I can sense a very budding hope of the change in the country-when one is not afraid to protest the war for fear of being called a traitor; to question the ability of the government to do anything right; to ask questions that haven't been asked before, and getting some answers. To have courage to face the enemy and say, "NO MORE!"

It is called "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore". I think the American people are finally waking up to the fact that what we had voted for in the past has nearly destroyed our country, and we only woke up in time to start putting it back together. It's going to take a lot of hard work and diligence to get it back, but it can be done.

We just can't let it take care of itself-because otherwise nothing will change. We must keep on keeping on until it is over.

For the first time in years I feel really good about being on the right side. I knew back in 2000 this set of circumstances would roll out the way they did..and felt real fear from that time on. Now that fear is beginning to recede very slowly.

As part of their "sea-change", the NY Times is now asking for answers to the questions that they should have asked 6 years and one war ago.

They're demanding answers for the why we're still in Iraq, why did the Republican congress not do anything, why the hell is everyone in the administration such a liar...and so forth.

It must be getting bad for them (the first cheerleaders of the war) to actually turn on their masters and demand something more than glib cliches and "myths" from the same people they worshiped not that long ago.

I guess something sunk into their heads-perhaps some damn good sense.

I know, I know..they're just as bad as every other corporate entity news outlet, but still, they're the "big guy" in it. If they're changing their tone, everyone should pay attention.

There's somethin' happening here..

This war is no more like WWII than Vietnam was.

This was totally unnecessary and against the wrong country for the wrong reasons and the wrong ideology.

It was for oil and revenge, not freedom. It wasn't about catching Bin Laden or to atone for 9/11, it was to make Halliburton rich.

The difference is that WWII did free some tens of thousands of Jews from concentration camps from a certain death; it freed entire nations from the Nazi regime, and it stopped the Japanese from conquering all of the Pacific.

Any comparision to this war is laughable and pathetic. WWII was a necessary war( when all else failed) against identifiable evil. The Iraq war was not only not necessary, it should have been stopped before it began.

As for Bush thinking he's Churchill, he should read some history books and biographies. Sir Winston must be spinning in his grave.

I'd like to know the names of these sobs so the American people can sue them shitless. They're the ones who financed his campaign and made him a candidate. They're probably the ones who told him to invade Iraq for whatever reasons, probably financial, to their benefit.

My husband has always said there was a Texas Mafia that supports the idiot. This proves it.

GK did himself proud-he evokes a southern drawl while contemplating the horror of a war we should not be in..if he can do it, why can't those idiots in Washington get it?

I was born at Ft. Benning, and while I didn't grow up there, the town of Columbus and the army base have a special place in my heart. Call it neonatal memory.

Bush stopped at Fort Benning a while ago to extoll his surge..and got the chilliest reception I have ever witnessed by any group of soldiers..they understand better than Bush does the meaning of sacrifice for no good reason..they're the ones who do it. I think they understand the futility of war, especially this one.

Thanks, Garrison, that was a great piece...did yourself proud, this time!

That's what Bush is always saying-that we have to send them more money, more arms and more of everything.

His veto just denied them support.

Did he notice this? He lied again!!

Why does the LW have to apologize for having "forbidden" thoughts and feelings about something that she wrote before the marriage?

Doesn't she own her own soul?

Marriage means the joining of two people. It does not mean morphing into each other every day for 24/7/365.

Her private thoughts and feelings should have been kept private, and he should not have read what it contains. Human nature being what it is, perhaps she thought he would read it, and accidentally kept it unsafe for that reason, although I don't know why she would.

He might also keep a diary or journal, which she doesn't know about...where her character is not so flattering.

Keeping secrets from one another is one thing, and quite harmful. Keeping your soul for your own is another.

The LW should really find another secure place to keep her thoughts to herself, where he can't find them.

Baring your innermost mind-workings is good for your mental health; finding that your spouse knows about them is not.