If you go to a doctor for an operation and he completely botches your surgery and you lose an organ due to his abject ineptitude and recklessness, you don't go back to that doctor for repair surgery; you find another one. If you go to a lawyer who almost destroys your company through complete ignorance of your basic legal obligations, you don't stay with that lawyer in the hope that he will get you out of the disaster he created for you; you retain another one. All of that is just basic common sense.
-- Glenn Greenwald
With apologies to Stephen Colbert, the word today is "conventional wisdom."
This is the charm of the Iraq Study Group (ISG) aka Iraq Survey Group. The ultimate purpose of this panel is to obtain a conventional wisdom that things are going badly, we need to do something about it, and just ignoring things (or putting them off to the future) is not a solution. "Conventional wisdom" (CW) is what "they" think. The public knows this stuff already though generally do not feel able to handle foreign policy -- after all, your average person doesn't have a military to play around with or anything. So, they are stuck with "they," including the allegedly smart people who discuss this sort of thing on editorial pages and the pages of the New Republic etc. And, given this, the report is of some importance.
[You can see this already since it gives Democrats cover. A weenie move, yes, but it is how life works. Unsurprisingly, people like Murtha and Feingold are a bit less impressed with the whole thing, saying troop re-deployment should be done right away or that we knew this stuff already.]
Now, there is a certain warning flag, that (ahem) doesn't seem to be mentioned too often -- the Democrat co-chair also had that role on the 9/11 Commission, which also put out a report, which its membership generally feels was not followed in many (most?) respects. Well, hey, this time will be different. There are seventy-nine recommendations that Baker said could not be cherry-picked, so obviously Bush said he would do just that (no talking to Iran ... they are mean!). As these sorts of things go, the report is pretty short. [79? Must have been some padding.] But, this does not really mean too many people will actually read the thing. The net value of the whole thing after all is changing the conventional wisdom, making official what sensible people already are saying now.
Up to a point, of course. The report leaves a lot of wiggle room, which in a sense is logical, since we cannot have any one policy set in stone -- refusal to practice flexibility that deals with the actions as they occur is not the path taken by this administration, to our detriment. Still, there was some fantasy view that somehow the ISG (with top experts like Sandra Day O'Connor* and Ed Meese) would be a great moment of change, putting forth a policy that would solve anything. Realistic sorts knew this was stupid. And, overall, smart people whose opinions are more worthwhile of our trust basically find the thing very pony-worthy (metaphor h/t Atrios). To the degree it is less so than Bush (low bar!), two problems: some wiggle room, plus the fact it is not like law or anything. You know who still is the commander-in-chief etc.
Sounds like, yes, "future presidents" (and not only of Iraq, though, sure, they will have a lot more dead people) will have the responsibility. A thought about that too. Lawrence O'Donnell (West Wing producer, former congressional staffer) mused about the '08 presidential elections during his last appearance on Al Franken. In effect, he promoted "conventional wisdom." He dismissed John Edwards as someone with no ideas, which sort of pissed me off, but then he let out his support for Kerry, which helps explain things. LD also basically said that it's obvious that McCain will be the nominee (vs. either Clinton or Obama), which is standard CW. This depresses me, since I do not like these choices, though the last one is less distressing. Low bar there. Clark is put out as a likely v.p. option, which seems okay, though other options might be viable too. [edited to clarify Clark remark]
[It does make me think -- since the other options are so obviously just wasting their time, why not throw my hat in the ring? I can even start a fake party ... NY for JP. I need not actually spend all that time and money to get my name on the ballot, since it would ultimately be a waste of time. After all, the Electoral College can still technically pick me. Carol Moseley-Braun ran for President. Come on!]
But, upon reflection, it pisses me off. Why exactly will McCain obviously be the nominee? It's "his time" ala Bob Dole. Right. Of course, no one actually thought Dole would win. We do not even have a popular incumbent President in place this time around. McCain is a hypocritical phony Bush enabler. So much of late that even Al, a past admirer of the guy since he clearly didn't like Bush and said maverick sounding things, started to dislike the man. Maybe, just maybe, if CW sorts like O'Donnell underline the fact, remind people that McCain does not deserve to be the nominee, it would not be so "obvious" that we would have him. This sort of BS got us Kerry, who "everyone" saw as the most "electable" candidate.
People like Al Franken might have been shocked that he didn't win, but I am not the only one who was not. I simply am not that intuitive, and that is not false modesty. Now, I have seen a few people who think McCain is no gimmee, various reasons given. One hopes so. Give that man a pony!
---
* Given the presence of James Baker, there surely was a "feels like old times" flavor to the whole thing. The two had a big role in getting their guy the job, so it is only right for them to help salve his reputation.