Here in Missouri
61% of people disapprove of the job being done by Gov. Matt Blunt.
So, knowing that fact, one Republican state auditor candidate wants you to know that if you elect him, he will roll over for Blunt, and assume the best.
The full article is here (I found it on Fired Up! Missouri)
The main quote:
Loudon portrayed McCaskill's style as confrontational and criticized that approach as inefficient. His approach would be more positive, he said, and would start from the assumption that 95 percent of the people in government "are in it for the right reasons" and are doing their jobs well.
You know what they say about assuming things? (answer and more under the fold)
Assuming makes an ass out of you and Missouri.
Essentially, John Loudon is pretty straight-forward about his desire to not really audit anything if elected.
The difference between what Claire McCaskill does and what John Loudon does would be the difference between doing the job and not doing it. Claire McCaskill has been going after the signs of corruption in the Blunt administration. John Loudon would rather stonewall such things.
After all, he'll assume that everybody is spiffy, and that suspicious things shouldn't be investigated.
Apparently 'positive energy' will power the state auditor's office if John Loudon or any Culture of Corruption Republican gets elected.
And, just to avoid questions, the Democrats have three candidates for Auditor: Maida Coleman (State Senator from St. Louis), Susan Montee (Buchanan County Auditor), and Mark Powell (Mayor of Arnold, nominee for State Treasurer in 2004)