Mr. Bush keeps on with his empty rhetoric, while highly-enriched uranium (weapons-grade) is flying around the former Soviet bloc like so many drunk bees. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/25/w...&en=7383b09a27c94149&ei=5094&partner=homepage You can search the State of Union speeches and contrast the reality with the colorful illusion American politics is living in. 2002 - "And second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons for threatening the United States and the World". 2003 - "We are working with other governments to secure nuclear material in the former Soviet Union..." http://www.nytimes.com/ref/washington/20070123_STATEOFUNION.html Well, that was four years ago. Loose Soviet materials and/or terrorist nuclear ambitions have not been mentioned in 2005, 2006 or 2007; instead he's shifted his talk exclusively to the Iranian and North Korean programs. So, who's going to take political responsibility for this issue? Clinton hasn't. Bush failed at it. Anyone who takes this on in a serious and productive manner has my attention.