To clarify, I never stated nor implied. don't buy American (sorry if I left that impression)-- just not from the American companies and people who desire to make money at the expense of our liberty. Back to my specific examples:

GE is corrupt. Period. Cap-and-Trade and MSNBC propaganda outlet. The list actually need go no longer that that. GE can claim some merit, but I believe they are rotten in their core.
"But other than brutalizing his wife and family, he's a really great guy."

GM is worse. It is pure fascism. Re-wrote (or circumvented laws) to reward unions at the expense of stockholders. Billions of bailout bucks for political payouts. Gov't owned; gov't controlled. They appear, for all practical purposes, to be an extension of Acorn. Tell me how GM's activism and political leanings significantly differ from those of Acorn? Again, yes, buy American and reward American workers... but not those who make their gain at the expense of others.

Walmart: I love them, but not if they are for programs that conveniently allow them to pass current THEIR cost of doing business (i.e., healthcare of THEIR employees) onto the backs of everyone else (taxpayers). Besides, wouldn't hurt to spend a little more money with the local "Mom and Pop's" anyway. I still buy Walmart (not a total boycott, as they haven't sold out... yet) --I have just cut back to send a signal.

Thank you, Dolly
I manage the "Sarah Palin Fans for Glenn Beck" group at TeamSarah.org, where I will add your idea.
--Miss Lavenia

Money is the mother's milk of politics -- VOTE EVERY DAY with your wallet.

For those who lament, "But what can I do?" ...well, here's an answer: boycott those who would do you and your country harm. Companies may disregard your letters, but they will not disregard your lost patronage.

Personally, I am boycotting...
GE ... strongly advocates for Cap and Trade. This company needs to go the way of the Do-Do Bird.
GM ... recipient of unfair advantages by corrupt gov't entities... union due feed Progressive machine. (Buy REAL American: Ford (or any company assembled by non-union Americans.)
AARP ... this left leaning organization needs to be put in its place. They have fooled the public long enough.
WALMART ...(reducing my trade) The Big Box now appears to support healthcare bill (YOU WILL LOSE MORE IN A YEAR UNDER OBAMA-CARE THAN YOU WILL SAVE IN A LIFETIME AT Walmart.)

Two names that haven't been mentioned who I believe have fantastic potential: Minnesota's Michelle Bachman & S.C.'s Mark Sanford. I haven't seen many interviews with Sanford, but what I have seen is impressive.

A true constitutional conservative with appeal, gravitas, and a believable chance to win could overcome those obstacles.

For example, let's pretend Palin ran for President and South Carolina governor Mark Sanford--and for good measure, let's pretend Newt would neither confirm nor deny that he would serve as Secretary of State in a Palin administration.

If Sarah, Mark, and Newt then asked for money and foot-soldiers to get the third party on the voter rolls (even if limited to winnable states (forget California & New York, for example), I believe resources would flood in.

I fear, however, there are no statesmen willing to risk everything to save this country -- the likes of George Washington are no more.

I sincerely hope you are wrong. To me, its not about merely being on the winning team, its about re-establishing a government based on founding principles...and I just don't see that as a key concern of 'moderates.' In short, if winning means I have to give up the things for which I am really fighting, then I will be glad to lose knowing I fought the good fight.

However, at this juncture I do believe there is a large enough groundswell of conservatism to win, moderates or no. Given the choice between the policies of Obama and Reagan, I think the latter will be the people's choice in the very near future. Windmills, squirt-cars, bailouts, private takeovers, union payoffs, Acorn thug politics, hyper-unemployment, and hyper-inflation are only going to go so far.

Good comment, Frenzytnt. Lets hope for the best.

Neither party you cite has made significant gains on the national stage, suggesting they lack broad appeal, for whatever reason.

It will take, I believe, a new party that is unencumbered with the baggage of any of the current parties to consolidate conservative and libertarian elements from among the various displeased Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and Constitutionalists.

As discussed above, the candidate choice is critical -- and with all due respect, I couldn't name a single Libertarian leader of national prominence, and I had never heard of the Constitutional Party until yesterday.

Of course, the other critical component will be the issues that define the platform, which, if defined through a process which involves all, will provide a general sense of inclusion.

In short, I think a fresh start is necessary. (That said, at the moment either party you mentioned sounds infinitely better than the party of Colin Powell and Megan McCain.)

Regards.

Flattering question, but I couldn't win--I live in a part of the country where the politicians vote like they actually believe the in Constitution-based liberty.

For example, my local representative is Louie Gohmert, one of only a few who voted AGAINST the FIRST bailout. He is also the congressman who proposed that, if congress was determined to stimulate via spending, then it should be spent on a 10-month tax hiatus on those pulling the cart -- workers and small businesses. Beck even talked about the idea for a spell.

(ASIDE: I called Gohmert's office and begged for him to run for Governor of Texas. No reply. Texas' loss, to be sure.)

My hope is that many of the likes of Palin and Gohmert rise to positions of prominence in the very near future.

Kind regards.

Agreed, the time to start is the next (midterm) election. Every election now seems to border on 'critical to win.'

Regarding Palin, there is no conservative candidate on planet earth onto whom the press will not unleash their full venom. The successful candidate must have such a great appeal to "Joe Citizen" that she/he can actually turn sentiment against the press.

Somewhat ironical, the press' bashing of her may be somewhat of a help -- they have already played that card, as it were. As things become increasing worse in this country, many may discount the press' treatment of one who would have lead us down an alternate path.

I see Palin as having both the personal appeal, issue stances, and skills of articulation to win the battle.

You have infinite more faith than I in the Republican Party.

It is the party of the Bush's and the McCain's, who argue with Democrats on HOW to spend money, not WHETHER it should be spent.

Our borders are still open and our children's future is effectively spent; thanks to Bush 41 (Republican), Clinton (Democrat), Bush 43 (Republican), and Obama (Socialist...I mean Democrat).

The Republican Party -- proud home of the likes of disingenuous Colon Powell (voted for Obama!) and useful idiot Megan McCain -- is beyond repair.

I'm not saying I would never vote Republican again, but it may well take more than a mere slide into totalitarianism, enemies with nukes pointing at us, and a great depression where dirt look like a good meal.