the NHS. From the BBC

A&E cuts will hit 23m people, British Medical Association says
Nearly 23 million people in England – more than 40% of the population – could be affected by proposed cuts to A&E departments, doctors are warning.
Under the so-called “sustainability and transformation programme” (STP), England has been divided into 44 areas and each asked to come up with its own proposals.

After analysing local plans, the BMA found:
▪ 18 of them, covering a population of 22.9 million, involved the closing or downgrading of an A&E department
▪ 14 of them, responsible for 17.6 million patients, propose closing or merging a hospital
▪13 of them, covering a population of 14.7 million, have put forward closing hospital beds
‘Deep-seated problems’

But NHS England rejected the criticism. It argues changes will only take place when there is a viable plan to improve care elsewhere whether through centralising care at a nearby hospital or extending community services, such as with longer GP opening.

Now, according the low standard of discourse set by the socialist left in the states, 40% of the population in the UK WILL DIE!

According to the left, the only solution is national socialized healthcare [Or as Elizabeth Warren terms it: a ‘national single-payer plan.’] So shouldn’t we take a very long and hard look at that concept borne of socialism and examine it’s failure around the world in disparate places such as Venezuela and the UK?

As with every other socialist programme, the nation’s left is long on promises and short on results. We are seeing the same take place in the UK, and yet we are supposed to ignore these facts.

10 charts that show why the NHS is in trouble

Remember how the Left promised ‘free healthcare’ and later on how Obamacare was supposed to lower premiums? And each time the situation gets worse and worse and the left’s only solution is more of the same but with even more grandiose and expensive government. Shouldn’t we finally listen to the saying that ‘Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

Senator Mike Lee: Why not give people a choice and let the superior economic concepts win the day?

Senator Mike Lee penned a superb editorial on the proposed BCRA. And it has one of the best ideas yet on the bureaucratic monstrosity known as Obamacare: Give people a choice in the matter. With this proposal the so-called ‘Liberals’ and those on the Left with their socialist national agenda can show if they are truly ‘pro-choice’. They can either show themselves to letting the people have the power of choice or they can illustrate that they are the party of economic slavery (Socialism)

Senator Mike Lee penned a superb editorial on the proposed BCRA. And it has one of the best ideas yet on the bureaucratic monstrosity known as Obamacare: Give people a choice in the matter. With this proposal the so-called ‘Liberals’ and those on the Left with their socialist national agenda can show if they are truly ‘pro-choice’. They can either show themselves to letting the people have the power of choice or they can illustrate that they are the party of economic slavery (Socialism)

In the editorial penned by Senator Mike Lee on the Republican proposal to shore up the collapsing Obamacare healthcare bureaucracy he proposes giving the people a choice in the matter:

And so, for all my frustrations about the process and my disagreements with the substance of BCRA, I would still be willing to vote for it if it allowed states and/or individuals to opt-out of the Obamacare system free-and-clear to experiment with different forms of insurance, benefits packages, and care provision options. Liberal states might try single-payer systems, while conservatives might emphasize health savings accounts. Some people embrace association health plans or so-called “medishare” ministry models. My guess is different approaches will work for different people in different places — like everything else in life.

Forget about the fact that this Repeal In Name Only’ will only serve to eviscerate the Republican party’s raison d’état in every election from 2010 on forward and will hand over this issue to the nation’s socialist left on a golden platter. Obamacare’s further collapse of will redound negatively to the GOP with this ‘change’ to the system. Set aside for a moment that a system that supposedly would lower costs and has done quite the opposite and Trump’s positive words for a socialist single payer system that is diametrically opposite to Conservative principles of limited, constitutional government.

Instead, let us look at the implications of Senator Mike Lee’s proposed modification to that measure. In essence, he wants to have a competition in the marketplace of ideas with regard to health care. We can once again prove the superiority of economic freedom [The free market] versus Economic slavery [Socialism] with Mike Lee’s proposal for the health care bill. If the socialist’s think that their system is better, let them prove it in the context of competition with the free-market.

Granted there are some faction’s of the socialist left that have the pretense of abhorring big government control of the means of production. Presumably they should also vehemently oppose Obamacare.

The nation’s socialist left has certain ideas on how a society should function while we on the right have vastly different ideas. The left advocates for ideas of economic slavery that are at least 500 years old and have yet work – word play with definitions aside. The Conservative – Right advocates for economic freedom. Some of the nation’s socialist left use the dodge that it really wasn’t their ideology in past authoritarian regimes such as the USSR because they failed to have ‘worker co-ops’ or some other amorphous  conceptions. Well, one of the ideas currently being foisted are healthcare co-opts, so our comrades on the left can put their ideological money where their months are and support this choice along with all the others.

So why not let the marketplace decide once again, which set of ideas are superior?

Shouldn’t the social Left welcome this chance to show the world that their ideology is superior and the best in fostering the cause of ‘progress’. The Left has a choice in this regard – they can let the free-market illustrate that their way is superior or they can illustrate that their ideology cannot stand up to the advantages of economic freedom.


Stop the Obamacare Insanity: Pass the 2015 healthcare bill.

The fallout of the AHCA crash and burn has seen some talk of moving left, but do they realise this the reason for failure in the first place? Leftist ideology is the underlying issue of Obamacare and anything short of repeal will a worst case scenario with the GOP being blamed for leaving this fiscal and social affliction in place. Repeal is the only sane choice at this point at this point in time.

Back when the Democrats forced Obamacare on the nation it should have been obvious that this was merely a stepping stone to national Socialized medicine. The Left made it clear in their words and deeds that they wanted socialist single payer, and the collapse of that dysfunctional monstrosity will push the nation further left with the added advantage for them that they can now blame it on Conservatives.

Over the weekend there were some who spoke of working with the nation’s socialist Left in solving the problem they caused in the first place. The main issue of the AHCA was that it in essence already took up the underlying assumptions and ideology of the Left and the reason it failed to garner any support.

At this point in time we only have three stark choices:

1) Leave the fiscal monstrosity of Obamacare in place in the vain hope that when it implodes as planned we can achieve a soft landing in the midst of chaos. This is predicated on the questionable belief that our side will have sufficient political capital at a later time to repeat the current process and avoid the left forcing socialist single party upon the nation.

2) Knuckle under to the nation’s socialist left and cut a deal that will see the same result as option number #1.

3) Take the legislation that was already agree upon and get it passed. It was reported this weekend from Andrea Ruth at Redstate that A Replica of the Successful 2015 Obamacare Repeal Is Languishing in Committee.

The trend of an impending Obamacare failure has been clear and admitted to by Trump and others. And it should be equally obvious that the inevitable result of options 1 & 2 will be the imposition of single payer on the nation at the behest of those who ostensibly oppose socialist schemes such as that. It is axiomatic that one’s political capital is at it’s maximum in the beginning of a term and diminishes over time, therefore it is imperative that this is accomplished now rather than later.

What could be worse for the GOP and Trump than to put in place national socialized medicine? Not only would they be eviscerating the solemn promises they made over 7 years, but it would see the imposition of something even more appalling than Obamacare.

Repealing Obamacare was the raison d’état for the GOP the last 7 years. This is why we voted for them and the reason they are in power today. To put it bluntly, if they cannot accomplish this task why on God’s green earth did we ever support those people? And why should we even consider supporting them ever again?

There is ONLY one choice: Pass the 2015 healthcare bill.