Huh -- wonder what the folks in our Ohio Dept. of Education would think of a school district that only met 3 of 18 indicators.

That's purely a rhetorical question, of course. Everyone here KNOWS what would be said -- and it wouldn't be pretty, especially if it occurs year after depressing year.

Isn't Iraq a little more "high stakes" than public education (even given how important that is)? How would one define failure if not by failure to meet mutually agreed indicators?

Barely 17 % or half the approval rating of the man (moron) in the White House, Congratulations!!!!

With the 3 success stories centered around kill numbers the military has increased to "them" and decreased to "us". Not bad considering we have shot and bombed the Iraqis into the jurassic. If Bush can travel to New Orleans and "see" progress then 3 for 18 in Iraq would look like a blazing success story. Using a baseball comparison, 3 for 18 would send a rookie back to triple A and a "star" into therapy about his "swing". In business it would become an "everything must go" sale, and in a marrage at very least counsuling, if not divorce. In Bush politics, it becomes a trip to la-la land where if you dare disagree, you become a non-supporter of the troops and an emboldener of the enemy.

Bush's extremely low self-esteem (although he'd never admit it) and feigned optimisim is wearing on him, and unfortunately, this country.

The upcoming "sugar coated" report will be spun as acomplete success and bring us an additional six month killing cycle. Betrayus has betrayed us, and probably more importantly, his own troops. Let's hope those guns his subordinates handed-over to the Iraqi Police, some of which landed in Turkey, stay there...

I find it refreshing that this draft report was leaked to the WaPo and AP so that it can be compared to the final version once it is released. Providing a paper trail for the manipulation the Bushies will put it through will be very helpful.

Further encouragement comes from the AP story on this same topic. There, an internal White House memo responding to the GAO report also has been leaked. Is this the beginning of a steady stream of Washington insiders at administrative levels finally getting fed up with having professionally prepared work products massaged by political hacks before they are released to the public? Release of the early drafts in leak form is the perfect route for exposing the political treachery.

An interesting quote appears in the AP story:

At the Pentagon, spokesman Geoff Morrell previewed the administration's response to the GAO report, comparing it unfavorably to the July findings.

"The standard the GAO has set is far more stringent," he told reporters. "Some might argue it's impossible to meet."

It would be interesting to dig out some of the stories from January, when the surge plan was announced and incorporated into the funding bill. I am sure the benchmarks were hailed then as easily achievable minimum standards against which to judge progress. The GAO "impossible" standard is a simple yes or no on whether the benchmark has been met.

Clearly, if the benchmarks agreed upon in January are impossible to meet, our presence in Iraq is meaningless and should be brought to an end immediately.

So, given the Bush League's performance with government agencies to date, has Bush/Cheney decided to eliminate the GAO in the interests of the war effort?

Where the Unitary Executive is concerned, no news is good news! I find it amusing that the Government Accountability Office takes issue with Bush's view of the war, given that government accountability is the very antithesis of what this administration has been about, from the very get-go.

There is nothing anyone will do about Iraq for another 7 years. EOY 2014 is the real end of the Iraq war. Everyone knows that.

I would like this Administration to put out a report as it was written by the people who actually did the research. I recognize that this Administration didn't invent spin (that was installed the first time George Washington put a polish on a report to Congress and has been getting a workout ever since), but this Administration has used it to a degree that negates the value of anything it has to say.

It's like the old Soviet joke about the headline for a report on a two man race between an American and Soviet Olympic runner: "Glorious Soviet Athlete Comes In Second in Race, American Comes in Next to Last". Amusing the first time you hear it, but it's really tiring to have to live the joke and it's getting people killed.

This is the guy bragging about a C average from college.

I mean for him he is taking this war Pass Fail.

These are great comments thus far! Special shout-out to RichEmery for drawing the NCLB parallel.

The thing is, you can mount a reasonable defense of Bush’s statement, “Iraq as a whole is moving forward.” Saddam Hussein, a dictator who used chemical weapons against his own people no longer leads Iraq. Iraq now has a democratically elected government. Desertion among Iraqi Security Forces is slowing. With the “surge” overall attack levels across Iraq have fallen in seven of the past nine weeks. The movement of Al Qaida in Iraq has been restricted in some areas.

That’s progress since 2003.

But that progress has coincided with severe setbacks: sectarian violence, suicide bombers, the rise of Al Qaida in Iraq, the emboldening of Iran, 4,000 U.S. dead and a minimum of 75,000 dead Iraqis.

So does this progress exceed the damage done? Is this the sort of progress we should have made since 2003, or does it only look significant à la Katrina—“hard for people to see progress when you live in a community all the time” ? Does Iraq only look good if you only look at it occasionally? Do you have to step back to appreciate it, like a Monet?

Was it worth it? Because if it wasn’t, that’s not progress.

these guys were talking about Iraq being oner in 6 months. Anyone know when that 6 months is supposed to begin?