Roadtrip reaction

The editorial folks in the national media were in recovery mode today after Bush's surprise 'road to Baghdad' trip Tuesday. The AFP was kind enough to summarize a few for us.

The WaPo was fairly positive. Here's how AFP described their take:

The Washington Post said Bush gave "an important demonstration of American support" for the new Iraqi government, which represents the country's "best and maybe last hope" of defeating secterian bloodshed, terrorism and defenders of Saddam Hussein.

Said the USA Today, "the circumstances of the trip itself illustrated that reality is not so simple ... Security remains so dicey that Bush was in and out of Baghdad in hours." [ed- pssst--it's still a war zone].

They went on to say that keeping troops around awhile was fine, but if things don't stablize, "as soon as that chance disappears, they should be brought home promptly, not left to die to save face, as happened during the long Vietnam drawdown."

Other than not providing any concrete answer of what represents "the chance disappearing", they managed to get that ole "V word" out there again. Saddam's crew must be thrilled, since he's been espousing the Vietnam model since the Gulf War.

Guess the USA Today thinks we're over there on a lark. If such were the case, I'd agree with them, but Saddam was/is a part of the GWoT every bit as much as al Qaeda or any other tinhorn sheikh who employs terrorist groups to do their bidding. They simply crossed the line on 9/11, and part of stopping them is why we're in Iraq now.

Opined the New York Times, "After too many photo-ops aimed at giving Mr. Bush and his fellow Republicans a short-term lift in the domestic opinion polls at election time, Americans hunger more than ever for a realistic game plan for Iraq and some real progress," said the daily.

An elected government, all cabinet positions filled, Zarqawi dead, 70,000 government troops spreading out in the capital city.. gee, sounds like some progress to me. If the Times believes our current predicament is so bad, perhaps they'd care to explain John Kerry's "realistic game plan", which is nothing more than a fixed-schedule retreat from the entire Middle East.

Judging from the reactions above, it seems like the WaPo was perhaps more in the loop than the Grey Lady or the Yuppie Comic. Just a guess, but burning bridges does have its drawbacks.

One more thing. The next time Bush spirits off into a war zone, someone please get Tony Snow a better-fitting helmet. I love the man, but that thing looked like a GI Joe hat on him.