[Torie]

I agree with you, that Bush was not there to please his audience. I don't think the audience was as "disappointed" as CBB suggests. I think the speech was OK, if rather repetitive of earlier speeches, except for his oversell of the significance of the June 30 transition. Would that the transition on that date be seminal. It will not be alas. That's my judgment.

[Texasforever]

Would that the transition on that date be seminal. It will not be alas. That's my judgment.

I don't think Bush made the claim that it would be "seminal". It is just the first step in the 5-point plan. Yes, it had nothing new. But why would that be a surprise? I would venture that to 90% of those that watching it that it was new since they are not news junkies like many of us. Bush has bet his election on his faith that the Iraqis are capable of self-government. That is a leap of faith that few politicians would ever take. So he has "stayed the course" when many that were "behind him all the way" have jumped off the train. We haven’t seen that trait in a politician in a long time. I just wonder if we ever will again.

[Sabertooth]

I think the speech was OK, if rather repetitive of earlier speeches, except for his oversell of the significance of the June 30 transition. Would that the transition on that date be seminal. It will not be alas. That's my judgment.

The speech wasn't terrible, though it was dull. First time I've fallen asleep during a GWB speech.

Agreed about the oversell of the transition. I also remain of the opinion that the President is more than a little Pollyannish about the long-term democratic prospects in Iraq, or most other Middle Eastern nations, but I understand that, as with Oslo, the West needs to go through the motions of the experiment to be convinced of its unviability.

I don't stand with those who think that a "failure" in Iraq would necessarily be disastrous. Whatever the outcome, the experiment will bring clarity.