The Roman Repubilcan system.

Seeing as the US 'founding fathers' modelled their idea for "one nation under God" based on the Roman repubilcan system, I wondered what your thoughts are on the striking similarities between the present US system of global influence and that practised by the Romans.

The fact that the top echelons of the present Repubilcan party grandees can happily partake in a blurred three handed pocket filling shuffel in which the lines between, industrial, military and political establisments are melting. (Eisenhower himself warned against an industrial/military block as a potential errosion of civil liberties). Take the Carylye group as an example. It's not the sort of behaviour that would be out of place in 2nd Century Rome. Ex-presidents with influence in global political circles using that to influence national policy infavour of their affliated companies benefit.
Haliburton, shouldn't the very potential for a conflict of interest and the fact that Cheney still owns shares and get defered payments be enough?
I must say that at least in the days of the Roman empire there was cudos and value in the possesion of Roman citizenship. But today it feels like the idea of 'citizen' is being replaced by the notion of 'consumer', a large difference, in which the 'person' becomes no more than a statisitcal financial probability for expolitation.
Also it seems that this idea of 'pre-emptive' stricks automatically assumes a position of authority in which the protagonists see themselves as a stabalising force for the better, 'let's show these silly people how it's ment to be done'.
Any comments?