...where is the Democrats responce? Once again they are silent. Certainly, George Bush's statements are self-serving and ludicrous, but his party is for the most part falling in line. The most coming from the opposition is disinterested silence. The Republicans, once again, own the issue by defualt even if the majority of Americans now oppose the war. The Democrats should be hammering him on this 24 hours a day.

This absolutely boggles my mind.

What's harder to believe is that America would make long journeys across dangerous borders, endure heavy fighting, and blow up thousands of civilians in the streets of Baghdad (Shock and Awe) based on lies, innuendo and fear mongering.

One has to wonder how many fortified bunkers were opened to civilians that night. Bush and Co. created a nightmare and now invites all to perpetuate it. One has to wonder how this man can sleep.

Those members of the reality-based community understand that Forest Gump is alive and well...Stupid still is as stupid still does...Yet I can't seem to shake the expectation that BushCheney&Co. will see a bump in the polls after his latest round of noxious hot air is dispersed--especially as we approach the mid-terms.

It is interesting to note that the President chose August 31, 2006 to make his pronouncement that the Iraq War “…is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century.” Yesterday also marked the day that the Iraq War exceeded the three years, five months, and 11 days it took us to defeat Nazi Germany. It seems this Administration has forgotten the most important lesson of WWII, i.e. the necessity to win. With the benefit of history, as imperative as it was for us to engage in WWII, we now know that it would have been morally indefensible in terms of human carnage and lost treasure if we had taken five, ten or more years to prevail in that conflict because with competent leadership and military commanders, it was accomplished in less time than it has taken us to reach the current state of affairs in Iraq. With a comparative record such as this, and with not a single civilian or military leader having been held accountable for the failures to date, its tragic that our President has the audacity to claim that he and his party are the most capable when it comes to protecting our country.

In Bush's grand speech he suggest that the war in Iraq and by default the war on terror " is more than a military conflict; it is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century. On one side are those who believe in the values of freedom and moderation -- the right of all people to speak, and worship, and live in liberty. And on the other side are those driven by the values of tyranny and extremism -- the right of a self-appointed few to impose their fanatical views on all the rest. "

Now which of the two sides do you think that Bush is really on? As far as I can tell the values of freedom and moderation, the right of all people to speak (insert dissent and disagree) ... has been at extreme peril with the very narrow view of values and the future under Bush and his administration. And I don't think that anyone could argue that this administration's visible and veiled play to expand the powers of the presidency and the same time ignore the judiciary (when it deems appropriate) and the legislature time and again - is clearly a practice of extremism that the 'right of self-appointed few' (Insert Rove, Bush, Cheney, Rumsefield, etc on all of the rest here and abroad!

Some prominent Democrat or some presidential hopeful needs to lay out a plan for Iraq, somewhere between Stay-The-Course and Cut-And-Run. Saintzak (1st post here) is right. Anybody who breaks with Bush, and starts speaking out now, with details and specifics... that person will be the next president of the USA. If nobody speaks, everybody loses.

W wouldnt be out making any "political" speeches. How can you say that?

Hes out talking about the war and..you know.. 9/11. How come you guys--so

what theres some elections in November? You guys twist--...look--

I really know W is really trying to be a uniter and not a divider.

I believed him first time on that.I just dont know how he would not be

doing that. He's the best president this country ever had as far as I'm

concerned. HONEST. TOUGH. SAYS WHAT HE MEANS AND DOES WHAT HE SAYS.

I dont know how you could say he is out talking about politics. Well...

I support him 110 percent. Those damn DEMOCRATS just want to cut and run

anyways...could screw this country up good. I support my man W ,he wants

to stay in Iraq until the job is done. I just know we can win in Iraq

if we stick with him on this. I know it. What else can we do? We pull

out now them terrorist guys will come right behind and we will be fighting

them here. I think thats a pretty bad thing to let happen. No, I'm with

W all the way. Hmmm...I wonder if he maybe meant something else cause

there is the elections in November?...why else would he be out talking

about his important ideas? Well...I know he means right...them damn

liberals...damn press...always trying to stir up the pot...Hmmmpphh.

So who does speak for the Democrats? Anyone? The four I have mentioned would seem likely candidates to shove Bush's prevarication right back down his throat.

What is that I hear? A thunderous silence from the pretenders to the throne? Oh well, they must have a good reason, don't you think?

The Dems are disgusting beyond belief.