I usually find reasons to take heart from former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan’s latest column, but not today. The headline "The Two Vacuums" and the subhead "Neither Iraqis nor Democrats seem ready to do what’s required of them" seemed reasonable so I printed it out to read. Only when I read it did I realize that the headline writer, for whatever reason, was trying to avoid her main point, which is that Bush is coming unglued, hasn’t a clue what to do, and his new strategy isn’t new at all. It certainly seems new to me, with its hints of finally cleaning up Mookie and his sectarian-warring militia in Sadr City, and the insurgent/militia sanctuaries in Syria and Iran, even if that means war with those terrorist-supporting countries (see bit about carrier battle groups in the Gulf, and providing Patriot anti-missile systems to regional allies), and a clear and hold strategy for Baghdad’s most violent neighborhoods, which I don’t recall seeing before. Maybe I am the one who sees substance that isn’t there, but his detractors (the usual ones and the shocking new ones like Noonan) seem to be saying: "We can’t leave, but we can’t stay. Sorry if Iraq falls apart and the genocide begins, but we are an impatient people more interested in presidential style than substance, and we are losing what patience we had with this man and his war." As if it really was only his war, and getting rid of him would make all things better. The mind reels. Mine, anyhow.
UPDATE For all that, the stock market continues to soar. Somebody’s not pessimistic. But Donald Sensing is, deeply.
THE TEXAS SCRIBBLER 
Noonan was a fine speechwriter, but she’s useless as an analyst.
It’s incredble that she endorses the ISG’s “recommendations”, which its authors surely felt would be swallowed whole by a desperate Bush. In rejecting their slow (or, should I say, not-so-slow) advocacy of surrender, Bush showed he still has the the resolve to win.
The issue is whether the American people, in the final analysis, have the will to defend ourselves. It’s an open question.
She’s often too sentimental, but it’s something for which I have a weakness. This column is such a total departure from her usual that I have to wonder about her health. Or mine. As for “the will to defend ourselves,” I don’t know. The heartland (us out here in flyover country) has it, but you seldom read/hear of us since the coasties control the MSM. The WH run in 2008 will be the proof I suppose, as congressional elections are too local in nature to derive much national meaning from them, though of course the Dems are claiming it was a referendum on Iraq, which I don’t think is true.