Help support alternative media by visiting our Allies

Selkirk Mountain Real Estate

Is Michael Snyder Running Scared?

Michael didn’t seem to think he needed any more experience than what he has already, and he seemed determined to forge ahead regardless.

Is Michael Snyder Running Scared?

Is Michael Snyder Running Scared as he Steps up his Attacks on Fulcher?

by Bob “Nugie” Neugebauer

(Gem State Patriot) – In Typical Michael Snyder fashion, he is once again focusing on the only opponent that he has not been able to denigrate with his so-called Trumpesque rhetoric. Michael T. Snyder is a hopelessly deluded prepper who has started numerous blogs as a testament to his unfounded belief that the world is about to end.

He started his journey to prepper country in 2007 with his Economic Collapse Blog. He later moved on to two other blogs, End of the American Dream and The Most Important News. Michael says he is behind Trump and perhaps even believes he is a Trump clone in his own mind, but nothing could be further from the truth.

Trump is a man of vision—a person who wants to make America great again—not one who talks about the End of the American Dream or an Economic Collapse. Now that we have a President who has a vision for a great America, why would we send a representative from Idaho to Washington who talks about an economic collapse and the end of the American dream? Shouldn’t we be looking forward to prosperity and obtaining our dreams?

It doesn’t seem to faze Snyder that every one of his economic collapse predictions has been wrong, but then again, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I guess he wants everyone to be patient ’till one of his predictions comes true.

I took the time to speak with Michael and his campaign manager when they first started his run for Congress, and he certainly seemed a likable fellow, but in the past few months, it’s as if he has morphed into a piranha wanting to chew every one of his opponents up and spit them out.

As I told Michael during our interview, he should be talking about the issues and spending some time in state politics so he could get to know Idaho before attempting to drive straight to Washington D.C. to represent Idahoans in Congress. Being a congressman in Washington is much different than being a representative or senator in Idaho. Working in a state legislature is like your freshman and sophomore year of college, and if you don’t learn the basics, it’s kind of difficult to move to a higher level.

It takes different skill sets to do both and you don’t acquire them by reading books; you absorb them by spending time on the job. Michael didn’t seem to think he needed any more experience than what he has already, and he seemed determined to forge ahead regardless. Sometimes we are our own worst enemy, and I believe that is where Michael is currently.

Michael’s only solution to all of our problems is to abolish every department in the U.S. Government that he feels is unnecessary. We don’t necessarily disagree with him on that point, but this is not something that would happen just because we sent Michael to represent us in Congress. Michael seems to think he is a one-man army much like Alex Jones; the problem is that he has to deal with 434 other congressmen who may not agree with him on many of his issues, and I’m not so sure that he is going to be able to handle that conflict with due decorum. Let me put it this way, would you hire a builder to build your house if he had never built one before? That’s how I look at Michael—he has a lot of ideas but not a clue how (or the demeanor necessary) to accomplish them.

Yes, we should eliminate the Department of Education and the EPA and several others that waste our money and make dumb rules—we don’t disagree they need to go. The problem is convincing a majority in the House (to say nothing of the Senate) to go along with you. I’m not so sure Michael will be able to be convincing enough to change their minds with his non-existent experience in the political arena.

I’m not interested in hiring someone who would go to Washington with a fantasy about downsizing government but with no plan and no strong support behind him to get the job done. I would much prefer to have someone with experience, someone like Russ Fulcher. He will be able to convince his colleagues that his ideas are good and that they should join him in their quest to solve the problems of an out-of-control government with unnecessary agencies and departments that waste taxpayer money. Fulcher, with the help of several other senators, was the one responsible for giving Idahoans the largest ever tax cut with his bill to institute the grocery tax credit over Otters objections. That’s called negotiating with prospective and clout.

It is questionable if Michael Snyder would bring the right message to Washington for Idahoans when you look at the titles of some of his work. I’m sure that Michael believes everything he says but doesn’t say everything he means. I would suggest that if you intend to vote for him, you should engage in some real, in-depth research on his past history and writings. Doing so might well change your mind about what kind of a representative he would be for Idaho.

