Better yet, name the single existential treat to our nation. Besides ourselves, that is.

The world is a dangerous place, and when one meddles too deeply in the business of others one draws fire. We have drawn some fire, but more warning shots than anything else.

We have a military that is still some 30% too large. I get it, the military is not going to volunteer for that cut. But it needs to happen none the less, and it will make us more secure in the process. Our national security is a function of many factors, and military strength is only but one. When we over invest and over engage with that single aspect it throws the entire system out of balance. We need to rebalance.

We are becoming a nation that is both excessively fearful and violent. That is a good definition for a bully, but not for a nation. Our self-image is incrasingly out of synch with reality and out of synch with how others perceive us. Going back to our roots to reassess how we best move forward is sound advice.

To simply imply that the Constitution and the Declartation are irrelevant to America in the modern age is the kind of rhetoric that should be saved for some Mein Kampf-type manefesto. I realize you don't mean that, just as I assume you must realize that I am not a strict constructionist. Most aspects, however, say what they say and mean what they mean. What the court interprets is if some law meets the constitution, not if the constitution meets some perspective or law.

The second amendment, for example, guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, but it did so in an era where every adult male was required by law to be a member of the "well regulated militia" and to provide his own firearm. Should we take that right away simply because such a duty no longer exists? Perhaps better that we re-instate the miliita duty if we are a nation at such grave risk as to require a war fighting army on the active books...