Um, find new problems?
Obviously, John, I agree with you (especially about my valid points!).
American politics have always been driven by a deeply polarized, almost schizophrenic division within the country's soul.
The Europeans who founded this country came here for two highly disparate reasons. One group (roughly the Puritans) came here or were forced to come here because they were so extreme in their religious and political views, even the Dutch in Amsterdam couldn't live with them.
(That's saying something, the Dutch are the only people on earth who can get along with the French, English and Germans genuinely and at the same time while disagreeing with all of us on all fundamental matters).
The other side were people seized with a sense of adventure, the desire to find out what's on the other side of the mountain because, well, because it's on the other side of the mountain. They wanted to make better lives for themselves and they weren't afraid to take calculated risks for gain. Not unfounded risks, risks which they thought were at least 50:50.
That is important.
Today, we have basically three groups: Those who wish to impose their standards on the rest of us - the conservatives, driven by racism and christianism.
The second group is made up of those who are more or less committed to "live as you will, let me live as I will" and the very similar "don't tread on me (and I won't tread on you) group.
Roughly, the two make up the libertarians.
The third group are the liberals. We tend to think: Why not improve what can be improved and if an expansion of civil liberties for all means limiting the rights to exploit others for some, no hu-hu.
It is obvious that the conservatives and liberals have no basis to work together, apart from emergencies which threaten them both. Being turned out of office in November is one such existential threat, there are few others. Protecting the country from harm is not, however, one of them.
Libertarians have a natural tendency to align themselves with conservatives because they hate, just plain hate being told what to do. At the same time, there is a biological not a psychological component which needs to be factored into the equation.
Recent MIR studies have shown that there are two basic ways for the brain to react to "the other". A person with a different culture, a religious viewpoint which is widely divergent from one's own: One can be frightened by this at a visceral, atavistic level. Or, one can be challenged by it, also at a visceral, atavistic level.
Conservatives of modern stripe (christianists and the fascists who now rule the Republican party) tend towards being frightened. Libertarians and liberals tend to feel challenged.
Well, this is only how I look at the mess, obviously it's only my opinion. It certainly explains to me why liberal gays like me, though very unhappy campers with the Obama approach to restoring our civil and human rights of: The Eternal Moment of Whenever, still prefer him 1,000x to the Republicans who want to torture us, strip us of our rights whenever they can.
It's a tough situation, any road. Personally, I'd like to see a solution in alignment with the 14th amendment. But then, that's a typical libertarian-liberal response: We are strict constitutionalists, not judicial activists like the Robert's court, which grants international corporations the right to be natural persons in the US and to donate unlimited sums to influence American elections.
(inter)national DNA database will also become reality. 
