President Bush seemed quite troubled when some in his administration shifted their rhetoric  from "war on terror" to "GSAVE." 

The NYT reported that the President worried that the change in language might be interpreted as a change in policy.  Apparently, he wanted to clarify that there was no shift, so he gave a speech using the word "war" over a dozen times in a 47 minute speech on domestic policy.

So, it makes you wonder what he'll do about this.  There's no easy way to say it.  Rummy's lost his mojo.  But don't take my word for it.  See for yourself. 

Hmmmm....here's a thought Mr. President.  Instead of engaging in public disputes with your Secretary of Defense over language, why don't you get enough troops in the right places in Iraq to prevent tragedies like the ones in Haditha this week?

From Slate's Today's Papers:

Though TP doesn't see it mentioned, U.S. commanders in the region have complained they don't have enough troops and end up sweeping towns only to be replaced by guerrillas. "We require more manpower to cover this area the way we need to," one military official told the LAT in May.

Yesterday, New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg sent a letter to the Chairs of the Intel Committees urging them not to grant immunity to witnesses in their upcoming hearings on the CIA leak.

Cox News had this story on Monday regarding the immunity issue.  They quoted two experts, both of whom urged caution on the immunity front.

Tom Blanton, president of the National Security Archive and a leading expert on the Iran-contra scandal, had this to say:

Do you suppose that Sen. George Voinovich will be surprised to learn that his fellow Republican Jim Talent says that those who opposed John Bolton's nomination to be U.N. Ambassador did so "for no reason?"

Check out what Talent had to say about the President's recess apointment and about those who opposed the Bolton nomination in this Missourinet interview. (Be sure to listen to the audio.)