Black Box Report

It's like Groundhog Day, except with a lot more people getting killed.

For four years we've been told progress is being made in Iraq; and for four years, things have gotten worse. So, for four years, we've been told, "Be patient. Wait another six months and then judge." And so it has gone, Friedman Unit after Friedman Unit, chaos ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Until, finally, the usual standby of accusing those who were impatient of being traitors or not supporting the troops wasn't working anymore. And so, we were given the Ultimate Friedman Unit! "Give the surge a chance," they said, "Wait until September for Gen. Petraeus to deliver his report."

Ummm, yeah, about that "report":

While Petraeus' statement to Congress will be made available, the public will not know what information he is providing to President Bush. The lack of transparency over Petraeus' "report" will only intensify the high level of skepticism surrounding his statistics.

Okay, well, so there was no written report showing data, sources, methodology...nothing that, say, a skeptical onlooker could verify and check to see if Petraeus was maybe rosying up the picture a bit. But still, the nation waited with bated breath for Gen. Petraeus' sober, unbiased assessment of the progress made in Iraq.

You'll never guess what he said:

Six months. It's always six months.

No, you're not having a flashback, or experiencing déjà vu. We have been here before:

The irony is, the policy the White House unveiled earlier this year was supposed to eliminate these constant requests for “Friedman Units” (6-month increments). Bush announced the “surge” policy and agreed to a series of 18 benchmarks. If the policy worked, Iraqis would complete the benchmarks; if the policy failed, the benchmarks would remain unmet.

Here we are in September, and only three of the 18 benchmarks have been checked off the to-do list. And yet, lo and behold, we need another six months to evaluate a policy that already doesn’t work, and already can’t produce the expected results.

So, after giving their performance in front of congress - and make no mistake, it was a performance - what do Petraeus and Crocker plan to do? They're going to Disneyland! Or, in this case, an exclusive interview with Brit Hume at FOX News, which for them is the same thing:

If there was any doubt to the US public that Gen. Petraeus was being used a puppet for Bush’s war—it should be gone now. Brit Hume of FOX Propaganda was granted an exclusive interview with the general, who is supposed to be giving an honest assessment of the “surge” and the state of affairs in Iraq. Bush might have well as given Rush Limbaugh the honors. No longer can the administration claim he is the voice of reason or not acting as an echo chamber for their plan to keep the surge and the war going as long as possible.

Well, if the administration thinks that Democrats are going to just lie down and let this pass without putting up so much as a peep, well then, they've got another think coming!

Oh...nevermind:

Now Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying a new approach: He wants to find common ground.

"We're working on consensus," Reid said. "We're willing to go halfway with [Republicans] as long as everyone understands that we're not going to do something that's cosmetic in nature."

Some Republicans, like presidential candidate John McCain, say Reid is talking with Republicans only because Democrats are losing the war of public opinion.

"They've lost the momentum," McCain said. "Otherwise, they wouldn't want to sit down with Republicans and negotiate a different resolution."

Gosh. If only Harry Reid and Democrats had the benefit of having public opinion on their side. Then they could surely take a stand against such baseless accusations.

Hey, wait...They do:

[McCain]'s right. Democrats are talking as though they've lost the war of public opinion. Except that Democrats aren't. They're winning it.

Yet they talk like losers.

60 percent agree with a hardline position in this debate, yet Democrats -- who won in 2006 on platform of ending the war in Iraq -- are talking like losers before the debate is even engaged.

Actually, Democrats have been acting like losers long before the debate over the efficacy of the surge came around:

[T]he stark inability of Democrats to think 6 or 12 months ahead on the issue has been revolting. Waiting for the ponies, or president Bush to come around, or the ISG to save the universe, or sensible Republicans to do the right thing has always been their strategy. But should have always assumed the obvious, that 6 or 12 months from now there would be no ponies, no sensible Republicans, and no wise old men of Washington to save the day. September is here, nothing will change... and these people appear to actually be surprised by this.

If the last 4 1/2 years have taught us anything, it's that Bush will not compromise. Republicans will not compromise. The only ones to compromise will, once again, be Democrats because they don't want to be attacked as being soft in the GWOT. In other words, they've learned nothing:

Public opinion has already concluded that the Petraeus report will sugarcoat the statistics, that the Crocker report will move the goalposts, and that "victory" in Iraq will be no less absurd an American mission at the end of the week than at the beginning. Magical September will make Republicans no less likely to wag their lapdog tails at the White House, or to rattle their cut-and-run sabers at the Democrats, than will Magical March, the probable next location of the turning-point mirage. Democrats, for their part, will seize on the possible January withdrawal of one brigade of the surge as a bipartisan triumph, and their fear of being branded anti-troop and pro-terrorist by a bunch of chickenhawk demagogues will lead them to hail a non-binding non-deadline nonconditional footnote to the next defense appropriation as though they had drawn some heroic line in the sand.

You may now commence pounding your forehaed against the floor.

Now, one could easily point out that Bush and Republicans would've attacked Democrats as being soft anyway, no matter what, so you might as well do the right thing and stand by your principles even if (and Rich, I'm talking to you here) you don't have enough of a congressional majority and don't have the votes to actually stop the war or set a firm timeline for withdrawal. Oddly enough, voters tend to reward people with principles, especially when they stick by them...Even moreso when they've campaigned on doing everything they can to honor those principles.

Crazy idea, I know.

Now, in case you happened to miss the Petraeus/Crocker show, or don't feel like watching Brit Hume's pander-fest tonight, don't worry.

In six months, you'll get another chance.