[Superman]

I thought it was interesting that a supposedly liberal media focused a lot of negative time and attention that day (the day of Petraeus' speech) to the title of a Moveon article. On any momentous topic, there will be thousands of articles published. Dozens will be funny. Dozens will be hateful and inappropriate. Why then, did a liberal media stop and focus negative attention on this one article so frequently that anyone watching the news that day would know at least as much about the article as about the General's speech?

Betraeus. BFD. This sort of "news" can be showcased at any time. Why?

FWIW, I have a great deal of respect for the military. A great deal of respect for General Petraeus. His agenda of consistently tracking reliable performance numbers and carefully evaluating them shows a level of managerial acumen we have not seen before from this "administration." Ever.

Frankly, the notion that his speech could be expected to paint a supportive (of the surge and the "president's" agenda) picture of our achievements in Iraq is pretty darned basic. If you asked me for a report of my office's performance over the last xxx period of time, what would you expect me to present? Sheesh!

We've got an "administration" that has shown its willingness to twist and misrepresent information to deliberately deceive citizens. And now you expect a General under that command to deliver a report that makes a positive assessment of a political problem it probably understands poorly.

That's the problem, guys. Just as we erroneously think of the drug abuse problem in America as a "crime" problem, similarly, we erroneously talk about the situation in Iraq as being a military one. It is not. It is not the job of the military (or at least, I hope it is not tasked with this) to resolve political conflict. That would be the job of the White House, if that office were functional. Which it is not.