I suggest that we decide our leader by a duel. It would be short, sweet, decisive and would greatly reduce any future bellyaching by the loser. It would also be uncorrupted by campaign money’s influence, favor a Southerner, and be great for TV ratings. I would call it “Survivor: Washington.” What better way to determine who would indeed be the best commander in chief?

This election has made one alarming thing clear to me: We have evolved into two differing groups of people. There are those who are independent, self-reliant, hard working and who expect little, if anything, from the government; and then there is the burgeoning class of folks who believe that they should be taken care of by others, namely the government. It seems the government-dependent, welfare state contingent just won the right to rule the country, dealing an ominous setback to the productive members of society. I guess it began in 1999, when Congress made Fannie Mae a social program and the American dream of owning a home became a right. The “right ” of health care is next; what could possibly go wrong with government involvement there?

Where you fall in this category depends entirely on your definition of two words: need and greed. “Greedy” is what 49 percent of the people are who want to keep more of the money that they earn; “need” is the excuse of the other 51 percent for taking more of that money.