Disqus - Latest Comments for Nietrick

Re: 2009 or 2011: Which Stimulus is it?

Nietrick — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:18:12 -0000

*nodding* I am aware of it. These were the folks that got prohibition passed. If I'm not mistaken, Hillary has roots in that ideology. As a libertarian I am also well aware that the social con thrust of the current GOP happened in large part back in the early 80s when Democrats crossed over for Reagan.

The left/right paradigm is false.

And to answer your question about hating Keynesian economics if by some miracle this latest stimulus ( should it pass) works, yes. I would still feel exactly the same way because I'm more of an idealogue than a pragmatist. I don't believe in doing wrong even if the results are good. That's how you lose your soul. It's how America ended up down the rat hole it's in. The ends do not justify the means.

Re: The national Ponzi scheme

Nietrick — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:41:30 -0000

I'm sorry the links I provided weren't up to your standards. I happen to disagree with your assessment of the Cato Institute as lefty. They've always seemed very much libertarian to me. The RLC is likewise libertarian, but I won't quibble about their obvious love for Ron Paul. I was only posting those links because they addressed issues, with sources, that I think are worthy of examination.

As far as Perry once being Democrat as was Reagan, I'd like to once again point out that Reagan never legislated as one. As one of the new links I'm providing - although at this point I'm sure I'm wasting my time - points out Rick was a conservative Democrat. Fine. He's fiscally conservative. But he was also willing to tow the party line for his career and when his career path as a Dem was blocked then, and only then, did he switch parties. THIS is my issue with his past.

Rick Perry is all too willing to throw freedom out the window when freedom gets in the way of what he wants. Gardisil, Eminent Domain, abortion, prayer......I'm sorry. I don't care how good his fiscal policy is, he has shown time and again that he is an opportunist who will throw the government hammer down to enforce his beliefs. We already have one of those, I'd prefer not to elect another.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs...

http://www.texastribune.org...

Re: Obama’s speech reveals new brilliant idea: more spending!

Nietrick — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:15:56 -0000

That, my friend, is an excellent question. I'll bet that the RNC won't say boo about it, though, because both Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal are ineligible in the exact same way Barack is, parents who weren't citizens at the time of their son's births.The GOP won't risk their rising stars.

That every single person in the government allowed this to happen just says to me that the elite will always have each other's back first and there isn't a damn bit of difference between the GOP and the DNC when it comes to protecting our freedoms. The citizenry needs to wake up and realize this and come to terms with the fact that we're going to have to gird our loins and fight hard if we want those freedoms back.

Re: The national Ponzi scheme

Nietrick — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:47:53 -0000

You hit the nail on the head, Frank. While I have other issues with the second group that may prevent me from supporting them, there is most certainly a line between them and Team Jesus.

This is the same reason I've stopped listening to Glenn Beck. There's a certain amount of religion you have to put up with but when you lead with that shit.....sorry. You start trading socialism in the name of government for socialism in the name of God.

Some days I feel like the last spark of the Enlightenment is sputtering.

Re: The national Ponzi scheme

Nietrick — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:39:14 -0000

The way the system it set up, in only the most technical of ways, you are a burden. This isn't to say you haven't worked hard and paid in your social security taxes, but you paid for your parents, or someone else's safety net. My generation is paying for you, at an ever increasing percentage per person, as the above points out. We will never see a penny of that money. I would have far less issue with socical security if the money you worked hard all your life to put into the system was waiting for you to collect it. It's not.

Social programs pit people against each other for their very livelihood in digusting ways. The government becomes insurance adjuster. You work until you can't to pay for your comrades and when you're not useful anymore.....well....those death panels are there for a reason.

You shouldn't take the raging against the machine personally, Ralph. It's the government and socialism that people are angry with. I think that point has to be made very clear if we are to avoid the division that is becoming all too common. Hell, if we don't make clear the line between being angry with socialism and it's victims/beneficiaries we will end up like Europe.

Re: Obama’s speech reveals new brilliant idea: more spending!

Nietrick — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:27:53 -0000

I came up out of my chair. I agree it was the most important part of the speech and I wish more people were talking it about. I think it was engineered to be missed coming as it did during the implied children poisoning and whatnot portion of the speech. This man is a tyrant who has designs on being dictator. I am greatful for his campaigning because it scatters his focus.

