Don Surber says that yesterday's speech was Bush's Gettysburg. Did Lincoln give the same speech twice?<snark> (I don't usually do this type of post except occasionally with LGF and Power Line, but after seeing Bush have another photo-op with our troops and reading Greg's post, I found this article)

Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus certainly don't share the same view. But-hey-"Welcome Instapundit readers."

Don seems to think the Iraq war was not based on WMD's. Let's see what Dick Cheney said on Meet the Press.

Russert: What do you think is the most important rationale for going to war with Iraq?

VP Cheney: Well, I think I’ve just given it, Tim, in terms of the combination of his development and use of chemical weapons, his development of biological weapons, his pursuit of nuclear weapons.

You mean it's not for as Don says: " By making sure that all men enjoy the rights to which they were endowed by their Creator." I wonder if the American people and the politicians would have gone to war over this new, revisionist theory?

Nothing about women in his statement either.

Then Don has this whopper: These are things that should have been said a long time ago. But like Lincoln in November 1863, Bush had to wait for the right moment.

I guess the President had to wait until 57% of the country think he's not honest for it to be just that right moment. I don't know Don and if his picture is any indication of the man he is then he looks like a really nice guy, but comparing Lincoln to Bush is well---Delusional.