The media is all over this.  "Bush Accepts Iraq-Vietnam Comparison" says ABC.  The SF Chronicle proclaims "Bush finally utters the "V" word as Iraq "mission" deteriorates".  Reuters:  "Bush sees possible Iraq-Vietnam parallel."

Being somewhat jaded to the accuracy of the main stream media, I had to read up on this to see if that is what he said.  And I discovered that yes he did….kinda.

The ABC article above has the most information and quotes.  So let’s see:

Bush Accepts Iraq-Vietnam Comparison

President Bush said in a one-on-one interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos that a newspaper column comparing the current fighting in Iraq to the 1968 Tet offensive in Vietnam, which was widely seen as the turning point in that war, might be accurate.

There it is huh?  But let’s see it in context.

Stephanopoulos asked whether the president agreed with the opinion of columnist Tom Friedman, who wrote in The New York Times today that the situation in Iraq may be equivalent to the Tet offensive in Vietnam almost 40 years ago.

"He could be right," the president said, before adding, "There’s certainly a stepped-up level of violence, and we’re heading into an election."

Not quite the admission of a quagmire…and he is right. The offensive and rising death toll in conjunction with an election is a huge factor.

"George, my gut tells me that they have all along been trying to inflict enough damage that we’d leave," Bush said. "And the leaders of al Qaeda have made that very clear. Look, here’s how I view it. First of all, al Qaeda is still very active in Iraq. They are dangerous. They are lethal. They are trying to not only kill American troops, but they’re trying to foment sectarian violence. They believe that if they can create enough chaos, the American people will grow sick and tired of the Iraqi effort and will cause government to withdraw."

Exactly.  So true, and apparently so effective, as that is exactly what is happening.

So apparently in the world of the Internet, we do not have enough ways to waste time and suck up our internet connection’s bandwidth.

Introducing Microsoft’s Ms Dewey.

The site is essentially a graphical overlay to the Live Search, hosted by actress Janina Gavankar.

Forbes had this to say:

More On Microsoft’s Ms. Dewey

After I broke the news last night that new search engine Ms. Dewey is sponsored by Microsoft, I received the following statement from Redmond:

"Who says search can’t be fun? At Windows Live we are constantly exploring new and creative ways to promote our search offering and deliver relevant information in an interesting and engaging way. The Ms. Dewey website is just one example of these efforts."

"This is not an advertising campaign. This really just an experiment for exploring different ways to introduce people to search and Live Search specifically. We are not promoting the site but simply putting it out on the Web for discovery."

I’ve got to hand it to Microsoft on this one. The site is surprisingly hip, edgy and well executed, not the sort of thing I’d expect from them. But as one commenter asked: Where’s Mr. Dewey?

I don’t know that a search engine needs to be sarcastic, impatient and demanding, but Ms Dewey is.  Ignore her at her peril.

The site is fun however and makes for an interesting diversion, and fun way to look up odd facts.   You type in a question, and before the search results are displayed, you hear Ms Dewey’s comments on the question.

Her responses are fairly entertaining.  Her answers and or comments are somewhat biting but heck, you are asking a virtual emulation, so what did you expect?  Sensitivity?  She is even a bit flirty.

Do nothing and she gets a bit lonely and tries to prod you along.  She will also tell you jokes if you ask nicely. 

So have fun with it.

I don’t want to attach too much significance to this, but it does raise questions.  The fact that Christianity seems to exist in a double standard in American schools is fairly obvious.  This is just one more example, with a surprising source.

The following was reposted from Stop the ACLU.

Jailed Terror Suspect Helped ACLU Draft School Religion Rules

Recently, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from the infamous 9th Circuit over a school engaged in Islamic indoctrination during certain classes.

The suit challenged the content of a seventh-grade history course at Excelsior Middle School in Byron in the fall of 2001. The teacher, using an instructional guide, told students they would adopt roles as Muslims for three weeks to help them learn what Muslims believe.

She encouraged them to use Muslim names, recited prayers in class, had them memorize and recite a passage from the Quran and made them give up something for a day, such as television or candy, to simulate fasting during the month of Ramadan. The final exam asked students for a critique of elements of Muslim culture. Source

If this would have been a Christian class using anything similar the ACLU would have been there in a flash just as they are for a woman suing over a “voluntary” Bible class in Indiana. However, as blatant an example within the ACLU’s standard of church and state as this was they were nowhere to be found. If we were to follow the ACLU’s typical standards this would be a shining example of crossing the line of “church and state” into the “slippery slope area” and straight into the pit of indoctrination. So, why the ACLU’s absense when the case went all the way up to the Supreme Court? The case was taken up by Thomas More Law Center, but the ACLU didn’t even file a simple friend of the court brief. Why no involvement or even a statement of any kind?

Perhaps their absense was because they wrote the religion in school rules with a little help from a terror supporting friend.