"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross" - Sinclair Lewis

Anyone who supports the idea of a large centralized national banking structure does not understand what freedom is supposed to be

Thomas Jefferson was against a centralized banking system
"Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies"

Mayer Amschel Rothschild supported the idea of controlling a nation's money to dominate the population, this validates Thomas Jefferson's claim that banking institutions are a strong danger
"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws"

Neo-Conservatives worship George Bush by supporting his Bush Doctrine and believe that pre-emptive war is needed for national security
But so did Hitler, when he attacked EVERY nation that he entered into a non-aggression pact with

Senator Robert Taft known also as "Mr. Conservative Republican" of the OLD Right political position, opposed the idea of a draft because it assumes that government owns the lives of the nation's young men. Robert Taft was against using a hostile foreign policy of interventionalism and nation building that plagued the Democratic Party during most of the 20th century. But there is something in the history of American politics that does match the Bush Doctrine and that is Woodrow Wilson's 14 points, and Wilson was a DEMOCRAT! Robert Taft even opposed the Socialism that was creeping into America with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal that included the Social Security system.

Robert Taft did not even want America to be part of NATO because he knew it would weaken American independence. The Old Right was not really isolationism, but it simply kept obedience to the ideas that were established by Thomas Jefferson, when Jefferson said "Commerce with all nations, alliances with none". Thomas Jefferson and some of the other Founding Fathers were in strong support of non-interventionism, which is to avoid empire building of entangling alliances. But worshipers in the cult known as Neo-Conservatism ridicule that idea as being a form isolationism. It is important to understand that while the Neo-Cons of the George Bush era would have you believe that they are the only example of Conservatism while claiming to support the Founding Fathers, the Neo-Cons are flaming McCarthists and yet oppose almost everything that the Founding Fathers stood for.

Robert Taft strongly defended the need for political dissent during a time of war to keep government honest
"As a matter of general principle, I believe there can be no doubt that criticism in time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government ... too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think that it will give some comfort to the enemy to know that there is such criticism. If that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments, they are welcome to it as far as I am concerned, because the maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a great deal more good than it will do the enemy, and will prevent mistakes which might otherwise occur".

But the worshipers in the cult of George Bush would have you believe that political dissent during war is treason and empowers the enemy. This is only a position that an authoritarian dictatorship would impose on it's population. But that only enforces the evidence that we don't have any real form of representative government anymore. 70% of the American people are against the war but yet George Bush continues the war. Most people want our borders secure but George Bush leaves the borders the most open that they have ever been in U.S. history so the terrorists can get here to harm us.

The so called "Conservative" movement in this country with the George Bush totalitarian garbage that they give the name "conservatism" to it completely illegitimate to what the history of real conservatism was in this country. Even Thomas Jefferson was against George Bush's foreign policy of aggression, interventionalism, entangling alliances, nation building, and managing the affairs of other countries. Thomas Jefferson said, "Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government". But the George Bush foreign policy is consistent with the history of the Democrats during most of the 20th century and is a strong attribute of EMPIRE.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS TRIED TO KEEP AMERICA FROM BECOMING AN EMPIRE!

The result of a hostile foreign policy of interventionism, entangling alliances, and nation building, the American Empire has existed since the late 1800's with the Spanish-American War when America reached beyond it's borders with the bombing of the USS Maine

Often times, ignorant people claim that a non-interventionism should be riddiculed as being a form of isolationism. But I ask that if non-interventionism is such a bad thing, then why did George W. Bush criticize nation building in the 2000 presidental debates as a way to gain popularity over Al Gore? Then over the next few years George W. Bush betrayed the American People's trust and began nation building in Iraq. After George W. Bush's War On Terror failed to capture CIA funded Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden During the Battle of Tora Bora when Osama Bin Laden later escaped into Pakistan, President Bush emulated the military strategy of Adolf Hitler and attacked another country by invading Iraq.

Although it is troubling to hear about the suffering of the Pakistani people in November of 2007, the events can still educate people about what bad government is and does. Now (November 2007) it is in the news that Pakistan is a military dictatorship, they have a nuclear arsenal, they are harboring Osama Bin Laden, they suspended their Constitution so they could crack down on the population, and the George W. Bush administration describes Pakistan as an ally in the War On Terror.

Where is this tough talk from President Bush that he used during the early part of the War On Terror when he said, "If you harbor terrorists, then you are a terrorist and we will deal with you accordingly"? Is the military dictator of Pakistan the type of people that an American president like George W. Bush would want to associate himself with? Not even Saddam Hussein seemed this bad. Not even the President of Iran is this evil, but the Neo-Cons in the Bush Administration portray Iranian leaders as evil and threatening to the peace process.

Does the government really want to get rid of Osama Bin Laden? Does the Military Industrial Complex want to get rid of Osama Bin Laden? What if Osama Bin Laden was already dead? Would that stop the government from taking old videos of Osama from the archives, modify the videos, play them on news networks like Fox News to scare the American people into submitting to the demands of a corrupt government?

When I carefully looked at some of this "terrorist video material", I began to be skeptical about the merit of the War On Terror. Some of the evidence was that the time stamp on the Pentagon surveilance video was dated from September 12, 2001 and in the "new (2007)" videos, Osama Bin Laden looks younger than the videos of 2002.

Some of the Founding Fathers have warned us about the dangers of abusive government. They warned us that things like this would happen if we had too much trust for our government, any government.