Tribune: Huh? Parsing the "Support"

Is the Chicago Tribune for real? By many accounts, Bush's speech last night was a bit of a dud. Nothing new, nothing different, lots of blah blah blah 9/11, blah blah blah, terrorists, blah blah blah, stand firm, blah blah blah.

So the Tribune, which can be reliably counted on to support the Prez in 99.44% of his endeavors, had an editorial of support that left so much out, it might have been printed on swiss cheese. Or a Flashdance shirt. Or something else with a lot of holes:

His message: Iraq, and the brave Americans fighting there, will face continued violence from terrorists determined to keep Iraq destabilized--and to hand the U.S. a devastating defeat. But a second courageous endeavor in that distant war zone, the building by Iraqis of the new government that eventually will secure and run their country, is on schedule and pressing ahead.

Everything is oh-so-courageous. Except for Bush's ability to speak clearly and honestly about what has gone wrong, and how he will address it.

With his citizenry impatient, his poll numbers down and some in his own party growing nervous, Bush needed to explain that the mission in Iraq has great long-term value for this country and that his administration has a strategy to succeed there. The president argued both lines of thought. But he wisely avoided the self-imposed treachery of timetables, he mouthed no empty promise about when peace would be at hand.

Uh-huh. Bush argues real good. Somehow I'm thinking that good rhetoric is not going to get Bush out of this. Good policy might. A change in policy. An admission of missed opportunities. Mistakes were made, that kind of thing. But the Tribune carries on, reliably supportive, predictably indifferent to the reality behind Bush's platitudes and arguments.

Tuesday night's speech was, then, the latest volley in a battle to influence Americans' will to win this war. Zarqawi and the other architects of attacks in Iraq have done a superb job of filling our television screens with images of violence and death. Their successes have stripped the war effort here of some support.

I'd say their successess combined with our failures have stripped the war of massive amounts of support. Only diehards are behind this war now.

Tuesday night, in response, Bush tried to help his countrymen see that orchestrated violence as an effort to intimidate them. "The American people do not falter under threat," he said.

Yes, but we do like to know what we're up against, and how we're going to defeat it. And we do like to know that our leaders understand the threats, analyze them effectively, and respond appropriately. So far, not so much.

Not that Americans watched his speech alone. On the far side of the globe, unsettled Iraqis no doubt measured every word as the leader of the free world pledged to complete their liberation.

Yeah, I bet they are. Especially those many factions aiming to thwart the liberation.

It was just so make my day if at some point the Tribune were to rise up from its torpor and really apply some critical thinking skills to our President's policies. I know wishful thinking.