Electoral College: Bush 304 Kerry 234

It seems to me that what you wrote is not too much different than what a democrat(socialist) would say about why we need to keep and/or add some newfangled domestic program that is sure to fail spectacularly. I mean, as we both know, they are long on yapping endlessly about how we are supposed to "help" the poor, "teach" the children, blah, blah, blah. Conservatives rightly point out that it doesn't matter what the intentions are, what counts is the results, and the results of liberal domestic policy is abject failure.

I would love to think that the federal government could do a good, efficient job defending us. Sometimes, I catch myself thinking they might. Then I slap myself across the face.

Let me ask you a question: Don't you think this nation would be better off, safer, and certainly nowhere nearly as deeply in debt if the government simply MANDATED that every single home, condo, apartment, shanty and shack be supplied with a gun, pistol, or rifle. Not that I would advocate that sort of idea, but I would say that the cost of invading a country like that would be so high as to make it pointless. Anyway, is foregn policy really so complex? Why can't it by as easy as: "Free trade with all, foreign entanglements with none." G. Washington, of course.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.