'Move On'? Not So Fast, Mr. President

And yet, Peter Baker writes in The Washington Post, "there were moments of reflection for a typically unreflective president. It was hard not to wonder whether he was talking about himself as he mused about the 'ugly war' and how the American people have wearied of it. 'You know, they're tired of the war,' he said. 'There is a war fatigue in America. It's affecting our psychology.'

"And then there was the concession that while he still commands policy, he no longer commands the affection of his nation. 'I guess I'm like any other political figure -- everybody wants to be loved,' he said. 'Just sometimes the decisions you make and the consequences don't enable you to be loved.'

"Leaning on the lectern, Bush anticipated the day when the responsibility would no longer be his and expressed his hope for vindication. 'When it's all said and done . . . if you ever come down and visit the old, tired me down there in Crawford, I will be able to say, "I looked in the mirror and made decisions based upon principle, not based upon politics," ' he said. "And that's important to me."'"

David E. Sanger and Thom Shanker write in the New York Times: "President Bush's Iraq strategy now boils down to this: He is trying to buy time for a surge that is living on borrowed time."

Sanger and Shanker suggest the real story is what Bush didn't say: "[E]ven some of Mr. Bush's aides acknowledge that the increase in American forces that the president so ardently defended Thursday was already in its final phases. From the White House to the Pentagon to the military headquarters in Iraq, the focus of behind-the-scenes planning is already on what follows -- a 'post-surge' mission for the American military that Mr. Bush only alluded to on Thursday.

"That narrower mission would focus the Americans on training Iraqi forces, assuring Iraq's territorial integrity, deterring Iran from seeking to extend its influence in Iraq and preventing Iraq from becoming, as a result of a botched American occupation and all that followed, a terrorist haven. To a significant extent, it would pull American troops off the streets and out of harm's way. . . .

"But the White House officials refuse to say how fast, perpetuating the fears of Mr. Bush's critics that he is just stalling for time, trying to get every extra moment on the clock he can for the current strategy, in hopes that the Iraqi government will somehow come together. . . .

"The argument inside the White House last week, one official said, was over 'how much leg to show' of that strategy. Karl Rove, the president's political adviser, was among those arguing for showing very little, and judging by Mr. Bush's performance on Thursday, Mr. Rove won the day."

The Plight of the GOP

Maura Reynolds and Noam N. Levey write in the Los Angeles Times: "Leading Republicans said they remained skeptical that the buildup of 30,000 troops would work, but they appeared to have accepted the president's plea to wait until a more comprehensive Pentagon assessment is released Sept. 15 before trying to force any change in course."

And yet, "unless there are significant improvements in Iraq in the next two months, lawmakers say, the president will almost certainly face a mutiny within his party's ranks. . . .

"A sense of near-panic has set in among congressional Republicans, who lost their majority in Congress last year in large part because of opposition to the war. They fear further losses next year."

Carolyn Lochhead writes in the San Francisco Chronicle: "Facing rock-bottom poll numbers and the judgment of history, President Bush has little to lose politically in using the last 18 months of his presidency to try to prove critics of his war policy wrong. . . .