Nice try, but not even close. When asked why people should not be so hard on Rumsfeld, even though he is in charge of the military, his entire response was, "The fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge, and he works closely with them and the president." to misconstrue this as an attack on the military, and somehow in league with what Kerry said, is a total stretch.

Boehner:" Wolf, I understand that, but let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumself."

Let's do blame Iraq on Political Correctness.

Our military knows what to do and how to do it well, but when terrorists hide in the midst of civilian populations like piglets scurrying under women's skirts, our troops are forced to use extreme restraint , go for highly calculated checked and balanced surgical strikes to prevent civilian casualties or it's literally H*** to pay. That restraint coupled with the fact that the whining PC socialist left is rooting for terrorists is why so many of our troops have died.

The old way, the war could have been won, terrorists turned to appropriate buzzard food, the rest history.

Yes! It is the constant negativity by those who want us to lose in Iraq that is emboldening the enemy and causing the Iraqi people to think that they are going to lose.

The U.S. military tried to do a simple thing of paying an Iraq newspaper for printing a positive news story (a factual story, not something made up), and the USA news media jumped all over them, and basically erased all the positive feelings and goodwill that would have come from the story. Instead, the USA new media purposely made the USA military look bad, and made them seem like they were doing something underhanded, rather than the simple fact that they were using a technique used in every war ever fought. You know, back when people in the news media wanted this country to win.

The news media and liberal politicians are actively trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, and unforunately they are doing a good job.

"Yes! It is the constant negativity by those who want us to lose in Iraq that is emboldening the enemy and causing the Iraqi people to think that they are going to lose." Todd

Todd, I am very tired & stressed out, so forgive me if I haven't read every word of every comment. I saw this sentence and my first reaction was - what does he mean by that? We've already lost, haven't we? Would you remodel a condemned home? Would you put new tires on a car that was totalled? And what if that car was stolen in the first place? Would you send your children to drive it until it blew up and they got killed in the process? I just signed on and my home page is Yahoo and the first headline was "November bloodiest month in Iraq." Are you going to accuse Yahoo of being biased? Is it "Politically Incorrect" to admit that George Bush made a terrible mistake and put American lives in harm's way because of his arrogance, greed and disregard for human rights?

We've already LOST?!?! That just says it all, I think.

Maybe you're right, Todd. After all, how can we lose something that was never winnable in the first place? Democracy isn't running a country for other people who don't want us. It would be allowing the people of Iraq to decide how to best plan their future, whether or not it coincides with American political or financial interests. That would be giving them back their freedom. If they want our help so much, why are they bombing American soldiers and telling them to go home? "Oil and politics are a flammable tail." (a quote from Youssef M. Ibrahim, Energy Editor of the Wall Street Journal)   American interests were never the same as theirs. My pessimism has nothing to do with lack of patriotism or support for our troops. It's that it's not easy to win a war in a desert when you have a president that just plain lost.

Wish I could edit - please correct typo. Last sentence should read "when you have a president that IS just plain lost."