Remember, “We Get the Government We Deserve.”


Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here:

15 Comments on Is Michael Snyder Running Scared?

  1. You really should know your subject better before judging ideas and people. Michael Snyder is leaps and bounds ahead of your thinking, and his “ideas” are well founded.
    Better 10 years too early them 10 minutes too late is a motto more should live by. It is people like yourself, living in the matrix, delusional about the severity of the late hour, that will be dangerous to those of us that are prepared. There is a marked difference between someone prepared and someone who mocks the prepared. Except of course when the running scared, unprepared person wakes up and everything that made your delusional life comfortable is a distant memory. That’s when you will want what the prepared has. That’s when you will be desperate and capable of any heinous actions to get what you didn’t prepare for.
    Your caught in the muck of unreality spoon fed by the fake news. These people arn’t even true journalists! They read the teleprompter, written by the very people that are deceiving you and lulling you to sleep.
    Michael Snyder is a political scholar as well as Biblical scholar. Sorry you can’t glean some well studied knowledge from him. But you are a part of the dumbed down majority. When you wake up someday and America as you knew it is gone and you weren’t prepared and mocked those who were….well all I can say is good luck. Your head was in the sand and you missed the window of opportunity for you and your loved ones.

  2. The greatest patriot in office, Senator Rand Paul, just endorsed Michael Snyder for Congress. Keep on hating. It’s only going to backfire.

  3. Michael Snyder is obviously a threat to the RINO establishment as evidenced by all these ‘hit pieces’ against Snyder. I am surprised to see RN attacking the one true conservative, Snyder, in favor of establishment candidates who are obvious mainstream Republicans like Fulcher. Michael is an unashamed Christian and that probably scares those who claim to be Christians just to get the Christian vote. Me and my house have already voted for Snyder. I enjoyed Michael being interviewed by InfoWars and The Health Ranger Natural News. Snyder is the best candidate to represent The Redoubt. Vote Snyder without reservation.

  4. Bob “Nugie” Neugebauer has written a vacuous hit piece on Michael Snyder. It smacks of the worst sort of insider smear. It is highly reminiscent of what Ron Paul had thrown at him in 2008. Given Mr. Neugebaur’s banking background, and ties to the financial industry one begins to understand the basis for the attack. Michael Snyder is the one sounding the alarm bell on the frailty of our financial system and where exactly this will lead. Working within a broken system to maintain the status quo is going to lead to continued flawed outcomes and eventual disaster. Snyder’s outside the box thinking provides hope with real solutions. While I was initially impressed with the Gem State Patriot website I have noticed that you cannot comment there unless you have a Facebook account. Apparently Mr. Neugebaur thinks this is just fine. That speaks volumes. Vote for a true conservative, vote for Michael Snyder.

  5. What I am seeing here is an argument about “conservatives” (conservative values) and “liberals” (liberal “values”) when speaking of the upcoming AMERICAN elections. What I should be hearing instead of “party politics” is the US Constitution, constitutional values not conservative values – and no, they are not always in alignment.

    Here, in our constitutional republic, we are supposed to be standing for AMERICAN values, not party “values” which is bringing our nation down. Read the framers and forefathers on the matter of party politics, which they called “factions”. Then please, for America’s sake, retrain yourself out of party politics and being dumbed down, and start retraining yourself in American values. It is going to be difficult as most today do not even recognize an American value when it stands beside them.

    George Washington, Farewell Address, Sept. 17, 1796: “And of fatal tendency … to put, in the place of the delegated will of the Nation, the will of a party – often a small but artful and enterprising minority. … They are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

    Alexander Hamilton: “We are attempting, by this Constitution, to abolish factions, and to unite all parties for the general welfare.” (Debates in the Convention of the State of New York on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Tuesday, June 25, 1788. In: Henry Cabot Lodge, ed., The Works of Alexander Hamilton (Federal Edition), Vol. 2, New York, 1904, p. 57)

    Alexander Hamilton: “Nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has, at all times, characterized political parties.” (Federalist 1, October 27, 1787)

    John Adams: “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”

    Political parties were NOT given the “power” to select and decide candidates from which the American people are allowed to vote for. That is not constitutional or American at all. Not saying that political parties did not start early in our nation, they did. Why? So that they could most rally people around an issue. People banded together. But what has happened to our nation? WE use PARTY VALUES not CONSTITUTIONAL VALUES – and they are totally different. Each party wants a POWERFUL party, not powerful and free individuals with the freedom to go about their lives without all this regulation, etc.

