This is the "change" all Democrat candidates are promising in their campaigns. Beyond the obvious personality differences between Hillary Clinton, Barack Hussein Obama and John Edwards, there is no ideological difference between the candidates. So Democrats are voting for one or the other on the basis of personality alone. If individual personality decides the Democrat nomination, Barack Obama wins. If Hillary wins, it’s based on Bill’s personality, not Hillary’s.

No matter which of the three Democrats you support, you are supporting wide open Democratic Socialism. We have even renamed it "progress" so that you can feel patriotic about it.

The Republican Party nominated George W. Bush not knowing exactly what he meant by his campaign slogan "compassionate conservative." Seven years later, we all know that "compassionate conservative" means Republican Socialist.

Over the last seven years, it wasn’t Democrats, who passed McCain-Feingold against the First Amendment, who grew federal social spending at a historic rate, who fought for an open society via wide open borders and demanded legalized illegal immigration, it was Republicans. Yes, many Democrats were quite pleased to support these compassionate Republican policies, which had been adopted from the liberal Democrat playbook. But it was a Republican White House and a Republican congress which advanced the very agenda Bush was elected to defeat.

Bush was elected as the lesser evil to Al Gore in 2000. He was re-elected in 2004 as the lesser evil to John Kerry. And even though there remains little doubt that both Gore and Kerry would have indeed been far worse, seven years with Bush makes many Republicans wonder how much worse it could really be… They are about to find out.

Independent and Republican voters attempted to teach the Republican National Committee a lesson by tossing nearly ever incumbent Republican up for re-election, from office in 2006. Based upon early Republican primary results, it appears that nobody has learned a thing from that 2006 lesson.

Convinced that they had to take matters into their own hands and less than impressed by the National Committee choices, core conservatives at the base of the Republican Party went outside the system, at odds with the National Committee and drafted their own candidate for the 2008 presidential contest. That candidate is Fred Thompson.

Believing that the nation can not be united other than on socialist policies, which will only further bankrupt an already financially troubled nation, core conservatives decided to draft a real true traditional conservative leader that had the potential to re-unite all factions of the Republican Party and rally American conservatives of all brands, around a fully conservative platform in the tradition of our founding fathers.

Conservatives were not looking to unite the nation which can not be united. They were looking to unite their fractured party around the principles it was built upon, and lead the nation away from the socialist abyss.

But in 2007 and 2008, the Republican electorate is proving to be more ideologically confused and politically divided than ever in U.S. history. I’m not sure that anyone had a good grip on just how divided the Republican Party is at present, until the early primary results started coming in.

No less than nine Republicans announced their intentions to become president. And the Republican electorate remains divided between the nine, including those who have already dropped out of the race and those who have never had any chance of winning.

We had three different winners in the first three primaries, none of them with even 40% support from their own voters, which means, each opposed by more than 60% of their own voters. The Republican Party is as far from united as it has ever been.

Even the most foolish voter knows that their party can not succeed in November with a completely divided party electorate. Yet few include themselves in the need to consider all options and find a way to unite with other Republicans behind a truly Republican agenda.

Our choice of candidate is divided by our divided individual agendas. The Republican Party was once the home of the conservative agenda. Republicans didn’t always seek to cherry pick which items to be conservative about and which to be compassionate about. But today, the party has been cherry picked to pieces.

Though the current division leads many to believe that there are many different types of Republicans, there are in fact only two types.

Type One – Believes that the Republican Party is Americas Conservative Party, built upon conservative principles and values aimed at protecting and preserving founding principles for future generations at all cost. For this type of conservative, the notion of uniting the nation is a silly idea. Recognizing the Yin and Yang, the left and right, the wrong and right, the principle of opposing pressures and the reality of polarizing political extreme oppositions, means that uniting these opposing forces is an earthly impossibility.

This means that one side must win and one side must lose. For type one Republicans, they see only a need to stick to fundamental principles and values in an effort to unite their party, in an effort to defeat their opponents, rather than try to unite with them for some false greater common good.

For type one Republicans, if you’re not conservative, you’re not Republican. Type one wants a candidate like Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter, who promises to stand on conservative values and principles, and beat back those who seek to drive America further into the socialist abyss.

Type Two – Believes that it is possible and more important to unite the nation, than to unite the party. So type two seeks the opposite type of candidate sought by type one. They seek a candidate who offers to work with the left, compromise with the left, sometimes even side with the left, for the purpose of uniting the nation, even if it tears the party apart.

Type two Republicans prefer a candidate that they believe appeals to moderate voters, be they Republican, Democrat or Independent. They seek a national leader acceptable to all political ideologies, in the name of uniting the country. This is the thought process behind candidates like McCain, Huckabee, Romney and Giuliani.

The driving question in the mind of voters behind these four candidates is, which can unite the most moderate cross section of voters in the general election to defeat the Democrat candidate. Of course, to a degree, the main purpose of the campaign is lost the minute this thought process begins, because one trying to appeal to all voters, must compromise all principles and values to do so.

In the end, even if they win, they lose. Even if they defeat the Democrat, but adopt Democratic Socialist policies in order to attract Independent and Democrat voters, what have they won?

Type One Republicans drafted a candidate that was not going to be a lesser evil for a change. But the Republican electorate is failing to unite behind their core principles and the candidate who was drafted by the people to represent those principles. This is a principle driven core of the Republican Party.

Type Two Republicans are willing to sell their principles for a winner in the horse race, even though winning the race will be a hollow victory with another lesser evil being the best possible outcome. This is the populist driven "big tent" of the new Republican Party. Type Two Republicans bicker over which of their four moderates has the best chance of defeating Democrats in November. But Type One Republicans have already given them the answer they don’t want to hear, none of the above, because the core of the Republican Party will not vote for any of them.

For any of the four Type Two candidates to win in November, they will have to do so without the base of the Republican Party, which means, they much attract enough liberal Democrats and Independent voters away from the DNC to win.

If Type One Republicans win the nomination process, the general election will be a clear and obvious choice between Democratic Socialism and Old Fashioned Americanism. Now that Hunter has dropped out, Thompson is the only remaining conservative in the GOP race. Pundits are pushing him to drop out at every opportunity.

But if Type Two Republicans win the nomination process, the general election will be a much less obvious choice between Democratic Socialism and the lesser evil of continued Republican Socialism. This is exactly the kind of battle the leftist press and Democrats are hoping for in 2008.

Hillary was never going to win in 2008 without a divided conservative vote. Republicans are committing suicide in this regard. They are guaranteeing a divided Republican electorate by nominating a Type Two candidate that will leave the base of the party out of the booth on Election Day.

Before the Republican Party can challenge the left across the aisle on anything, it must leave the leftist ideas itself and nominate a candidate driven to defeat the left, not compromise with the left. But they have failed to heed the warning shots fired in 2006.

Sadly, it appears Republicans are not yet prepared to choose conservatism. It seems they will have to endure another Carter-like era before they will remember why they were Republicans to begin with.

America is headed for tough times and this time, Republicans will be to blame. They had a chance to unite on conservative principles behind a conservative candidate and they passed.

History will prove this to be a costly mistake… GOP suicide.