[maica]

,,,then he [Congressman King] mentioned a soldier that was quiet thru the whole tour but then at the end came over to King and said that the american media had the blood of our soldiers on their hands because of the way they choose to report the news ...

*****

This needs to be said often, especially after any appearance by a Dem presidential aspirant.

President Bush's speeches are easy to understand. His sentences have a point; they do not ramble and waffle like the words of the previous president.

He particularly called Operation Iraqi Freedom the "battle of Iraq." The war is against those who use terror to hurt others. It is not against a country.

Media types who make their living using words CAN understand these distinctions, but just like the way, in 1994, they could not bring themselves to say "Contract with America" usually saying "Contract ON America" they refuse to recognize what President Bush actually says in his speeches.

[speekinout]

President Bush's speeches are easy to understand.

For sure. And at his Tue. news conference, he made it clear that we are not going to be abandoning Iraq until they have a functioning democracy. He was also clear about what we have to do (train police, army, security guards, etc.) and what they have to do (write a Constitution, have elections, etc.).
That sounds like a plan to me. Not one where you can set a date certain, but one you can measure.

And yet the Dems rail that he has no plan, or is a miserable failure. Without any alternative.
Are they dumb? Or are we as dumb as they think we are?