Gone from 'Iran is a terrible threat to the world' back to 'a state sponsor of terror'?

Bush's televised Rose Garden speech made me do a double-take:



Did he just CONCEDE on the 'drumbeat for war' idea with Iran?



I mean...think about it:



Bush said once that he wouldn't allow Iran to get nuclear weapons.



"If you're interested in preventing World War III..." (famous quote)--remember that one?



NIE comes out=hopes dashed for a third-front war.



Bush and Chenicons are pissed.



Time passes...more saber-rattling...and Iran still hasn't budged on its uranium-enrichment program.



Israel threatens to bomb the country and now Bush is saying that "Iran is still a menace--it is a state-sponsor of terror."



Does this mean that Iran is no longer the double-threat guy Bushco painted it to be in the past?



"State-sponsor of terror...state sponsor of terror..."--and...(so what's your point, Georgie?)



Does this mean we won't be going to war after all? Being a state-sponsor of terror doesn't exactly rank high on Bush's "Countries to Hit"-list, does it?

Gone from 'Iran is a terrible threat to the world' back to 'a state sponsor of terror'?
If Israel bombs Iran you can still bet that the Bush Administration will do its best to follow suit, saying that Iran is a state-sponsor of terror makes the country sound smaller and unjust to its own people and since the U.S. is at war against terrorism to say that Iran is a complete state of terrorism then he essentially is saying we are or shold be at war against it (we are at war against terrorism right?)

mascara