I do respect that you and others place it as your number one priority. I don't think either party will lower our national security as another 9/11 would eliminate their party in the next election.
I'm willing to put up with another democrat if meant another Ronald Reagan down the road - I lived through JFK and LBJ (which were worse than Bill Clinton), Carter, and Clinton.
The people at the top only care about elections, and right now it's in their best interest to appeal to people on both sides of the fence, through all these little programs and expenditures. They may not be on the scale of JFK/LBJ, but they are just as harmful, as they are harder to reverse down the road.
We need less government, not more, and we can maintain our current level of national security (as weak as it may be) and still work towards less government.
Do you honestly think that if they were in power they would accept blame for another terrorist attack? HA! They would cashier some of the military, blame the FBI, and go their merry way. Besides, they would think we wouldn't have an attack because we would be letting FRANCE have a veto power over our foreign policy.
And there is no guarantee you would get another Reagan (who also funded the NEA, the NPR, farm bills, and the Department of Education).
Most of the country is not conservative, which many people don't realize. I am the MOST conservative person in my extended family, and they are fairly normal people. Two of my sisters are centrist voters, and one sister and one brother are yellow-dog democrats. My sister the art teacher, who voted for Bush, likes this idea. My brother, the union electrician, is going to vote for Kerry if he is the nominee; he is convinced that W is out to destroy unions.
Moving too quickly and too far to the right will give us President Kerry, whether you want to believe this or not. And we won't see another Reagan for a generation, so you'd best quit looking.