After spending yesterday trying to avoid the Gen. Petraeus' Half-hour comedy hour, I spent a good portion of this morning reading the analysis of his testimony. I was struck, repeatedly, about the horse-race, partisan coverage of the event.
Most of the newspaper coverage viewed Petraeus' speech in terms of a partisan lens. The typical column spewed something like "Petraeus didn't convince any Democrats and war supporters enjoyed his speech." Even intelligent columnists (outside of George Will, as John points out), spent time writing on the horse-race aspect of the report. Here's something from the usually insightful E. J. Dionne.
Oddly, Bush's intransigence has caused more problems for Democrats than Republicans. The inability of the new Democratic majority to muster the votes to cut off funds for the war has left the party's large antiwar constituency furious - even as moderate Democrats push for compromise measures that could get Republicans on record as opposing the president.But E. J. and the other writers really are all being suckered once again by Bush. The fact is, the "surge" (and the subsequent Petraeus report) is like putting 24 inch rims on a Yugo - they may be nice and shiny, but after the momentary distraction, you eventually realize that the car is still a piece of shit.
Petraeus has reporters buzzing and bussling, essentially hijacking the political debate for the past few months. We've seen this before - capturing Saddam, the Baker-Hamilton report, etc. etc. Washington gets all whipped up about the event and analysis flows on how this new development effects the political scene.
But it all continues to be window dressing, as Bush dazzles the crowd while he runs out the clock. The basic facts never change - Iraq is still broken. Iraq is a huge problem for the next President. And, politically, Iraq is a millstone around the neck of Republicans. Someday, even reporters might even catch on to those basic facts.
Main & gay blog