One thing that really stood out for me as I listened to the Decider last night - yes, I watched the whole thing, sober too! - was how in spite of uttering the words, “Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me”, the passive voice used prior to that belied that fact:

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation. The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement. We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together, and that as we trained Iraqi security forces, we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.

But in 2006, the opposite happened.

Clearly he blames everything on the Iraqi people, Al Qaeda and “shit happens”. Also he framed this new “way forward” as an Iraqi plan that he’s just, y’know, gonna go along with because really, the USA doesn’t really have much to do with it, like sending more troops is some kind of humanitarian mission requested by the Iraqi people.

Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work.

This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels.

Yet the NYT reports this here this morning, with no mention of Chimpy’s saying the exact opposite last night:

As President Bush challenges public opinion at home by committing more American troops, he is confronted by a paradox: an Iraqi government that does not really want them.

The Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki has not publicly opposed the American troop increase, but aides to Mr. Maliki have been saying for weeks that the government is wary of the proposal. They fear that an increased American troop presence, particularly in Baghdad, will be accompanied by a more assertive American role that will conflict with the Shiite government’s haste to cut back on American authority and run the war the way it wants. American troops, Shiite leaders say, should stay out of Shiite neighborhoods and focus on fighting Sunni insurgents.

They really impressed me though with their rewriting skills when I saw this precious nugget I gleaned from the same article:

American officials have warned that with lessening American oversight, Shiite leaders might shift to a sectarian strategy that punished Sunni insurgents but spared Shiite militias. The execution 11 days ago of Saddam Hussein, carried out in haste by the Maliki government over American urgings that it be delayed until the legal paperwork was completed, only reinforced such fears.

Compared with this on December 30th:

With unexpected speed, the Iraqi Prime Minister swept aside any remaining political hurdles and signed the former dictator’s death sentence. Iraqi and US officials met for almost three hours late last night to confirm that all legal requirements for the execution had been met.

Update: Check out Juan Cole’s take on the speech.