I only caught a small portion of this speech before I got that sinking feeling in my stomach every time I listen to this guy or his cronies speak anymore. I must have missed the good part and just heard the part about how we had to bring democracy to the middle east and how those who support Israel should be backing him up here. I've had a real problem with all of this even above and beyond the moral implications. There has always been some logical fault that I couldn't put my finger on with the whole bringing democracy to the middle east. I finally realized what it was. The point of democracy is choice and to bring democracy to some other country via gunpoint just seems akin to a shotgun wedding to me. Countries have to be ready for demoracy and they have to want it. Democracy not done right can turn into an elected dictatorship of the majority where the minorities come under the thumb of those in charge. Besides just being a giant act of hubris, it's just a poor decision if that's what we actually went in there to do originally, as opposed to why we were told we were going there. Very frustrated.

I would be careful not to buy into the coming media narrative of Bush's "bounce back" which feeds on the assumption that his recent poll numbers are a mere matter of PR flubs as opposed to failed policy. The MSM likes this narrative, because it is based in their egomaniacal belief that they are the ones dictating reality and that truth is merely a matter of who says what in the best way, rather than some confusing existential phenomenon that someone might actually have to do some investigative reporting to uncover. I guess we can mail a gold sticker to Bush for finally doing his assignment, but this isn't like his days back at Yale. He's a quarterback, not a cheerleader, and until he starts pursuing a policy on Iraq that works, the effectiveness of his PR strategies is irrelevant.

I agree with Sunshine Girl...we are not supporting a democratic revolution started by the Iraqi's we're imposing it on them...so no, Mr. President, it's not like our own battle for democracy. Will he ever get it? The analogy of the shot-gun wedding is right on point if you ask me!

Doesn't it strike anyone else strange that on some days the President seems to deliver rather simple speeches from a prompter in 3 and 4 word groups and other days, evidently this morning was one of them, he can actually wake up and manage a whole sentence at a time.

One friend with a good deal of experience in rehab says this resembles people she's seen diagnosed with brain damage from drug and alcohol use.

Or are there some special pep-ups he occasionally takes?

What's going on here?

Reading this, I realized I very much yearn to have a president who answers questions and who displays something human behind the politically-crafted image. But it's still no comfort to hear again the inapt analogy to the American revolution which was hundreds of years in the making and deeply organic in its origins. And, of course, there is also the unhappy example of the French revolution that quickly descended into deep anarchy and muddled along for decades before achieving any kind of stable government. Maybe that's what's unfolding in Iraq.

Wow! The President of the United States answered some questions! And he didn't screw up any of the big words!

The maestro of manglespeak slips the leash, and for a brief moment, surprises us all, by not screwing up. Before anyone gets too excited, how do we know that Karl didn't Gannonise the audience? Don't bet on a repeat glitch-free performamce from Junior, if someone pops him a question about anything nuclear.

Not likely. On the video clip I saw of President Bush answering the question about the number of Iraqis killed, it appeared he was reading from his notes. My, isn't it convenient that he happened to have the answers to the questions written down!

as there was during the debates last year? Bush unscripted is wonderful if you don't like him - remember New Orleans? - and a horror if you're a spin doctor. I can't believe his handlers and psychiatrists let him loose without some sort of backup.

Maybe Bush really was as good as the reports say answering spontaneous questions from random members of his audience, but forgive me if I am deeply distrustful of everything that this super-scripted White House does in public.

If you look at the transcript, you'll see that the president took exactly five questions. Of those, two were from self-confessed supporters of his. Two were of a nature that you could say they came from the opposition. And one pretty much straddled the line in the middle. What are the chances of that happening with just random picks from the crowd, huh?

Of course, maybe it's just that Republicans are remarkably lucky when it comes to games of chance. Bob Ney, after all, managed to win $34,000 on a $100 bet in two hands of a card game at a ritzy London casino a British avation executive had introduced him to...

I will back all bets that say those questions were scripted; as were the answers. These guys don't do anything that is unrehearsed. You just don't get it. Neither does NBC, which accepted an invite to the whitehouse to interview Bush. The usually composed Brian Williams appeared nervous and intimidated. Bush looked more like Alfred E. Newman than I have ever seen him.

i love bush. even if the questions and answers were unscripted, he's awesome: he's lowered the bar so far that all he has to do is simple things -- things that most other people manage to do without a team of handlers advising them -- to receive words of praise.

i'm going to try something similar at my job. i'm going to screw up things so badly that when i manage to do something as basic show up on time and not burn the office building to the ground, i'll get a raise and a promotion.

oh! and i'll have to remember to act folksy -- gosh-boy-howdy-i'm jus' a reg'lar guy -- the whole time for maximum effect. i reckon i'll get 'er done and have 'em eatin' out of my hand by the time i'm through.