That said, I'm with you on the socially moderate/fiscally conservative thing...with the one exception being the necessity for a strong national defense (which we currently do not have thanks to Mr. Obama).
The emphasis would have to be on
defense. Strictly defense, nothing more. No more
nation building, no more intervention merely because there is unrest or political instability
in a given area, so long as there is no explicit or
provably iminent threat to the United
States. (A comparable example would be the time in the 1980s when Saddam Hussein was
fool enough to declare his newly built and on-line nuclear reactor would be used explicitly
to make weapons for use against Israel, and the Israelis said "not so fast, sucker" and
flew in the bombers post haste to take care of
that idea . . .) We can't just waltz in
and overthrow everyone we can't stomach otherwise, or back those looking to overthrow
someone we can't stomach otherwise, if only because of the law of unintended
consequences having a nasty habit of making things even worse. (Just ask Iran.)
