The "Bush not fighting hard enough" meme, again.

This is quickly becoming one of Putz's favorite explanations for the reason "the war" is going badly.

THE POLITICS OF THE WAR: Bill Stuntz, writing in the Weekly Standard, says that voter dissatisfaction with the war stems as much from a sense that Bush isn't fighting hard enough as from a sense that it's going badly: "Voters may indeed want America either to win or get out of Iraq. But I bet they'd prefer winning to getting out. The real problem is that we aren't doing either."

No, the real problem is that there's no way to "win", since we're not fighting "a war" in Iraq. We're presiding over a horribly misguided neocon nation-building experiment and babysitting a bloody sectarian religious conflict.

Because Putz never describes what a "win" in Iraq looks like, he's able to keep playing these little imaginary strategy games about Bush "not fighting hard enough", which presumably can be translated as, "not invading enough Middle Eastern countries and not killing enough Arabs."

But what would a Putz post about Iraq be without a media bash?

Meanwhile, Mickey Kaus looks at reports from Iraq and comments: "One wonders if the Washington players are now so locked into the hell-in-a-handbasket Iraq story line--in large part because the polls support it--that they are incapable of grokking a promising trend in the news."

So Bush (who is the ultimate "Washington player" by the way) just needs to man-up and "fight harder" against the hoards of Islamofascist Arabs, but at the same time, is incapable of summoning the will to defeat the media.

Classic.