Charles Martel: I frankly don't know much about George Soros. Looking him up on Wikipedia, here is my quick analysis:

1. He is a progressive, which means he is a Fabian socialist, at least in heart if not in name. He may be very sincere in this. He speaks against totalitarianism, having experienced it. He recognizes the Neo-Con agenda & the Bush administration as being a grave step towards Fascist dictatorship in America.

2. However, by focusing on the "Right," he is missing the point. He supports organizations of the "Left." This causes me to believe he is a Fabian socialist, in which case he holds much common ground with the Fascists. Both believe in Collectivism. Both believe the Government ought to coerce people to "do the right thing." Both believe rights come from the Government, not that they are intrinsic to the individual, and so on.

3. He claims he is for a free market, but who doesn't? A truly free market eliminates governmental coercion from the equation, and a truly Constitutional government does not apportion taxes unequally.

4. As a progressive of the "Left", he is aiming for the same kind of future as are the so-called conservatives of the "Right." He only thinks there is a nicer way to do it. But this future is a Collectivist future, which necessarily leads, in my opinion, to the totalitarianism he supposedly resists. So despite his criticism of the Bush administration, which in my opinion is proper in itself, his solution is equally detrimental to liberty. The same criticism can be leveled at those who now reject the Obama administration. While it also is proper in itself, it misses the bigger picture, that those who do so offer a solution equally detrimental to liberty.

My quick analysis may be way off base. I took a quick glance at Wikipedia, a George Soros website, both more or less favorable, and one unfavorable article.