Victory versus our strategy of defeat

John Lewis lays it out in stark black-and-white. One pearl among many:

It is obvious that the defeat of the Republicans in the 2006 mid-term elections was a repudiation of President Bush's policies in this war. But it is more important to understand that President Bush has not mounted an offensive strategy, and that an offensive strategy is not the reason why American troops are dying in Iraq. There has been no drive to victory, only a string of casualties and the progressive discouragement of the American people. As a result, our primary enemy has been strengthened, and allowed to address the world as a leader just a few blocks from Ground Zero in New York City. (Imagine Hitler being granted this privilege.) Bush's war strategy of non-war has resulted in a functional paralysis caused by our self-imposed failure to identify and confront open and avowed enemies.

If I may add: Bush is an altruist, which means he believes in the moral sanctity of self-sacrifice, which is exactly what his policies have given us: an unrelenting sacrifice of American blood, money, and liberty to the irrational societies of the world. So much for the claim (e.g., "elections are about the issues") that a politician's philosophy should not be the principal criterion when voting.