I support Bush and seems you just said you do. So I am a bit confused.
As far as protecting interest I am mainly refering to our Asian and European interest however our intrest is making any and every attempt to secure the middle east plays into that at least until we secure more oil resources over here, which ain’t happening anytime soon.
I do find it interesting that you complain about nation building and then support Bush. It is also intersting that you say several republicans running understand the threat and mention Paul among them.
Dr. Paul understands the principles that guide our country and wants to preserve them. He also understands there are ways to conduct business, protect our economic interests, remain strong, and still leave folks in the dust who do not give a rats behind about the freedoms we enjoy.
The candidates I do not want to see in public office are the moral relativists who would shape our principles according to definitions *opposite* of what our founding fathers intended. Public officials ought first and foremost be about “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” on the part of their constituency. I see President Bush in that camp, as well as a handful of other Republican candidates.
Those who percevie Dr. Paul as a cut and run, kow-towing defeatist in this struggle are dead wrong. They can’t see the forest for the trees, and that forest is adherence in practice to the founding documents of our Constitution. Of all the candidates he seems to get it best.
I hope the other candidates are listening, although it appears a good many merely bring out the broad brush of ridicule rather than think things through. The wisdom of spending our precious blood and resources to establish freedom in the midst of peoples who despise it is worth debating, and that is why I do not by any means chalk Dr. Paul up as a “loon.”