I think they might of thought if the Arab world had a choice they would naturally choose secular leaders or leaders friendly to our interest, it don't always work out that way.
You're probably right, but if they choose representative governments, it's very unlikely that they will come into conflict with the US or the rest of the West.
The point where there is disagreement is what should and can the US and other Western nations do to prevent or contain the emergence of governments hostile to their interests and nationals?
I appreciate that there are people who think the answer should be:
"Nothing. Live with it, unless they attack your country. Leave them alone and they never will."
Of course abiding by such a policy would necessitate doing away with inter-national security alliances (and likely trade alliances as well), or the possibility of the West sticking its nose into the business of The Sudan, Haiti, Rwanda, and Bosnia among others. Maybe that's a proper trade-off. Certainly conservative isolationists like Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan would agree.
And it might not if democracy has it way in Egypt either, but democracy is the right thing in either case.
Is it the right thing if the new "democracy," for lack of enlightened leaders or a surefit of opportunists, quickly leads to another autocracy which will be eventually be the target future of pro-democratic reformists?