Re: The national Ponzi scheme

Nietrick — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 16:51:28 -0000

I agree with you about Perry being against free thinkers. IMO, he's a big government guy and of the deplorably bad GOP pack, he's near the top for worst in my book. I don't buy into the idea that anyone would be better than Obama. I think we are in a very precarious situation right now, not totally unlike what's been happening in the ME in that in your zeal to rid yourself of one tyrant you have to be cautious don't put another in it's place.

I don't think we are better off putting a big government Republican in, no matter how bad Obama is. The best outcome there is gridlock with lots of spin showing how bad the Republican is which sets up for an even more dangerous liberal to win the next election. The GOP seems to have shirked it's duty to being the opposition and the upholder of freedom. I will not support a slower suicide.

Re: Obama’s speech reveals new brilliant idea: more spending!

Nietrick — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 16:36:14 -0000

I wish I had the exact quote, but did anyone else hear when he was talking about the creation of Medicare and Social Security and actually said that it wouldn have gotten done if we would have been bogged down by some strict notion of what government can or cannot do? Hello, Obama, that's called the US CONSTITUTION and you took an damned oath to uphold it. Those " notions" are the law of the land and the chains that are supposed to bind would be tyrants from becoming actual ones. Obviously we've had an epic fail there.

I don't know what's worse, that The Big Zero actually admitted to America, before a joint session of Congress, no less, that the Constitution was his to violate or that no one has called him on it.

Re: ‘Belligerent, combative – but no threat’

Nietrick — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:47:37 -0000

I am dubious that Barack Obama has any true loyalty to anyone but himself. I think this man is about power, and while it's obvious that he's siding with terrorists everywhere he can, it may well not be out of any real allegience to Islam per se, but rather he sees it as the best way to destroy America so that he can rebuild it in his own image. Simply put, he's using them for his own, separate, ends.

He's playing with fire, to be sure. I'm fairly certain that the powers that be in Al Qaeda aren't as stupid as King Barak think they are and they clearly see him for the power mad snake he is and are perfectly willing to let him lead the symphony of destruction. He's making their job easier, too. Obama, and most liberals, in fact, are too stupid and arrogant to see that even an ass kissing, America hating, non Muslim is just another infidel that needs to die.

I think we're walking a very fine line between doing everything necessary to kill dangerous Islam, and protecting our freedoms. In the middle east, they hide behind babies to make Israel the bad guy for shooting. Here, they hide behind our civil liberties for the same effect.

Re: ‘Belligerent, combative – but no threat’

Nietrick — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:24:45 -0000

I am in NO WAY saying I think Islam is anything other than dangerous barbarism. However, watching this whole thing unfold has left me with an unsettling thought. What if this wasn't simple PC baffoonery? What if Hassan ( and others) have been allowed to run free simply to justify a severe crackdown on Muslims in this country? While non Muslims cheer as they ' finally do something', the government would start imprisoning the law abiding Muslims and violating civil rights setting a precendent ( and possibly writting laws) to make it a cake walk to do the same to the rest of us. Jews were the excuse that Hitler used while average Germans cheered.

To be clear, I am in no way equating the Jewish faith with Islam. I am not saying that Islam isn't a hateful, dangerous philosophy or that I believe any of the PC nonsense that has left us vulnerable to a terrifying threat. I don't allow this administration any benefit of the doubt, however, and history has shown the best way to herd people into tyranny is to whip them into a frenzy at the "other". Obama has thus far been scarily similar to Hitler in too many ways for me to let ANYTHING pass unexamined.

Re: A note to our readers

Nietrick — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 02:17:19 -0000

Glenn Beck has, on serveral occasions, actually said that you have to get on your knees before a god or you aren't a good American. As long as religious nutcases are the voice of dissent, we're only putting a bandage on a severed artery. We might be able to hold Obamunism off, but we may well get a theocracy in it's place.

Still, Beck has the passion that is lacking among the so called " leaders" of the conservative movement. Kudos to him for leading the charge against Van Jones. Maybe his passion will ignite the revolutionary fires in those with the intellectual power to really lead us out of the pit.

Re: 1. About us

Nietrick — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:59:11 -0000

Does anyone else feel like they're entering into some Faustian deal by having to side with religious (nuts) erm, conservatives because they're the ones fighting Obamunism? I'm sick of going to Tea Parties and being all revved up during the talk about the Constitution but angry, sick, and ready to leave when they start in about needing to pray and how we all need to get on our knees or we're not conservatives. The Founders were all good Christians my ass.

Anyhoo....I totally *heart* this site and Jillian is my new hero, just below Thomas Jefferson and Ayn Rand.