At last, our senior Senator from Ohio has taken the plunge, at least starting his break from unthinking, unblinking support for Bush.

When he was our governor in the 1990's, George Voinovich also had public displays when he was apparently overcome with emotion. One notable instance occurred when budget problems forced the state to cut off thousands of poor people from General Assistance, the last resort for many who had no other means of support like unemployment, etc.

He actually cried in public, asserting he and the state were doing the best they could with the limited resources currently available. He said he knew this would cause distress, and expressed his regret.

At the time, I dismissed all of that as crocodile tears, but over the years since, it's apparent he does have a conscience. He retains a sense of the effects government policy has on individuals, unlike at least one President.

Having a president without that conscience -- who doesn't REALLY feel the pain of others -- we now find ourselves in the Iraq quagmire, with no good options remaining. IF ONLY the Current Occupant had a fraction of the empathy of Sen. Voinovich. (And too bad the good Senator didn't come to his senses earlier!)

I also would like to know exactly what the left and so-called Bush-haters have done, or could have done, to affect Bush's Iraq "strategy" in ANY way. What, exactly, was Bush unable to do, at will, after being given a blank check by Congress when they authorized use of force?

Beyond the fact that one would have to be clinically insane to wish failure on our troops (considering that one main measure of failure is the body count), I don't understand what evidence anyone has that those who felt that Iraq was a war of choice, almost doomed to failure, actually WANTED failure.

Is it a wish for failure to yell at someone careening down a mountain road that they'd better slow down, or perhaps should consider an alternate route entirely? Is it a wish for failure to point out that a cliff lies dead ahead, and that it's a LONG drop?

I guess it all depends on how one defines "success" and "failure" -- and certainly, I have never connected with the Bush administration's ever-changing definition of success in Iraq. Nobody *I* know who objected to the war wanted failure, Joe. Don't know who YOU talk to, but I really doubt you could cite many normal people who actually WISHED for that!

So, please, could we put that canard to rest? Just stay with discussions of substance, and stop attempts at character assassination.

Up to this point, the mantra had been "U.S. forces will stand down as Iraqi forces stand up."

Now, all the Iraqis have to do is simply SHOW up. No longer any requirement to STAND up.

That's progress, folks! Sure it is...

Based on all the evidence, over his entire adult life, George W. Bush has had someone ride to his rescue each and every time he's stumbled, or needed help moving to the next phase in his existence. His privileged life (which isn't his FAULT, of course) has enabled him to avoid disaster whenever its ugly head reared up in his face.

From getting into Yale as a "legacy", to avoiding/evading his National Guard commitment, to his ownership of a baseball team, to the stunning Supreme Court decision handing him the White House on a silver platter (plus all the other incidents in between), he's benefited from the efforts of others -- all designed to GIVE HIM WHAT HE WANTED.

Well, he's finally run out of patrons who are able to continue this largesse. The last gasp from a group trying to provide such support, James Baker's Iraq Study Group, was rejected out of hand by Bush. Now, nobody on earth seems capable of giving him a strategy likely to succeed in Iraq -- guess he's going to have to rely on that "higher Father" he mentioned previously when asked if Bush 41 ever offered advice to him about Iraq.

So, answering my own question, I guess Bush is waiting for divine intervention -- some deus ex machina, entering during the play's last act -- to pull his chestnuts out of the fire. He's just vamping, playing for time, perhaps even trying to wait out the clock on his term in office.

Two problems with that -- first, his "chestnuts" are just his place in history, while our troops have REAL chestnuts on the line in Iraq; second, where exactly will this "deus" come from? Stage right, stage left, or NOWHERE? I guess miracles do still happen, but would a sane person base a critical decision on the expectation of a miracle?