We've updated our Terms of Use. You can review the changes here.

"One For The Gipper" (NRR90)

by Deterge

supported by
𝙅𝙤𝙚 𝙎𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙡𝙡
𝙅𝙤𝙚 𝙎𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙡𝙡 thumbnail
𝙅𝙤𝙚 𝙎𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙡𝙡 Demonically distorted Reagan speeches with polymorphous avant-garde noise background fucking hell yes. This shit sounds like soundscape from festering ultra-neofascist dystopian future experienced through some futuristic combination drug. Amazing and unique stuff! Favorite track: A3. Necessary Cost.
T. Aaron Brust
T. Aaron Brust thumbnail
T. Aaron Brust Monumental power electronics release. Opens with quiet menace before unleashing the aggression. EBT Sacrament shocks with the use of an actual melody, but everything circles back to dread and menace with Five Enemies. Laissez-Faire ‘18 is 20+ minutes of varied, evolving PE that straight up rips. I have been waiting for a record like this. No Rent Records is on a roll. This Deterge is a new American classic. Favorite track: A6. EBT Sacrament.
Revenues should be increased not by increasing the tax rates on the individual but by building a bigger economy for everybody. the problem is not the size of the deficit it's the size of government's claim on our economy. Government should confiscate from the "haves" and bestow upon the "have-nots" Beyond the requirements of a compassionate welfare program to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. Far. From. It. Our duty is to foster a strong, vibrant wealth-producing economy which operates in such a way that new additions to wealth accrue to those who presently have little or no ownership stake in their country. The mainspring of our own liberty has been the widespread ownership of property among our people and the expectation that anyone's child even from the humblest of families could grow up to own a business or corporation of their own. You can't invest a foodstamp.
Idle industries have cast workers into unemployment causing human misery and personal indignity. Those who do work are denied a fair return for their labor by a tax system which penalizes successful achievement and keeps us from maintaining full productivity. From time to time we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule that government by an elite group is superior to government FOR. BY. and OF the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? Dream of healthy, vigorous, growing economy that provides equal opportunity for all Americans with no barriers born of bigotry or discrimination. Putting America back to work means putting all Americans back to work. If we look to the answer as to why for so many years we achieved so much prospered as no other people on Earth it was because we unleashed the energy and individual genius of man to a greater extent than has ever been done before. Freedom and the dignity of the individual have been more available and assured here than in any other place on Earth. The price for this freedom at times has been high but we have never been unwilling to pay that price.
All of us need to be reminded that the Federal Government did not Create the States The States created the Federal Government We created you We own you
Government Is not a solution to our problem Government IS the problem. Government doesn't solve issues it subsidizes them. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases If it moves Tax it If it keeps moving Regulate it If it stops moving Subsidize it The problem is not that people are taxed too little The problem is that government spends too much
A government deity When God and Country becomes God IS Country Proposal for a one time handout Let's see what you can make of yourself Rather than what They can make for you
A free enterprise economy is not wealth and prosperity Concentrated in the hands of a few while a great majority owns little more than the shirts off their backs Widespread misery A privileged few control the nation's wealth Millions labor for a pittance Millions more desperate for want of employment What leader can you think of that is independent of the forces that have brought us our problems: Congress Bureaucracy Lobbyists Big Business Big Labor
Laissez-faire '18 We've never had it so good. I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend more than the government takes in. This idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man'srelation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves. You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down[up] man's oldold-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course. The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state. Or, Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 21st century. Former Senator Fullbright had said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He said he was "hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document." He must "be freed," so that he "can do for us" what he knows "is best." Another Sanator defined liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government. Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government"this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy. Under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights are so diluted that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes from the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a "more compatible use of the land. We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they're going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answerand they've had almost 30 years of itshouldn't we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing? But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. So now we declare "war on poverty," or "You, too, can be a Bobby Baker." Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add 1 billion dollars to the 45 billion we're spending, one more program to the 30-odd we haveand remember, this new program doesn't replace any, it just duplicates existing programsdo they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated. This is the youth feature. We're now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps [Civilian Conservation Corps], and we're going to put our young people in these camps. But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? A young woman who'd come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning 2000 dollars a month. She wanted a divorce to get an 650 dollar raise. She's eligible for 2700 dollars a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who'd already done that very thing. Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we're always "against" thingswe're never "for" anything. Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. Nowwe're for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we've accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem. But we're against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood. They've called it "insurance" to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified it was a welfare program. They only use the term "insurance" to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Social Security as of this moment will run a 75 year deficit. But they say there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble. And they're doing just that. I think we're for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we're against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world's population. I think we're against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in colonies in the satellite nations. I think we're for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we're against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So governments' programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth. Federal employees: federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation's work force employed by government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine. Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to theor the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment. Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two menthat we're to choose just between two personalities. Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answernot an easy answerbut simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right. We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind China & Big Tech, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peaceand you can have it in the next second--surrender. You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this beginjust in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it's a simple answer after all. You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." "There is a point beyond which they must not advance." Peace. Through. Strength. Peace through strength. You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness. You and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.


released October 18, 2018

Deterge is Jim Haras

"You will never understand my motives"


all rights reserved



No Rent Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

NO RENT is a family label releasing experimental music.

Many out of print no rent titles are available for free or pay what you want download here. In print titles are 7USD. Our intention is keeping high quality digital transfers available after physical releases sell out

Albums can be removed at artist request without explanation. Download. This is not permanent.
... more

contact / help

Contact No Rent

Streaming and
Download help

Shipping and returns

Redeem code

Report this album or account

If you like "One For The Gipper" (NRR90), you may also like: