The Red Scare Index: 80

Since you like text book definitions so much, here you go. This definition is referenced from:
Rao, B. V. History of Modern Europe Ad 1789-2002. Sterling Pub
lishers Pvt. Ltd, 2006. p. 215.
In the economic sphere, many fascist leaders have claimed to support a "Third Way" in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of unrestrained capitalism and the severe control of state communism.[10][11] This was to be acheived by a form of government control over business and labor (called "the corporate state" by Mussolini.)
Sorry hotmovies, I only want people to understand that any government control, no matter what it is called, and no matter for what good purpose it is intended, detracts from the liberty of the people. Our Constitution outlines the best comprimise between allowing every one complete freedom and acknowledging that that humans are only human and will try to cheat other people. The conflicts that arise are then delt with using reactionary laws that punish offenders in a predictable manner without infringing on the Liberties of law abiding citizens.
The opposite of Liberty is tyranny. All government control is tyranny. Our need of tyranny in this country is very limited. That is what the Constitution does. Brilliantly.

As I said. The bailouts approved by bush were wrong and could be seen as fascist. I have no intention of insulting any one. I merely state my position as an independant conservative thinker. My philosophy is based on The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, The Federalist Papers, The Complete Anti-Federalist, and other writings of the Founding Fathers.

Wow you must have gone to college. Which gives you licence to regurgitate liberal propaganda.
I on the other hand choose to believe the founding fathers themselves. They contend that our inalienable rights are bestowed by Nature and Nature's God. I am perfectly agreeable to allowing atheists to claim them as Natural Rights, since freedom of religion is specifically protected by the Bill of Rights. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison was agaist adding the bill of rights because they felt the people shouldn't look to the government for rights. Thomas Jefferson opposed him and strongly felt certain rights need to be protected from government and others who would infringe them. All Founders knew that all Natural Rights were not bestowed by government or men but by human nature. These rights can not be granted or revoked by government, but endure in the hearts of men desite political pressures. Natural rights also are not limited to the few specifically protected in the bill of rights. Natural rights include freedom of speech and press and the right to bear arms and all of that. They also include more mundane things like the right to walk naked in your living room, the right to shop where you want, the right to party (as long as you don't violate some one elses rights), and the right to play Yanni in your basement way in the back so your friends don't catch you. A lot of our natual rights are mudane little every day things that people take for granted in a free society. Some are the more widely acknowleged rights that are specifically protected by The Constitution and various laws. What all inalienable rights have in common is that every one can enjoy them with out infringing on any of any one elses rights. Another thing is that in the entire history of The United States of America, the greatest country in the history of our planet, These Natural Rights have never cost the tax payers of this country one single cent.
Your "inevitable conclusion" is nothing but liberal double talk that pays lip service to The Constitution while undermining the rights and philosophy it was created to protect. If nothing else Know this; our government was not created to provide, deny, favor, or diminish any right. It is only meant to protect our rights and prevent individuals, foreign powers, and its self from infringing on those rights.

I so focused on your answere to the rights question I forgot to acknowledge your definition of republic. It's a little incomplete don't you think? As far as etymology goes it is perfectly adequet but it lacks a certain amount of defining qualities. there are many political states that do not have a hereditary monarch. There are also several froms of government in which the people have an impact. A democracy for instance.
If you read a little further into your textbook you will find that our republic is a representative form of government operated under the rule of law to protect a civil society. What this means is that under our constitution, All people are entitled to equal treatment under the law. Only when you infringe on another citizen's rights will the government react to protect the individual. At least that is what it is supposed to be. Laws and controversial Supreme Court decisions and entitlements have been slowly chipping away at our rights for nearly a century.

I will never condone what W. did for the auto industry. I would have prefered that GM and Chrysler go into bankruptcy and try to correct the mistakes they made leading to their downfall.

Of course I could argue that Bush at least didn't confiscate stock holders stake in the government, (stock holders consisting of retirement funds, 401k's and other privately held value) and hand it over to the UAW. That would be one specificity. I could also say that the Bush administration did't force finacial institutions to relax lending practices, allowing people, who wouldn't normally be able to get a loan because they couldn't afford to pay it back, to have loans, which they of course defaulted on because they couldn't afford to pay them back, which caused banks to start finding interesting ways to hide their debts (mortgage backed securities). And as their hidden debts grew they started complaining that thse stupid government policies are bankrupting them, the government sent in freddie mae and freddy mac (both founded by government during the Great Depression) to boost confidence by buying these mortgage backed securities. Oh, but since the mortgages were defaulted the securities were effectively worthless. Meanwhile all of the defaults were driving down home prices and choking off new construction which lead to the subprime mortgage crisis. Which dropped us onto our current recession. Government intervention starting with HUD (Carter) caused the subprime crises. When W. attemped to reform Fannie and freddy the democrats in congress stopped him. It would have been the only good thing W. accopmlished. and now that they have failed miserably the government (W.) stepped in and propped them up at our expense. And finally Barrack Obama has bailed out banks and signed into law his "stimulus" bill, which takes money from private citizens and gives it to government to waste. President Obama also has not allowed banks to pay back there TARP money because they don't want to lose control of them.
I hope that was specific enough for you. I apologise for implying that Obama started socialism and facism in this country. FDR did (New Deal). It was worsened by Johnson, (Great Society) Carter, (HUD) Reagan (bailing out savings and loans) Clinton, (expanding HUD and pressuring mortgage industries to lower standards) W.(bailing out auto industry and finacial institutions) and finally, continuing many of W.'s policies, Barrack Obama, who has socialized Chrysler and soon GM. Who again is pressuring financial institutions to continue policies that started our current recession trough their TARP benefits. Who also wants to socialize medical care. And whom will continue to socialize every thing he can before we vote in an opposing congress, hopefully made up of an independant conservative majority.
All of these things are government intervention in the private sector that is at best merely wasteful and at worst is socialist and facist. Almost all politicains for the last 50 years has done something that has expanded government power at the expense of the taxpayer. All of these policies were self serving and unconstitutional. (10th. amendment) I want it stopped and our government returned to its constitutional limitations.