Well let's see then what you propose:

First off not all republicans are republicans. Odd that they all vote exactly the same way, here and in congress.

These TV personalities that you mention are simply making a living by following a script--be they Bill Kristol or Bill O'Reilly. Such idiots as Rush Limbaugh are entertainers, as he says, but he uses the same old script also.

I never thought of the neo-cons as communists, however. Wow, that will get em! Sounds like that famous Senator of the fifties accusing everyone of being a communist who didn't agree with him.

No one that I know of agrees with you that there wasn't still sufficient regulations authorized to have stopped the banks and others from crippling our economy for years to come. Ponzi schemes have always been illegal.

Now as to your fear that we might cooperate with other countries and the U.N. when we can---maybe even have trade and negotiations with most of them, that may be true and useful.

Now, as to the overall politics of it, I think we are headed for an even larger voter block of Independents. These people find it useful to vote for some of each parties plans---not all one way.
The republicans and democrats are polarized to the point that it is necessary to have about one-third Independent voters.

No longer will the following fly or even be a tenable philosophy:

Control people by law as to religion (abortion).
Collect most all taxes from the masses.
Have 50 strong state governments who for the most part are superfluous. They require extreme help now from the central government, else they would collapse due to politics.
A Bible, a cross, and a lot of spouting off in every courthouse.
Stop welfare and allow individuals to help people as they see fit.
No universal health care--every man for himself.
Preach about politics in church.
Assume that the people of the world are out to get us.

beside the fact that you do not pay attention to details, you think that I made a proposal of some kind. I did not, however I did state the solid fact that both major parties are steering this country (with startling velocity I might add) toward an unelected one world government that will be funded by taxing the developed western nations for carbon emmissions.

Yes, sufficient regs were in place to stop the financial collapse, however Treasury Sec Paulson who is in bed with Goldman-Sachs didn't blink an eye to stop anything as his pockets were being lined with dirty Wall Street hush/slush-fund money.

Independent voters are the majority, but most morally refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils. This is why voter turnouts are usually no more than the mid 30 percentile.

What is needed is a return to the Constitution, but Obama is trying to get around it working with the UN. You see TREATIES circumvent the Congress, and the American voter. Google Obama UN gun ban treaty.

Oh and did you know that Obama broke the law when sitting as chairman of the UN Security Council? But that's OK, right? Because he's not Bush, NOT THAT I LIKED BUSH, but if Bush had done the same thing, the nation would be calling for his impeachment and arrest for treason.

In Liberty,

DarthDubious

I had to grow up in a time where the far right-wing lunatics kept talking complete ignorance about the "Trilateral Commission," "The Illuminati," and yes, "one world government." Back then it was mainly confined to religious zealots and inbreds living in them that hillses with limited education and even poorer common sense, but I see it still hasn't died yet and is being revived again.

Look, no government wants to give up their OWN power, something that the one-world government garbage is all predicated upon. While European countries have some commonalities, there are vast differences even there and the idea that everyone is going to sit down and all agree on a form of the whole world being governed by one body is laughably insane.

Treaties don't circumvent the Senate and I have no idea where that idea came from. I guess it helps build a grand global conspiracy of some sort, but it's completely inaccurate.

I do believe that BINDING Treaties must be ratified by the Senate; Non-binding ones do not.

an end run on the Bill of Rights is possible when 80% of our Congress, the House of Reps(our version of the House of Commons in the UK), is barred from the process. In case you hadn't noticed the Senate(which is our version of the House of Lords) is full of globalists who care nothing about we the people losing our liberty, as long as they keep their's, and have pockets lined with Wall Street campaign cash.

They aren't working for us anymore folks, they work for the banksters. It will be easy to pass treaties in this Senate.

In Liberty,

DarthDubious

Disagree with your assessment of Senate makeup. Pls tell me what hard evidence you have to support such an idea---or, you could just give me another lesson on UKUSA political differences or similarities/differences.

Abound!

The only conspiracy we have that is really dangerous to us here in the USA are money-grubbers. Witness our current situation.

Senators? They were sent there because we liked what they said. Witness Isakson and (never can think of that funny talking fellows name).