Republican Party hijacked by the "new world order" folks?

The following post was filed by Mickey over at Blue Collar Republican, The Self Destruction of the Republican Party. I have included it here in full. It deserves a good look. (emphasis added)

The Republican Party is being destroyed, but not by the ‘far Religious Right’. It is in disarray because of the moderates and the Neo-Conservatives who run it. The moderates have done nothing but sit on the fence (go along to get along). They are useless. The NeoCons have taken over the party. Their leaders have ‘exported’ Democracy by championing America meddling in the rest of the world’s affairs, they oppose isolationism, and they believe in the New Deal (socialistic big government). The Republican Party of today is the Liberal Democratic Party of yesterday: Bush has increased the national debt, Clinton increased the national debt. Bush fights Un-Constitutional wars, Clinton fought Un-Constitutional wars. Bush is providing more national health care, Clinton wanted more national health care. Clinton wanted more and bigger government and gave us NAFTA. Bush wants more and bigger government and gave us CAFTA, Homeland Security and the failed Leave No Child Behind. The ‘far Religious Right’ will soon learn there is only one Party. The Socialist party. Perhaps they will wake up and come to the Constitution Party, here.

Some of those of us who are conservatives have heretofore had no place to go but the Republican Party - that is where I am active now but as readers know I am no fan of "globalism" and "open-borders" or amnesty/citizenship for people who spit on our laws as they litter our land and destroy our rivers invading our nation. Forgive a bit of digression here but I really don't like hearing 911 calls in a language other than English and those calls having to be answered by a dispatcher in other than English. I don't like our Emergency Rooms over-run by illegals and foreign-language speakers who demand interpreters or the hospital gets sued. That's not a "diverse" America; that's a dysfunctional America. As history proves, a people are most vulnerable when they do not speak the same language. A common language lends itself to at least a unified citizenry - I don't mean we march to the same "political" drumbeats but at least we can disagree in the same language. As I recall from reading of our nation's founding that the Founding Fathers, most notably George Washington along with others, did not believe that America should involve itself in "wars" within any given nation. Rather, they supported the view that a nation's internal strife was within the province of that nation's people to work out. They also supported the notion that America could engage in trade as she saw fit - but certainly they would view our out-sourcing of jobs, our taxes that punish business and consumers alike, and other issues such as the North American Union designed under the rubric of "free trade" to be anything but good for the sovereignty of the United States of America or its citizens. I believe the Founding Fathers would be aghast at the "new world order" crowd and even more astonished with the notion that it is our "national destiny" to spread democracy around the world because "democracies don't have wars with each other." Mexico's feet-on-the-ground invasion of the US could call that notion into question - because we are being invaded and just as dangerously as a uniformed army with its conquering forces would be. Only difference is that our government would be fighting back instead of rolling over with its four paws in the air in a total act of "submission." In my view, globalism/new world order and using our "military to spread democracy" abroad while failing to defend our democratic republic at home is probably not what the Founding Fathers had in mind. Jefferson sent our Marines to Tripoli, not to spread democracy, but to protect and defend our sailors who were being kidnapped and killed by Muslims of the time, to defend our ships and our trading interests. Jefferson's was a far different mission than that of using our military to spread democracy. Current incidents demonstrate the an infiltrating jihadi force under the cover of "multiculturalism" can be more effective in weakening and undermining a nation. Melanie Phillips' Londonistan is quite clear on the effectiveness of a jihadist force in spreading chaos. In Election 2008, we need to scrutinize the candidates on their view of our role in the world. We can't afford to be "fooled" through this NAFTA and CAFTA cant. Ross was right about that "great sucking sound."