Take this story on a recent poll in Missouri. While I'm heartened to see that the race is still shaping up to be a dead heat, the specifics depress me:
Kerry did better than Bush among the respondents on the issues of protecting the middle class, improving health care, keeping America prosperous, improving education, holding down federal spending, strengthening Social Security and creating jobs.I imagine that respondents would also favor Bush's handling of the situation in Iran. Because that's shaping up to be the next situation, isn't it?
Bush was favored for sharing the values of the respondents, holding the line on taxes, keeping the country safe from terrorists and handling the situation in Iraq.
I suppose it doesn't matter that the Bush Administration created the situation in Iraq and will likely do the same in Iran. You have to admire the wit of a foreign policy dedicated to getting the United States into trouble that inspires ordinary Americans to close ranks beyond the troublemakers. How can we argue with this sort of logic?:
James Adams, a retired international consultant who lives in Forsyth, favored Bush because of his experience.He has plans? I should darned well hope so.
"You don't change horses in the middle of a stream," he said. "We need to get out of Iraq, and he has plans for doing that."
What if the horse has no intention of making it to the opposite bank?
