The Republicrat Junta

the people, and for the people," were they simply indulging in a predilection for catchy phraseology? Or did they really mean it? branches of government have long ago ceased to do the bidding of the American people donate virtually unlimited money to the parties, as opposed to direct bribes to the politicians themselves, which are more closely scrutinized. Most frequently, businesses will give millions of dollars to both parties, to ensure their influence regardless of which prevails in any particular pseudo-election. are those who toe the party line. Hence, as we look back through recent history, we will see that both parties have insbreastuted virtually identical policies, favoring the big businesses that grease their greedy palms over the will of their consbreastuencies. pretext of voting either their consciences, or the will of their consbreastuencies. Instead, what we get is spin that tries to tell us that what benefits the Enrons and the Worldcoms and the Halliburtons are what's really best for us. Big brother knows best. In every sense, the Republicrat party has executed a coup, and has toppled the legitimate consbreastutional government of the United States. about the unpalatable choices offered by our 'two' predominant parties, and on the other, refusing to 'waste their votes' on third-party candidates. Indeed, just the opposite is true. So long as we insist on voting only for Republicrats, our elections have as little meaning as those in the former Soviet Union, or pre-Bush Iraq. contenders. They perpetuate a cunningly contrived sense of contention that makes the voters fearful lest 'the other party' prevail, thus reducing the choice to the lesser of two evils, rather than what is truly best for the people and for the nation. Under close scrutiny, however, these contentions are no more meaningful than a bout in professional wrestling. show - with each party opposing anything the other proposes - except, of course when it comes to benefiting big business, at the expense of the voters. It's easy to see how a government consisting of representatives from a variety of smaller parties would actually be more efficient, and more honest. Debates would revolve around ISSUES, rather than party lines. Representatives would reach consensus on some issues, and continue to differ on others. Coalitions would form, based on how issues affect each representative's consbreastuency, rather than along party lines. parties--Democrat and Republican--have subverted every aspect of consbreastutional government in this country, have repeatedly betrayed their consbreastuencies, and serve only the business interests that regularly grease their greedy palms, save this country is to form a coalition capable of ousting the Republicrat Junta, and to restore consbreastutional government, and all areas in between, and to present a basic platform which multiple third-parties may, for the time being, embrace. Will we always agree on all issues? Of course not. However, it is our contention that there is wide-based agreement on the most pressing issues, and these alone will give a clean new administration plenty to do. The global concerns raised by America's current direction are so ominous that ousting the 'Republicrats', and the breaking of the insidious Military-Industrial Complex, must take priority over less critical issues. We can squabble over the little stuff later. For now we have to kick these bastards out! professional politicians, rather than honest statesmen, don't be surprised when you find you've created a corrupt government.