Political leadership is not about being smart. It is about perceiving, responding to, and representing interests. The Bush Administration represented the perceived interests of the people who elected them. They represented the real interests of the people who directly supported them - the Republican party, corporate interests, those who shared the Administration's ideology.

In this light, it was not irrational to go to war in Iraq. War certainly enriched (and continues to enrich) many corporate iterests. A "strong" foreign policy certainly satisfies the ideological demands of many of the Administration's supporters - traditional, conservative Americans.

What has changed since 2004 are many material facts. After 4,000 plus deaths of military people, which have reached nearly every community in America, perceptions of what their interests are, are changing. Realization that the huge costs of the war have failed to bring about general prosperity have also changed the perceptions that people have. So sentiment has swung against the Bush Administration.

People may not be able to pass the logic section of a law school exam, and their leaders might not either, but they're not stupid. They can (over time) figure out what's in their interest - difficult as modern methods of political persuasion make the task.

As Churchill famously said, democracy is a poor system, the only problem is that all others are worse. Plato's Republic would have smart leaders, but they would have their own interests, and those interests would prevail.

Neale Adams

Vancouver

Conason doesn't really answer the question why the Republicans have been nominating for vice president such obviously unqualified candidates. Spiro Agnew was another. I think it has to do with their view of government--they don't believe in it. Since they expect so little, the only quality in a candidate they care about is electability. Palin is fine, if she attacts votes. Whether she is qualified to lead the nation is irrelevant.

In the last two elections they put foward (and won with) a person, Bush, who I believe was really quite unqualified to be a serious presidential leader--but a great front man.

Ironically, the vice president, Cheney, is quite qualified, and has a good grasp of the issues--although not in the policy direction most of us agree with. But he has been effective, one must say.