Definition of "sovereign" from Webster's Online Dictionary:

"One that exercises supreme authority within a limited sphere"

I'll believe that Iraq has a sovereign government of its own when our government officials like Sec. Rice or Rumsfeld get approval from that government BEFORE making a visit to Iraq, or if that government actually makes an independent decision that goes AGAINST something that the Bush White House wants.

It all depends on the further definitions of "supreme" and "limited sphere", I suppose. It's quite a stretch, though, to maintain the fantasy that Iraq actually has a truly sovereign government!

"Bush said that the "ultimate accountability" rests with him, but then suggested that the time for such talk has come and gone. "That's what the 2004 campaign was about," he said."

He's alluding to that "mandate" that he believes he received from the American people by being reelected.

The speech on Iraq was not a speech at all about Iraq. Yes, he opened up by ackowledging the problems everyone else in the universe long ago acknowledged. For a second I thought I was listening to a speech written three years ago. Or at least it should have been.

But after grudgingly stating the obvious, then saying how unhappy he was, like what has been going on in Iraq had nothing to do with him, we got treated to the stump speech.

Iraq is the center of the war on terror.

If we lose Iraq and its oil will be in the hands of terrorists who will hold our Hummers hostage while mountaining their oil financed terror invasion of USA.

And for the big finale and the GOP campaign slogan:

drum roll...

If you don't reelect the GOP you'll be paying higher taxes while being attacked by terrorists.

Bush even put a price on the cost of voting Democrat: $2,000.00, the estimated loss of the child credit. Vote Republican or pay $2000.00. Election year 2000's tax cut bribary now replaced by 2006's extortion.

Oh yeah, you won't need the money anyway, because if you vote Democrats the terrorists will kill you.

If the Dems want to blunt this "greed and fear" campaign they need to step up to the plate now and swing hard.

I love the URL for CNN's coverage of this speech...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/25/stay.course/index.html

- PonB

Our fearless (Mission Accomplished, "Bring it on!") leader is now pussy-whipped by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Maliki is now setting the aganda? Our troops will be target practise as long as he deems neccessary?

The President will send more troops if General Casey needs them. How many, 50,000, 100,000? Where will they come from? Will there be a need for the draft to fuel this disaster with warm bodies until he can slink away and claim some faux victory? Is this the same Gen Casey who only this week (with shifty, darting eyes) said "Iraq is not awash in sectarian violence"?

After years of arrogance and contempt for anyone who dared question his policies and judgements concerning a disaster that has grown worse by the day and now he expects us to show him sympathy and understanding?

He should have "stayed the course." At least then he just seemed out of touch and delusional. In the last week he has exposed himself for what he really is: a petty, venal, dim-witted opportunist. Nothing more.

It's almost Orwellian how the bush administration operates. They pursue one course of action for months/years, and now that they've changed, they're working hard to convince people it was never that way at all. Next they'll be saying that war is peace.

They just use smokescreens and hope people are overcome by the fumes enough to believe what they say.

...did anyone notice the sequence where Bush implied that a Democratic congress would repeal the Child Tax Credit??

I almost put my head through my driver's side window screaming at my radio this morning.

What a fucking liar. Last I checked, no-one was suggesting repealing the Child Tax Credit, but here's Bush, implying clearly that if you elect Democrats to Congress, you'll lose your child tax credit. It was such a blatant lie, I could not believe he was saying it even as he said it.

Did he sound a little desperate? I thought maybe. He certainly didn't sound presidential. He sounded like your typical right-wing-nut from Texas. His favorite camouflage.

God. Only a coup could put such a dick in power. We have GOT to get rid of this guy, by impeachment, or neutralization with a Dem Congress. Let us pray to the Divine Ordering Principle that Dems win in November!

"Bush said that the 'ultimate accountability' rests with him, but then suggested that the time for such talk has come and gone. 'That's what the 2004 campaign was about,' he said."

Oh. My. GAWD. So, accountability only counts when W's re-election is at stake? And now that he can't run for re-election, he really doesn't care about the war that much, does he? He's already told the press that pulling out of Iraq would happen after 2008 and then it would be someone else's problem.

So, he doesn't care about American lives lost (never mind Iraqi lives lost -- you can pretend you want give them freedom, but who cares if they die from it?). He doesn't care about the cost in dollars (our children will be paying the price), nor the cost in prestige (we're all paying the price right now and for a long, long time to come).

W: one big SOB who's just said so on national television.

What made me so angry when I listened to his purile banter was that not one of the press called him on the fact that he didn't answer their questions. For example (from http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0610/25/cnr.02.html):

QUESTION: Does the United States want to maintain permanent bases in Iraq?

And I would follow that by asking, are you willing to renounce a claim on permanent bases in Iraq?

BUSH: Any decisions about permanency in Iraq will be made by the Iraqi government.

And, frankly, it's not in much of a position to be thinking about what the world's going to look like five or 10 years from now. They are working to make sure that we succeed in the short term. And they need our help. And that's where our focus is.

But remember, when you're talking about bases and troops, we're dealing with a sovereign government.

Now, we entered into an agreement with the Karzai government. They weren't called permanent bases, but they were called arrangements that will help this government understand that there will be a U.S. presence so long as they want them there.

And at the appropriate time, I'm confident we'll be willing to sit down and discuss, you know, the long-term security of Iraq. But right now we're discussing how to bring security to Baghdad and what do we do in al-Anbar Province, where al Qaeda still uses violent methods to achieve political objectives.

You know, it's interesting, if you -- I'm sure people who watch your TV screens think the entire country is embroiled in sectarian conflict and that there's constant killing everywhere in Iraq.

Well, if you listened to General Casey yesterday, you know, 90 percent of the action takes place in five of the 18 provinces. And around Baghdad, it's within a 30-mile area.

And the reason I bring that up is that while it seems to our American citizens that nothing normal is taking place -- and I can understand why. It's a brutal environment there, particularly that which is on our TV screens.

That -- there is, you know, farmers farming. There are small businesses growing. There's a currency that's relatively stable. There's an entrepreneurial class. There's commerce.

General Abizaid was describing to me what it was like to, you know, go to Baghdad markets.

There's a lot work to be done. Don't get me wrong, but there are people living relatively normal lives who I believe -- strongly believe -- that they want to continue that normalcy. And it's up to Prime Minister Maliki to do everything he can to make the situation as secure as possible.

That's a straightforward question. Does the U.S. want permenant bases in Iraq. It has nothing to do with a return to ordinary life in Iraq (and I can't reconcile what the smirking chimp said with the heartwrenching story in Salon by Riverbend last Thursday: http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/10/19/riverbend/).

Bush gave a campaign speech disguised as an answer, and no one called him on it. He didn't say whether or not the U.S. was lobbying the Iraqi government for permenant bases. 90% of his answer didn't address the question at all, and no one called him on it. They never do.