No, getting too wrapped up on domestic issues when you're in the middle of an international war that threatens your very society is dangerous. To try and ignore the fact that Ron Paul is openly calling for us to surrender in that war does nothing to legitimize him.
My whole point is that there are always significant issues on both ends. President Bush is good on foreign affair issues but sucks on running a government domestically. Ron Paul is great on domestic issues, but his foreign policy stances suck. It's a shame that so many people have to "take sides" and not just look at this as an outsider.
You'll have to admit this is a very 'weird' war--the enemy doesn't wear uniforms, have generals, no insignia, etc., while blending in with the locals.
The answer to this Kennedy "quagmire" is the same one that alluded the British a couple of hundred years ago. Namely, to quash the opponent with whatever it takes, no holds barred. Then after we win, we can tell them that "we did it for your own good".
"Mrs. Speaker!"
We disagree here. I'm not afraid of terrorists. My chances of being killed by one are miniscule and if they do get me, well, I'm OK with Jesus. Millions more are killed by abortion each year than by terrorists. Why is it so bad to not be so one-issue on this?