Interesting poll, to be sure. Though, I find it hard to believe the average Dutch citizen would really have a clue about American taxes, and how they are applied. In that sense, the poll is not a very good one.

__________________
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.

John Edwards came up as my top democrat on that poll, with Rudy Guliani as top republican.

__________________
England has no eternal friends and no eternal enemies, only eternal interests - Palmerston

Rudy Guliani and Fred Thompson were my top two on the list. Can't remember who my top dem was, but I do remember that they were pretty far down on the list.

__________________
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.

I think the overall order for me was Edwards, Obama,Guliani...and then all the others with democrats being in the top end and republicans in the bottom end. I wonder what I chose that made Guliani the exception and propelled him towards the top ?

__________________
England has no eternal friends and no eternal enemies, only eternal interests - Palmerston

They give a break down on the bottom of the page showing which points you had in common with each candidate.

__________________
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.

Well, if that is your argument; then I object to California surrendering its sovereignty to a federal government that tries to force its misuse of power on our good and altruistic state.

Why do you insist on a lack of democratic ideals as a good for export to the rest of the world?

I guess this mob has never heard of the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). I could not do the survey using my screen reader and keyboard functions. This is a frequent problem with European websites.

Tethys

__________________
-- Harry S. Truman

Because California is bound to the United States Constitution as a state of the Union. You guys are free to leave at any time.

I have no problem with the world falling under a single government. That is, only if the whole world becomes America and subject to the American Constitution.

__________________
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.

BRAVO!

Other countries bitch when the U.S. does not ratify crazy treaties (the various "human", "women's", "children's", etc... "rights" ones).

Yes, those crazy treaties are probably improvements over whatever anarchy the third world is enjoying, but none of them hold a candle to our Constitution.

Plus they're all constructed with a socialist bent, so, um, they can get bent.

I haven't had the opportunity yet here on USPoliticsOnline - it usually only takes a small amount of time before some Euro points out how "young" the U.S. is (usually while pointing out how "brash" and "arrogant" we are along the way). I absolutely love that because it gives me an opportunity to point out that our government has been under continual operation (under the same Constitution) longer than any of theirs. Seriously. In terms of government longevity, we're the old kids on the block. And that ain't no coincidence.

__________________

"Compassionate Conservatism"?!?! That is a stupid phrase. Conservatism is inherently compassionate. It is liberalism that is cruel for the sake of maintaining a constituency.

The same could be said of a hypothetical UN Union. The same principle applies.

The Founding Father's decided on our form of federal government for a reason, and it included a separation of powers by function of government, as well as by a separation powers by state governments. The Tenth Amendment was also included for a reason, not just aesthetics.

Why do you think America knows what is best for the rest of the world? Our policy in the Middle East has not solved any problems which we didn't create in the first place. What happened to exporting democracy; especially, the form of democracy known as state's rights?

I agree that new and hypothetical UN Constitution could have a better version of our Bill of Rights included.

Why do you think a UN federal government with a US style Constitution with a Bill of Rights would be any worse than our current US government?

I don't see how it is. The UN can go ahead and put together some "World Federal Government". The United States would not be beholden to it in any way. California, on the other hand, agreed to join the Union.

preaching to the choir here.

America knows that the American system is not right for every one. Why do you think we didn't force a Republican form of government on Iraq? Or our constitution for that matter? America is not exporting our form of government; we are simply exporting 'choice' to those who don't have it.

I don't, considering the rest of world has different ideas on what rights are.

Because it wouldn't be the United States Constitution. If the UN came out and said they were going to adopt our Constitution, word for word, then I would be all for it. If the rest of the world agreed to it (which they wouldn't) then the whole world, in essence, would become America.

EDIT: I should have said "America's Republican form of government."

__________________
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.

It could be accomplished in much the same manner as the US under the Constitution was accomplished; with a convention and ratification of the requisite number of states.

The several US states under the Articles also had different ideas of what a federal government should be like, and they had a convention to create a new Constitution.

Invading a foreign, sovereign state and requiring a change in the previous government does not lend much credibility to your argument that we didn't force a new (republican) form of government on the populace of that former state.

Not everyone thinks the US has the best form of government. What happened to state's rights and a hypothetical UN Tenth Amendment? Consider this analogy to our form of federalism: why would California care what Nevada or Pennsylvania does within its own borders?

But the United States government would never ratify a UN World Constitution. If they did, there would be war.

Your point? Those states were already bound. This, however, would not be the case for some hypothetical UN World Constitution.

Did we tell them which government to take? Did we tell them who their leader would be? Did we tell them how their constitution would be worded?

QUOTE=danielpalos;1136974]
Not everyone thinks the US has the best form of government. What happened to state's rights and a hypothetical UN Tenth Amendment? Consider this analogy to our form of federalism: why would California care what Nevada or Pennsylvania does within its own borders? [/quote]

It isn't perfect, I agree. But it is the best one out there and I wouldn't want to live under any other. The US government has over stepped its bound on numerous occasions. Do you mean the US tenth Amendment, and not the UN?

__________________
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.

Why would there be war? The US signed on to the current UN.

Why would it not be the case now? All of the current UN members are similarly "bound" in the same way the several states were "bound" under the Articles of Confederation.

I think an invasion and a US backed leadership is sufficient.

I meant a hypothetical UN Tenth Amendment based on the US Tenth Amendment.

And in case you don't realize, the UN has no power over the United States. We are still a sovereign nation beholden to our own constitution. There would be war because if the United States government suddenly joined in some UN federal government, thereby entering into a world government, they would be surrendering our rights and national sovereignty as laid out in the Constitution. I, and many others, would take up arms.

No, they are not. The UN is in no way like America was under the AoC because the UN has no legal power over its member nations. The AoC provided that legal framework for the early states by binding them into a Union. The UN does not do this.

Ummm, the Iraqis have voted.

Do you honestly think the rest of the world would go for that? I don't think so. In case you haven't noticed the United States, when compared to most other nations, has a weak central government. A UN federal government, in order to get the backing of most other nations, would have to be very strong and large. Something our founding fathers warned against.

__________________
Success is measured in blood; yours or your enemy's.