    Do not look for “party values”, look for CONSTITUTIONAL VALUES or you too, are throwing our constitutional republic away. Start learning what a real free American election is run, how American candidates are selected and it is NOT by political parties vested in their own interests and power. WE, the American people, are NOT Democrats or Republicans, we are Americans; we have our own value system, and our legitimate government is the US Constitution PLUS every state Constitution. We are NOT ran LAWFULLY by a centralized government, but by two distinct governments with different powers… yeah, really.

    You will be surprised, and probably a bit afraid after being ruled unLawfully for decades, over 10 of them, but FREEDOM and INDEPENDENCE is a really good thing. This government run nation of ours is NOT legitimate. As Dr. Edwin Vieira puts it so well:
    “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides… The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights… The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.”

    Start being Americanized with these quotes…
    Daniel Webster: “We may be tossed upon an ocean where we can see no land – nor, perhaps, the sun or stars. But there is a chart and a compass for us to study, to consult, and to obey. That chart is the Constitution.”

    “On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

    John C. Calhoun’s 1831 “Fort Hill Address”: “The error is in the assumption that the General Government is a party to the constitutional compact. The States, as has been shown, formed the compact, acting as Sovereign and independent communities. The General Government is but its creature;”

    Daniel Webster: “Is the Constitution worth preserving?” He said, “Then guard it as you would the very seat of your life. Guard it not only against the open blows of violence but also against that spirit of change.”

    “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778 Plus “The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.”

    Patrick Henry, Virginia Convention, 1788: “You are not to inquire how your trade may be increased, nor how you are to become a great and powerful people, but how your liberties can be secured; for liberty ought to be the direct end of your government.” (as quoted by Thomas M. Moneure, Jr., in “Virginia’s Great Dissenters”, printed in the March, 1999, issue of American Guardian, pp 38-40)

    James Wilson: “I leave it to every gentleman to say whether the enumerated powers are not as ACCURATELY and MINUTELY DEFINED, as can be well done on the same subject, in the same language… nor does it, in any degree, go beyond the particular enumeration; for, when it is said that Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper, those words are LIMITED AND DEFINED BY THE FOLLOWING, “for carrying into execution the foregoing powers”, it is saying no more than that the powers we have already particularly given (enumerated), shall be effectually carried into execution.” (caps are mine)

    Gov. Samuel Johnston, North Carolina Ratifying Convention (U.S. Constitution 1788): “When Congress makes a law in virtue of their constitutional authority, it will be an actual law. I do not know a more expressive or a better way of representing the idea by words. Every law consistent with the Constitution will have been made in pursuance of the powers granted by it. Every usurpation or law repugnant to it cannot have been made in pursuance of its powers. The latter will be nugatory and void.”

    Archibald Maclaine said during North Carolina’s ratifying convention: “If Congress should make a law beyond the powers and the spirit of the Constitution, should we not say to Congress, ‘You have no authority to make this law. There are limits beyond which you cannot go. You cannot exceed the power prescribed by the Constitution. You are amenable to us for your conduct. This act is unconstitutional. We will disregard it, and punish you for the attempt.’”

    Thomas Jefferson: “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps… The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots….”

    George Washington: “It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. “

    John Quincy Adams: “America does NOT go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She well knows that by enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standards of freedom.” (caps mine)

    James Madison, drafter of the Constitution, 4th US President, about the budget in Fed 58: “The House of Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose, the supplies requisite for the support of the government…This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutatory measure.” also explains that one of the main reasons the House was vested with this important power was to reduce “the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of government” as the people may demand.

