Remember those "security moms" that political commentators kept talking about in the months before last year's presidential election? They weren't thrilled with Republican economic or social policies, but they reportedly felt safer by staying the course and re-electing Bush and his fellow GOPers.
Democrats should challenge this notion head-on, and the perceived debacle of Hurricane Katrina strengthens their odds of doing so with some success. After all, both a hurricane and a terrorist attack have something in common -- each one requires a speedy response to get food, medicine or rescue equipment quickly to those in need.
Or, to frame this in question form: If the Bush administration couldn't respond adequately to a hurricane-induced flood whose potential destruction had been foreseen by top experts long ago, what makes us think the administration can adequately respond to a terrorist strike that may come without warning?