reality-based educator

The NY Times reported this morning that the Bush administration has pushed back their analysis of how well the "surge policy" is producing signs political progress or greater security until September. Even then, many of Bush's advisers believe the signs of progress will be minimal.

Now that's an interesting admission from Bush's advisers, even if it came only off the record, because just seven days ago the preznut said this in response to Harry Reid's charge that Bush, Cheney, Rice et al. know the war is lost:

The direction of the fight is beginning to shift...So far, the operation is meeting expectations...Day by day, block by block, Iraqi and American forces are making incremental gains in Baghdad...

So which is it? Is the direction of the fight beginning to shift as Bushie said last week or is the surge policy producing little to no real progress on the security and political fronts and that's why they pushing back the accountability moment for the policy as far as possible?

Given the news recently, you'd have to say the latter:

KERBALA, Iraq (Reuters) - A suicide car bomber killed 60 people and wounded 170 near one of Iraq's most revered Shi'ite Muslim shrines on Saturday, in an attack likely to inflame sectarian tensions.

The U.S. military said nine soldiers had been killed in Iraq in the past two days. The latest deaths raised to nearly 100 the number of U.S. soldiers killed in April, making it one of the deadliest months for U.S. forces since the 2003 invasion.

The blast in the holy city of Kerbala occurred at a checkpoint on an approach to the golden-domed al-Abbas shrine, situated among shops and restaurants. The area was crowded at the time.

Television footage showed a man running down a smoke-filled street holding a lifeless baby above his head. Smoke was rising off the baby. Ambulances rushed to the blast scene in Kerbala, 70 miles southwest of Baghdad.

No matter how hard the preznut and his war apologists try and fool the American people with this "surge policy," it is becoming quite clear that the surge is NOT working, conditions are not getting better in Iraq and all the Bush administration is doing is hanging around in country just long enough for another president to have to pull the troops out.

For some reason, as the news media covers the standoff between the preznut and the Congress on the Iraq war funding, the plain and simple fact that the surge policy is NOT working never seems to make it into the coverage.

Every time they report how "steadfast" Bush is about not accepting benchmarks in the Iraq war funding bill, they ought to be reporting that Bush doesn't want benchmarks cuz' he knows the Iraqis can't or won't meet them and all he's trying to do is delay the inevitable "retreat and defeat" for the next president.

Is it so hard to report the ACTUAL conditions and not the b.s. spin they're getting from the administration and its apologists?