Would the Founding Fathers be proud of the neocon faction of the Republican party?

[Visualbat665]

I don't think the founders would be proud of most of the political views of any of the current political body.

[Commie Omerica]

I know what neocon means to idiots, but You not being a liberal, not sure what You mean.
But We are a Communist Omerica now. And it will get worse.

[UpYoursObama]

The Republican Party as we once knew it, Is no more. We have been pirated.
We sold out our priciples, our honor. And our integrity. We the constituents
of the Republican party have no more voice in our way of political structure
then fly. We have some phony RNC drive incompetent non Conservatives
down the throats of the American Republicans. Case in Point. John McCain.
Mitt Romney.

Money has got to be taken out of the equation for both parties. Television
has got to stop the senseless barrage on the American Households. A
political ad should have to meet the same truth in adverstising standards
that products have to. If they are proven to be false. The station should
be fined or their license pulled for allowing to shuttle lies through out their
markets. And the party putting the ad out. Should have to pull it immediately.
And put a piece out saying they apologize for the misrepresentations,
and pay massive fines. Along with only two ads per hour on anyone show,
1 for each party.

Now we put the onus on the voter, They have to research and dig out the
information they want on a candidate.

Just some thoughts.

By the way. Keep displaying the flag as you have it. For we are deeply in
distress.

[agreeableclub912]

Not bad in your almost spot-on definition of neoconservatism. I hate it when people throw out "neocon," "nazi," "communist," "socialist," "fascist" and other political epithets in completely the wrong way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

Yes, I believe the founding fathers are figuratively rolling over in their graves over the state of politics today. While I disagree with your statement that we are a single party system, for everything important to me (specifically the rule of law, and even more specifically failure to enforce the law against the big banks) I have a hard time seeing a difference between the two.

Oh wait, the difference is that one pretends to be all about sticking to the rich guys (whom people automatically associate with the big banks), but only plans on raising their taxes which doesn't affect the real rich, only the high-income professionals, while the other party just doesn't have anything intelligent to say on the matter. And the biggest difference between the two parties is which "squirrels" they are telling people to chase down.