Pretty incompatible? Both parties (R and D) gather money from the same corporate entities (that the government regulates) and set the rules of that legislation. The incompatibilities are window dressing for the most part. We are currently experiencing a (numbers for relative ordinal influence, higher being better) Financial Sector (+2) Military Sector (+1) government where before perhaps it was a Military Sector (+2) Financial Sector (+1).

Their bread is buttered by the same people, with a bunch of steadily willfully more ignorant proles to be kept in the dark by sports match-ups and mass media. Oh, and the entertaining fallacy that war is good for the economy. That one pays dividends for years.

Many NeoCons were actually communists and lobby for high regulatory measures and police state law enforcement. Many NeoLiberals are actually communists, and even hold dual party membership as socialists, and value the protective umbrella of high regulatory measures and police state law enforcement.

Protectionist steel tariffs was an early one.

The Old Right (Buchanan et. al.) had been very critical of him throughout his presidency.

Rush was also critical, but he was an unapologetic supporter of the war and mouthpiece for his buddy Cheney. Rush's show allowed a reasonable amount of dissenting opinion from his guest hosts. Neal Boortz became a Libertari-neocon.

It fell into the previous (AC) posters Orwellian Memory Hole. You did risk it and you got it. In Republican circles you got it especially if you were a Libertarian or Paleo-conservative Republican, and you usually got it from someone who supported Rudolph Giuliani or John McCain.

If you were a liberal you got it if you didn't make sure you were in good with the Israel lobby, but were certainly admired for hating Bush on principle without criticism, because they were on the other "team".

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right...

Indeed the Bushbots are still on the whole You Hate America if you don't (unquestioningly) Support The (actions of our interventionist foreign policy)Troops tripe.

Oh, and why exactly are libertarians delusional idiots, exactly? And are you asserting that all of them are? How about classical liberals and liberal democrats? How about parecon supporters? Noam Chomsky folks, and (for a complete non-sequitur) the whole of the bloody Irish and Catholics while we're at it?

As a mostly libertarian delusional idiot, I support the right of all to make a total ass of themselves in public fora, such as this, and my own right to assert that you suck.

(Kiss Me I'm Irish)

Some people tend to call what walks and quacks like a duck, a duck; this because (perhaps wrongly) they assume based on their experience (or sur-experiences from reading of RIAA tactics) that they (RIAA) indeed typically engage in "creative" ways of manipulating public opinion as a matter of course.

For me, I (or I would hope that I) don't tend to play the shill card immediately, I just try to counter the argument.

Only if you promise to make a perfect copy of said items so that I still have my stuff, I don't mind. If you develop this replicator technology be sure to patent it so appropriate outrage and ridicule can be engaged in at your expense.

As opposed to being reamed by Republicans for the millions of other things that wouldn't stick? Politics may be about compromise, but it should not be this level of compromise.

My Admiration for Obama deflated greatly after the decision relating to Telecom Immunity, it is one of the reasons I didn't vote for him.

I think he'll be a consensus building leader though, I'm hopeful of that anyway.

Republicans like Ron Paul are strongly against such behavior. The fully corporatized Democrats and Republicans alike are Just as guilty of the things you assert are Republican.

The Mike Gravels and Dennis Kuciniches of your favored party are few and far between, but respectably hostile to such things.

The Ideological basis of Classical Liberalism, which is what the "good" Republicans subscribe to, is quite opposed to a large spying intervening government.

Most modern Neo-Liberals/Democrats I have the pleasure to listen to have a very ad-hoc/inconsistent feeling about government wiretapping and other sorts of police-state tactics used by government. If some "good"(protect the children/minority/[fill in your blank]) comes of it then they seem to be fine with all sorts of interventionist and police-state action. "Good" in this case seems to be when a Democrat is running or providing "Oversight" to the abusive action, "Evil" when a Republican does the same.

Branches of government are full of rent-seeking opportunists with both R's and D's before their names, it is disingenuous of you to assert that it is wholly worthy to blame Republicans alone for this disgusting and wholly unconservative President and Administration.

Nixon was not a true conservative either. Kissinger was a proto-neocon. And Hillary Clinton worked on one of Nixons election campaigns, before she became a Democrat, there you go.