http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003571876

NEW YORK A new survey of 1,502 adults released Sunday by Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that despite the mass appeal of the Internet and cable news since a previous poll in 1989, Americans' knowledge of national affairs has slipped a little. For example, only 69% know that Dick Cheney is vice president, while 74% could identify Dan Quayle in that post in 1989.

Other details are equally eye-opening. Pew judged the levels of knowledgability (correct answers) among those surveyed and found that those who scored the highest were regular watchers of Comedy Central's The Daily Show and Colbert Report. They tied with regular readers of major newspapers in the top spot -- with 54% of them getting 2 out of 3 questions correct. Watchers of the Lehrer News Hour on PBS followed just behind.

Virtually bringing up the rear were regular watchers of Fox News. Only 1 in 3 could answer 2 out of 3 questions correctly. Fox topped only network morning show viewers.

Its easy to see what the great neo-conservative Iraq excuse will be in years to come:

"We were just about to win the war when the America-hating-French-speaking-tree-hugging-pink-liberals got control of congress and brought our brave troops home.

Iraq was not a defeat. No, it was a glorious victory stolen liberal cowards.

Just a few more months would have made all the difference. If only the Democrats in Washington had listened to wise council of their fellows like Joseph Lieberman and kept their nerve.

Now Iraq has gone to hell, America's interests in the entire region are threatened, Israel wants more money and weapons, and the price of oil has doubled.

And all because of those America-haters in Washington who don't understand what war means and don't get what true patriotism is. They've given victory to the freedom hating Islamic hordes and made the sacrifice of over 3000 brave young American heroes worthless."

Jeez!

I should charge Jonah Goldberg for the use of all the above and then do a toned down "mistakes were made" version for David Brooks...

The point of the surge was to allow the Iraqi government time to regroup and lead Iraq back to health in some coherent manner. However, the Iraqi government is weaker now then before the surge. The bombing in the green zone, Sadr ministers (important to Al-Maliki) resigning from the government, all demonstrates the Iraqi government cracking, becoming weaker. From a strategic point of view the surge is a disaster. (How many disasters is a President allowed anyways?)

There are some tactical gains where parts of Bagdad are relatively safer (the operative term relatively), while in areas around Baghdad the violence has increased. These small tactical gains the WH will spin that the surge is working and maybe if we are lucky we will see Cheney in a heavily armed and fortified ice cream truck festooned like a porcupine with heavy caliber machine guns, driving through downtown Baghdad, little ice cream bell tinkling, to prove it. However when it becomes undeniable, even to the Baghdad Bobs in the WH and the beltway, that not only has the surge failed, but Iraq itself is failing, they'll blame the liberals in Congress for undermining the surge. It is incredibly insipid and arrogant, but smarts, integrity and being accountable is not a neo-con strong suit. They are good at CYA propaganda though.

The premise of why Iraq invasion took place has moved several times and ways since the original "Saddam has WMD ability,is allied with OBL and is a bad dictator and terror backer" and the factual record clearly never supported any of that hokum. Well...Saddam is now dead and Iraq is at what stage of D.Cheney's "last throes"?

Those American super-bases,the big Baghdad embassy and the plain intent for the USAF to remain Iraq's defacto air force for a very long time to come all point to the early and clear intent of Bush2WH to remain in Iraq for many years(decades?) to come. The Iraq Oil Law the Bush2WH has fingerprints all over is one big reason. The desire to stride about the ME with viable means to inflict mayhem on other "non-cooperative" ME leaders,governments and populations another. Nothing new in this as it has been an intrinsic part of American ME policy ever since the British pulled out of ME. However prior to G.W Bush and Dick Cheney the idea of occupation of an ME country was not undertaken. The Bush2WH went beyond any prior Open Door frontier,any switch the leader or undermine the government and put in the one you prefer. In 1953 in Iran the Americans went along with taking out the leader when he failed to appease them. Saddam was an American ME creature who USA lost control of. Had he went with a Marcos or Suharto style of play-along likely enough he would still be alive,in power and the Western petro interests would be raking in Iraqi oil revenue.

It is difficult to see how the DEMS truly will be able to walk away from the idea of American presence and control in Iraq. Traditionally both national parties have endorsed some form of Pax Americana in ME petro matters since taking up where the British left off. Those super-bases in particular are very much intended for a long stay. As is USAF being the only air force flying in Iraqi air space for a long time to come. The DEMS are fully up against some deeply entrenched and deeply rooted militarism,corporatism and globalism interests.

G.W.Bush,D.Cheney and the AEI,Heritage and PNAC types they front are digging in for political attrition to win. The DC DEMS will be hard pressed to fully unplug American meddling in the ME. Invading Iraq had little or nothing to do with the GWOT Bush2WH was selling the American people. It did have to do with setting an example of Saddam falling from power. Of putting in place western style oil control. Of putting up a big notice to any other ME players the Americans could fuck up things for failure to fall in line. Lebanon last summer got the message via Israeli militarism. Syria and Iran are very much in the cross-hairs now.

Americans perhaps are about to discover more about American interests and desires in ME then they ever have since 1950's. All those American super-carriers exist to inflict punishment. At great yearly cost. American public opinion vs a "small but powerful group" perhaps should be amended with also vs. the militarists,corporatists and globalists who like idea of the "big stick" in ME affairs being in American hands. They are not about to walk out of ME gently or meekly. Ask D.Cheney.

The Iraqi people have a different take on that. Many Americans do as well. It is surely a real and grave risk the Americans will run out of treasure and blood to shed for it. It is certain the Iraqis are bearing a terrible cost every day.I hope the Kagans,Kristols and Cheneys fail. I sincerely do.They will not admit to any failure or wrongness of policy short of total political banishment. The death dealing,control of power and authoritarism they condone and seek will not end otherwise.