    Virginia Representative Alexander White to James Madison: “The Constitution, having authorized the House of Representatives alone to originate money bills, places an important trust in our hands, which, as their protectors, we ought not to part with. I do not mean to imply that the Senate are less to be trusted than this house; but the Constitution, no doubt for wise purposes, has given the immediate representatives of the people a control over the whole government in this particular, which, for their interest, they ought not let out of their hands.”
    Madison: “The principle reason why the Constitution had made this distinction was, because they (the House) were chosen by the people, and supposed to be the best acquainted with their interest and ability.”

    God Bless America and all Americans!

  6. I have read redoubt news for awhile thinking it was conservative. Wrong! The last two articles I read bash the most conservative candidate in the race. You should change your name to rhino news. Snyder and Herndon both know more about the Constitution than any of their opponents.

    • You sound like a liberal to me. If someone does not think 100% like you, you go on the attack, point fingers and spew hate. If you are the only one to define a conservative, you really should send out a memo.

      • Hi Shari. First, I appreciate the Redoubt News site because it brings a lot of stuff that the MSM won’t bring, and usually it is a biased on the side of a liberty slant, as opposed to biased on the side of Marxism/Communism slant like the MSM. This is most welcome during our times.
        As for this election cycle – you obviously have your picks, and thats fair – it is your site after all and your picks are far from liberal hacks (I hope in the long run). You are also pretty fair in allowing others to post comments like’s Josh’s (and mine).
        This being said – I do find that RN chosen choices in these two races aren’t the ones that are the most knowledgeable of the constitution or the one’s most outspoken in their Christian faith. In this respect – Scott and Michael both outshine their opponents. Are the others RINOs? Ms. Ahrens – I don’t know yet, and won’t really now unless she has an opportunity to vote. I do think, as I have stated elsewhere, that because she wouldn’t debate Scott Herndon, a member of her own party, it is highly debatable whether or not she will be able to stand up down there. With Russ Fulcher – he speaks a good game, and should he win, I hope he does well as a representative. I think he stank up Common Core, though – and he should have known better. CC will probably never go away in this state – and that is his legacy that he has to live with. He was surely warned it was garbage – but pushed it anyway. What else will he do that is not in Idaho’s best interest?
        Finally, it is possible that Josh has spewed hate elsewhere, but his comment up above isn’t hate. It is an opinion and his opinions on the candidates are probably shared with many. But, if those few lines above are hate – boy, are we in trouble as a society – even in a place like the Redoubt.

      • That’s not hate. He’s expressing his opinion.
        Snyder does know more about the constitution. He’s up front in his Christian values. We should support him.

    • Your an easily fooled person! Or your in on Schneider and Herndon especially are leftist infiltrators!! Herndon is from San Francisco, was a professor at Cal Berkeley and campaigns wearing birkenstocks and wreaking of pachuli oil!! Wake up idiot!!

    • Herndon listed one of his qualifications as “managing the fleet of vehicles for his family”. What is this, a jr. High project or running for state senate? I don’t care how many kids his wife had at home, or how he gets his kids our with signs protesting. All well and good, and within their rights, but shades of Westbrook Baptist Church comes to mind with Herndon.

  7. Russ Fulcher was the Republican Caucus Chair for years in the Senate. During those years he never once attempted to get rid of the grocery tax. It wasn’t until he heard strong conservatives speaking across the state about getting rid of it when he tried to run for governor that he picked up the torch and tried to get rid of the grocery tax. What about the prior 7 years in office? Russ is a super nice guy, put he’s a seat warmer with no backbone.

    • Russ Fulcher began in a stepwise process to eliminate the grocery tax. First, he helped to get us the grocery tax refund so at least we could get some relief. Then after that had been in place for a while, he began working on the next step, elimination of the grocery tax. Changes like this do not usually happen overnight, nor with one vote down in Boise. Big things like this, usually have to be corrected bit by bit or the establishment will fight it. You know this, Lynda, but are choosing to ignore that in your letter.

  8. Well, I believe I read somewhere that he is also an attorney or lawyer, so enough said right there, no?

Comments are closed.