Bush's speech was interesting, with some funny bits. And while peole here flip him shit for not being able to speak well, he joked about it himself:
"Sometimes people need to correct my english. I knew I was in trouble when Arnold Schwartzeneggar did it."
Sorry, guys, the crap about how he mangles words occasionally in speeches is just that, diversionary crap. if even he jokes about it...
many of our best presidents were crappy orators. Thomas Jefferson, a great writer, was a horrible speaker. Some presidents stammered. Som occasionally misspeak a word (ever see blooper reels on movies? Top paid actors, who'se whole JOB is to speak written lines, misspeak words...) It simply ensn't enough to cry about.
.............................
As for the hunt for Osama, let me ask a few questions about terrorism in general:
Even with some of the top intellignece agencies in the world, the British can't stop IRA car bombers, and the isralis can't stop Palestinian terrorists. We, otoh, may not have gotten bin Laden yet, but we've actually put a HUGE dent in the ME terror network, taking two major terrist-supporting governments out of commission. We removed most of the Al Qaeda network, and the primary strongholds in Afghanistan, fairly quickly. We discover that there is an emerging Afghan army, that the country is now a joint NATO responsibility and thus under the protection of the broadest military alliance in history, that it has a new constitution and is preparing against hellish odds to hold a general election, and that at least a million and a half of its former refugees have opted to return. A highway from Kabul to Kandahar—an insurance against warlordism and a condition of nation-building—is nearing completion with nearly infinite labor and risk. We also discover that the parties of the Afghan secular left—like the parties of the Iraqi secular left—are strongly in favor of the regime change.
But yet you say, we haven't done anything?
.................................................
About Bush's comments on not winning the war on terror, you TOTALLY took it out of contexts, as is typical. He said that you can't win a war on terror like you "win" a conventional war. You don't sit down at a table and someone signs surrender papers. You create a situation where the terrorists can't wage their war and then you will have "won."
I'm gonna just stop there... 
Answer me this georges, what the fuck is Bush doing to get rid of all the other dictators in the world most of whom are more dangerous Saddam!? Your argument is bullshit because Bush is doing nothing about those other dictators!
