What's up with Ian Scott?

I just wrote up a relatively large post taking down Ian's irrational and hopelessly naive critiques of American foreign policy, but then I thought that Ian's a pretty good guy, and I didn't want to seem as if I was attacking him.

But yeah - in basic summary (though omitting many points that I wanted to make), but in no real order: America has done bad things in the past; America has done good things in the past as well; Bush's current rhetoric is too ambitious and unrealistic (which is a good thing mostly); A country can only be expected to act in its best interests; America can't be compared with any other nation due to its power; Doing bad things does not handicap a nation's ability to do good things; Iraq's invasion was not in America's material best interests; and lastly, STOP BEING SO FREAKING CYNICAL. Is it not possible for George W. Bush or another US President to be the slightest bit sincere when they talk about foreign policy or are they always acting in the most malevolent way possible?