"So, in a verb, if you contrast the two verbs, which is -- when we look in the mission statement, we look to the verb, OK?"

Is this even English?

Apart from all this, with Yet Another restatement of the objectives of the current surge, I can't help but think of what George Santayana called it when people redoubled their efforts even after forgetting the original purpose: Fanaticism.

God help us all.

Aren't these they same guys who excoriated Clinton when he quibbled over the definition of "is"?

And isn't there a bit of a moral difference when, unlike with Bill, more American kids are dying and more Chinese dollars are being spent each day that these guys quibble?

What the hell was that burst of nonsense? Could it even qualify as "doublespeak"? Probably not -- my understanding is that Orwellian doublespeak involves reversals of the clear meaning of words. I've read this War Room item 4 or 5 times, and am no closer to understanding a word of it -- forwards, backwards, upside down or inside out.

Larger issue: WHY does the media still play along with this "senior administration official" crap? If something being said by such "officials" is all that important, reliable and worthy of coverage, why provide the cover of anonymity? I just don't get it, and never will.

One of the administrations pet lines about the Iraq war is that "we're fighting them there so that we don't have to fight them here". But now we're told that our focus in Iraq is shifting away from "the enemy" and toward protecting the populace.

Never mind defining who "the enemy" (or even "them") is. Never mind the question of who we're protecting the populace from, if we're not fighting "the enemy." We are now at odds with Bush's favorite mantra--we're not fighting them "there" or anywhere now. We're providing security to the Iraqi populace--populace that desperately needs protection because...we invaded them and shut down their government.

My head hurts

Seriously, does everybody's brain turn to Bush-like mush after they work there a while? What the hell is "the dimension which everybody captures it?" What did any of that mean (or, what is the "stand-up-to-do-what")?

And is it even possible to be an "anonymous" official if you're speaking to a room full of reporters? Come on, reporters: out these idiots!

Remember, U.S. Americans, the verb is: secure the population. Do it for the Iraq!

No kidding. That was completely unintelligible. I found a clearer explanation on a Baltimore Sun blog: "The more we succeed, the more troops we can bring home from Iraq. The president calls this policy, 'Return on Success.'"

However, I find this new policy name gross and out of touch. Return on Success?

Like returns on the stock market? The currently volatile stock market? Where the nation's richest people and biggest corporations get even richer? An index that has little to do with the immediate concerns of the working poor and much of the middle class?

Way to go. Let's reduce the lives and futures of U.S. troops to the abstractions of electronic money.

Start counting. It will be the new "stay the course", "road map", "war on terror" ...

Condi will be on Good Morning America next week and will say "Return on Success" at least two dozen times.

And MSM journalists actually subject themselves to this rubbish?

No wonder our country is going down the tubes.

"Reporter: Inaudible."

Why do I get the impression that the inaudible part was the reporter laughing or choking out a "you've got to be kidding?"

post game commentary or interviews. Mindless blather. Only instead of the "players" on the "field" making millions and signing autographs afterwards, they are in body bags or missing body parts.

RichEmery said " What was that burst of nonesense? " I think that covers the "return to success" strategy perfectly!

I can take much more.

And you moved TOWARDS DC, Tim?

The Dems should mimic the Repugs by labeling the Bush regime's plans themselves, instead of letting them get away with the word "Success."

This is "Stay the Course" and the Dems should drive that home.

How about the truth?

Senior Administration Official: "This whole war thing was a dumb idea. A really, really dumb idea. So was the surge. We don't have a clue what to do next. We have no idea how we can get out of this quagmire. We just can't bring ourselves to admit it in public, so we are fudging data and twisting words and spinning lies, hoping the public will be fooled again."

You don't really expect anyone to say that, do you?

I believe that I understand what they were saying. It may not be what they meant to say, but its sounds just like:

"Ladies and Gentlemen, we have an army in Iraq that is in search of a mission. We don't know what to do with them and we're afraid to bring them home, because then we'd look like fools and everybody would be really upset with us for getting almost 4,000 Americans and at least twenty-five times that number of Iraqis killed for reasons we can't, or wouldn't dare, articulate."

The only verb we need to be examining is "to impeach".

The difference is "dotted maps" - I haven't seen them; and anything that potent has to have its own web site. Did the give a URL?

after all "Stay the course" was getting old. I don't know if the on/upon thing was intentional or another w-ism.

"You've all seen the dotted maps and so forth. That did not exist before."

Most impressive this "Return on Success". Wow! Dotted lines. Maps. Genius.

What's next? Green and red Monopoly houses and hotels to go next to the dotted lines?

And the Dems are actually scarred of THIS?

Unbelievable. Comedy is tragedy plus time. Go team yay.

So this goes back to the shift that we saw in January that has resulted in what I would call the infrastructure, the security infrastructure required to secure the population. So these are the joint security stations, the combat outposts. You've all seen the dotted maps and so forth. That did not exist before. So now, when we transition to the Iraqis, we're transitioning this new concept and the infrastructure to allow them to do it. So there is some element of stand up, stand down, but it is not -- it is now focused on population security, when it was not, pre-January

We are FINALLY placing civilian security as a HIGH priority and "doing it" shoulder to shoulder with Iraqi forces on an ongoing basis.

Unlike everything else we've (theoretically) tried (while in fact playing cowboys and indians whack a mole) this might actually produce some dividends ... in a more reliable local (Baghdad) police force/presence.

Beats the hell out of running all over the place acting touch and getting blown up in Humvees ... seriously.

Hate Team Bush, Hate this war ... but, if it can be sustained, this is a good thing ... even if I thought it was to have started with "the surge" ...