[meenie]

Everybody has to make their own decision on how they handle the socialist agenda. There is one problem I have with the concern for security in the years ahead. The consensus seems to be that a strong defense does not rely on a strong economy to support that strong security. I fail to see how there is a disconnect between the two. We have to have the ability to support our military, if not, we can go to the Soviet model where the country goes down the creek and the military collapses. Guns and butter did not work in the Lyndon Johnson era and it will not work in this era.

[Burkeman1]

We sing the same song. Modern Empires are net drains on the home country of the empire and eventually drain it dry. The Soviet Empire didn't last nearly as long as they would have if their economy wasn't a crazy utopian pipe dream. We can play numbers games for a least a few decades and use our "superpower" status to forestall the inevitable but eventually all debts are called in.

But the immediate question is who is to run this country for the next four years?: Dean or Bush? Will the election of Dean have any significant impact on our foreign policy? Not one bit! And if history is any indicator- Democrats always seem to expand such little wars as we have now and make them even worse.

Vote Bush- hope he purges the neocons among his advisors- and hope he appoints sound jurists to the bench. A lot to hope for yes. But there is no hope if Dean is elected.