Killing babies to fight inflation? Memo exposes sinister origins of Democrat ideology

October 24, 2022

Photo by Daniel Dan on Unsplash

CEO/Founder

The polls are not looking too hot for Democrats lately. Even AOC got heckled recently — in her own district. Dr. Oz is gaining on Fetterman. Kari Lake is pulling away from Katie Hobbs. Herschel Walker is neck and neck with Warnock.

Even the New York Times conceded on October 17 that the GOP is steadily making serious gains.

And maybe one of the funniest things in all of politics and the mainstream media is that almost none of them can figure out why. They’re seriously dumbfounded.

But I think a lot of us that don’t live among the coastal elites can actually empathize with their political confusion. We are likewise confused, but not on why the Left is so unpopular right now. We’re confused over what they actually stand for. We’ve got no clue what they are fighting to achieve. Well, outside pure raw power. But the means by which they’re trying to achieve it makes no sense.

For one, there's the buzzword “EQUALITY.” We already have equal opportunity. Whether it be race, gender, sexual orientation — those fights have already been fought and won.

I saw a TikTok the other day of a liberal teacher bragging that she passes out pride flags every day to all of her students. She said she was doing it so that “every day is a Pride Parade.” Umm … why? What is this a stand against? What rights do those in the LGBTQ community not have?

Why is there a left-wing cult for climate change?

Why is there another left-wing cult that really wants to make sure people can kill babies with no restrictions?

It almost sounds as if today’s Democrat figureheads don’t even know the why for all the things they’re so outraged over. Almost as if they were handed some talking points from the 1960s and are trying to pretend we still live in the civil rights era. Now, I want you to think about that, and then listen to this interview of Stacey Abrams recently on MSNBC:

Stacey Abrams says unrestricted abortion-on-demand can help solve inflation: "Having children is why you’re worried about your price for gas. It’s why you’re concerned about how much food costs." pic.twitter.com/5CDEAKMDwN
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) October 19, 2022

Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but never in all my years did I ever think I’d hear a major American political party declare the answer to inflation would be to kill your kids. Maybe that’s just me.

Stacey Abrams is clearly an idiot, but I think I kind of get where the stupidity originates from. I don’t think she or any of the other up-and-coming Democrats today truly believes any of the crap they’re spewing. They’re using it all to try to gain power. They’re sowing hatred and rage, but they have no clue where all of this came from. They’re just skimming the talking points that have been handed down to them over the past 50 years or so. But do they actually understand any of it? I don’t think so. And how could they? As I pointed out before, these are fights that have already been fought. These are fights that other people, in many cases, have already won.

And maybe the greatest example of this is Stacey’s wacked-out statement on abortion and inflation. If you Google the words “abortion” and “inflation” together in the same search, you might possibly stumble upon a Planned Parenthood memo from 1969.

The memo was authored by a Planned Parenthood vice president regarding “Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the United States.”

You see, long before the cult of climate change, progressives were all on board the cult of population control. American eugenicists were respected by progressives and tyrants all over the world, and Planned Parenthood was ground zero for the entire movement.

This memo not only reads like a script from a horror movie, but it reveals what leftists truly stand for — whether they remember or know about the origins or not. I’m going to highlight quotes directly from the memo. This first part is directly from the first page:

This memorandum is responsive to your letter of January 24, seeking ideas on necessary and useful activities relevant to formation of population policy, defined as "legislative measures, administrative programs, and other governmental actions that are designed to alter population trends ...”

So right off the bat it makes you wonder. Was the abortion movement truly concerned with women’s rights? Or was it really all about a post-apocalyptic strategy to control population?

It appears they believed that American families were to blame … but not all families were always the focus of proponents of population control. Take a look at exactly which families they wanted to control the sizes of. They looked to:

justify an explicit U.S. policy now of encouraging a specific universal limit on family size (as distinguished from proposals aimed selectively at welfare recipients and racial groups).

Minorities and the poor. Supposedly the people the Left claims to care about, right? Kind of makes you wonder about LBJ’s true motivations behind his War on Poverty, doesn’t it? It makes you wonder why the REAL effects of the ensuing massive welfare state ended up making people poorer and breaking up families. Interesting coincidence.

The memo goes on to mention that a mass wave of contraceptive handouts was the preferred method. But I find this part interesting:

effective contraception is efficiently distributed to all who want it and abortion is available on demand as a backup measure.

Abortion on demand wasn’t even the main plan. It was the BACKUP. But I thought it was all about women’s rights?

Now, here’s where we get to Stacey Abrams’ weird comment about inflation and abortion. This memo actually references inflation:

as a concomitant of full employment and thus, to accept relatively high (or not least preventable) unemployment levels as necessary. Yet, more women enter the labor market under conditions of full employment and the relationship between employment of women and lower fertility seems well established. An examination is needed of, in effect, the question: How much inflation could or should we risk to achieve lower fertility?

Aaaand a lot to unpack there ...

For one, they wanted women in the workforce — not for equal opportunity, but because employed women tended not to have as many babies. But they thought all those women getting jobs might spike inflation. So it was something they figured they’d have to measure. The party of virtue!

The memo also came with an attachment that listed other measures proposed by population control experts. It was never said that any of these were actual plans by Planned Parenthood. But check out some of these “proposed measures”:

“Restructure family: postpone or avoid marriage, and alter the image of ideal family size.”
“Compulsory education of children.”
“Encourage increased homosexuality.”
“Educate for family limitation.”
“Fertility control agents in the water supply.”
“Encourage women to work.”

These are just a few, and it gets nuttier and nuttier. Again, there’s nothing to suggest Planned Parenthood had any plans to do any of this, but it shows the lengths population control academics were willing to go to. Fertility control agents in the water supply?! Are you kidding?

How many current Democratic flag-bearing issues can you spot just in this memo?

“Compulsory education of children”: How many of us have wondered why they’re pushing so hard on our kids lately? Why are they ramming sexually explicit Comprehensive Sexuality Education into our schools?

“Encourage increased homosexuality”: What is the LGBTQ lobby still fighting over? Didn’t it already win? Why are people hyper-sexualizing kids and exposing them to drag queens in schools and libraries?

“Educate for family limitation”: Who has wondered why they are shouting to “destroy the nuclear family”?

“Encourage women to work”: Isn’t workplace gender discrimination illegal? So what’s that fight really all about?

And regarding the “education” they keep referencing for both kids and families, check out this quote from the full memo:

In this area it seems particularly important to distinguish between education and indoctrination. Whatever may be the merits and effectiveness of a truly educational effort, an indoctrination campaign may well have only negligible effects on fertility values, but may provide unintended support in building a public opinion which seeks legalized compulsory fertility control for selected groups (particularly welfare recipients).

The admission here is insane. Indoctrination — they admit — has its bonuses ... especially for imposing "fertility control" on poor people.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep