[Victoria Delsoul]

Meanwhile, Iraq's experiment in Arab liberty has had ripple effects beyond its borders, pushing the Syrians most of the way out of Lebanon, and in Syria itself significantly weakening Baby Assad's regime. Saad Eddin Ibrahim, who's spent years as a beleaguered democracy advocate in Egypt, told the Washington Post's Jim Hoagland the other day that, although he'd opposed the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, he had to admit it had "unfrozen the Middle East, just as Napoleon's 1798 expedition did. Elections in Iraq force the theocrats and autocrats to put democracy on the agenda, even if only to fight against us. Look, neither Napoleon nor President Bush could impregnate the region with political change. But they were able to be the midwives."

Excellent point. Don't expect the media to report about the advances in the Iraq war, but only what they perceive as failure and doom and gloom of GW's war on terror. We know, however, that the reasons for this blatant omission is the media's political alliance with the Democrats and the Left. Their objective is to undermine the Bush presidency in the hopes that the Democrats will score better points next election when it comes to seats in Congress and the presidency itself.

[Army Air Corps]

Precisely. 'Tis sick that some are willing to sell-out an entire budding democracy for the possibility of a few extra votes at the polls. Selfishness defined.

[Alberta's Child]

And the Democrats are in a box they've made for themselves -- because they can't publicly oppose the war without coming across like an indecisive Kerry-like fool.