The primary responsibility of a nation is self preservation. A nation cannnot exist without its citizenry, therfore the overall protection of its citizens is, of course, the most integral part of the self preservation of a nation. This may include, but is not limited to, the confrontation of any threat, perceived or blatant, against the citizens of a nation, regardless of the size of the threat or its percieved harmlessness. Being that the primary role of a nation is self preservation, through the preservation of its peoples, a nation must value the lives of its citizens above those of other nations. For example, if a relatively small group of people in a foriegn country consistantly threaten the peoples of a nation, it is the responsibilty of the threatened nation to do whatever is physically possible to neutralize the threat, regardless of public opinion, as public opinion alone does not maintain the existance of a nation, and regardless of the possible innocent casulaties that may be incurred in the destruction of the threat, though they should be minimized. There will always be nations that want to destroy other nations and the only reason they don't act upon their wishes is because of their assured destruction from a mightier nation; therefore there must always be nations willing to balance potentialy threatening nations. For example, if Iran thought they could successfully destroy the US, they would without hesitation and without regard for innocent casualties, etcetera. The self preservation of a country depends nearly completely on the constant effort to improve or maintain military strength relative to other nations; The only other option is to wish that your nation's actions never offend or anger any sizeable group of people, but thats not a reality. Most disagreements to this are largley based on wishful thinking; for example, wishing and believing that it doesn't take armies and weapons in order to keep some level of balance in the world or believing that if countries could just 'understand' each other more there wouldn't be war; maybe a worldwide day of tolerance and understanding or an international hug day could be organized to help the effort, as long as it wouldn't interfere with the showdates of my new play "Blood for Oil"; which I'm also holding the lead role, as a gay laywer whose fighting corporate greed, the war and for equal marital rights through my legal smarts and interpretive ribbon dancing.

The Democrats are truly the party of choice. I mean, life is really uncertain, and who has the time to plan for unwanted pregnancies anyway? So, yes, the Democrats are the party of choice in regard to pregnancy*. With social security the Democrats really lay out some very nice options as well; you can let the government decide how much you pay into your social security account in the form of a payroll tax, or..........you can..........let the government decide how much you pay into your social security in the form of a payroll tax. Like I wrote, some very nice options. What about maybe, allowing me to invest a portion of my social security "dues" into the stock market through mutual funds, etc. ? Since I earned the money to begin with, how about letting the portion of benefits that I don't use be inherited by my family upon my death. Not a chance. What about education? The Democrats are the self proclaimed defenders of public education, right? What if I find the public school in the district in which I live has terrible testing and graduation rates? Since the government is alotting a certain dollar amount for my childs education through public schools, can't they do the same except with a private school of mine and my childs choice? Oh wait, but that would result in less kids in public schools, which would result in less $$ going to the public schools and since teachers unions are all nested into the democratic party that means.......you don't have a choice and that your kid is stuck in the school in your district regardless of how bad it is. The Democrats are the defenders of the current public school system and the teachers and the unions their apart of, which is miles away from being concerned about the actual kids who are stuck in the schools.

*Pregnancy is the process of gestation for humans where after nine months a lifeless, inanimate clump of cells magically becomes a human when it comes in contact with air during birth and from that point on is protected by our laws.

Walmart.

It seems there is constant debate over whether Walmart is "good" or "bad" . The classic 'Walmart is bad' thinking goes something like this: "Walmart is big business and big business is inherently evil therefore a plus b equals Walmart is evil. Walmart also stiffles the competition; that being smaller business's without the buying power and resources to compete. They also make manufacturing plants compete feircely for their business which somehow makes them 'bad'. Basically everything Walmart does that their most critized for happens to be tactics which produce more profit, which is the reason Walmart exists. Which is the reason the smaller hometown business exists, which is the reason that organic food market exists. That 'all organic market' exists to make money; not just because they have some intense passion about organic food. The same is true with most business's. They exist to make money. They same thing with Walmart. Walmart just does it better than most of their competetors. There are a ton of people that would have no problem if there was government intervention in Walmart development, dictating where they could have stores in regard to how many stores they may put out of business. Such meddling stands awthart the foundations of free markets and bears similarity to principals observed by socialists.

of being conservative,


Taxes: If you like paying taxes then you can't be conservative. I consider any money I pay that is not in direct exchange for goods or services as taxes; whether its medicaid or social security or whatever other govy program under the guise of a service to the people. Many conservatives believe that taxes should be as flat as possible, that financially successful people should not be penalized for their success, and each citizen should be financially responsible for themselves or their family. Regardless of the reason(s) for ones financial problems- lack of employment, a shit ball economy, laziness, vice, poor life decisions (like making babies with the guy who won't work) - each citizen should be responsible only for themselves, not that we shouldn't care for our neighbor, though such shouldn't be imposed by a government via taxes. But what about the roads you drive on? and the miles of pipe that connect your water and schools and the military and police? Of course we have to be taxed for all of these things, but they should be operated efficiently and be kept to a minimum.


Regulation: In Maryland, you have to have a license to operate a coin operated billiard. To me that is crazy. The law dictates it is illegal to operate a coin operated billiard without buying a license from the State. That is the tip of the iceberg. If you want to change the size of a window in your house then you need a permit, which costs money. If you want to make a driveway on YOUR property then you have to get a permit. If you want to legally scrape or remove lead paint you need a license. If you want to legally own a dog you need a license. If you want to add a room on your house your gonna need a permit. If you want to convert your home to a 2 unit then your going to need a permit. Regulation like this is doing absolutely no service to citizens. Licenses and permits overall serve as cash flow for various governments. Regulation is always initiated for the "protection" of the people, though always, always ends up serving the monetary interests of the government (local, state, federal) more than the well being of its citizens. Conservatives believe that a free market naturally solves the problems that regulation is enacted and fails to solve. If enough people voiced their opinion to their power company about poor environmental standards then the power company would respond in order to keep customers. People and companies that do poor work or sell sub par services and goods will not stay in business long. Companies that are found discriminating against anyone for any reason are punished by the market. Consumers in groups are very powerful. Regulation gives lawmakers great power also, think of how regulation opens the door to bribes and the ability for companies and lobbyist to "buy" our lawmakers.This does not mean that all regulation is bad; it just means that so far regulation serves the government more than its citizens.

The 'Minuteman Militia'

I can't understand why anyone legally in this country would be against the Minuteman. As long as their not breaking any existing laws then they should be commended for their civic duty. A lot of people oppose them because of the inherent nature of militias in general and the fact that the people attracted to this type of militia are most likely or obviously anti mexican. Though what is the point of a border and immigration laws if the border is not fiercely defended? Are we to justify the widespread disrespect for our immigration laws by Mexicans because life in Mexico doesn't offer the same opportunities? That is the twisted logic of some. In reality we (America) should have some sort of physical barrier securing the border. Again, I can't see any logical opposition to this outside of the financial side of it. I am not anti immigrant of any sort. America is very pro immigrant; that's the whole "melting pot" thing, but immigrate the legal way and assimilate. Anyone, anywhere trying to sneak into the country should be considered a risk and potential liabilty and treated accordingly. Its a wild concept I know.