Matt Yglesias uncovers another fundamental quandry presented by the "surge": The Iraqi Prime Minister doesn't like Gen. Petraeus, especially when he's arming Sunni militias and insurgents, but the American government does like Petraeus and his methods making it even harder to explain what we're doing or why we're staying. 

Frankly, I think Matt should have ended the piece with the line, "Which is why our next step is pushing for the removal of al-Maliki as Prime Minister" and it would come closer to what is likely to happen in the next year or so.

If you can't face Youtube, how are you going to face Al-Qaeda??

My thanks to FNC CEO Roger Ailes for the inspiration.

 

 

We've talked about the end of the beginning and the beginning of the end.

Now we are at the middle of the end.

Finally we are at the call for the special prosecutor. We are at the 25% percent approval rating.

I'm a little late on all the Politico bashing that's been going on and call me old-fashioned, but if you're going to title this piece "Obama models campaign on Reagan Revolt", it'd be nice if the author actually provided more details to support this assertion.  Best I can tell the name "Reagan" is only used three time in the piece, one of which is in the title, and exactly which "Reagan Revolt" campaign are we talking about: 1968, 1976, when he almost torpedoed Gerald Ford, or 1980?  Furthermore, how is the Obama campaign similar to the "Reagan revolt" campaign(s)... ah, we'll never know but if one of Obama's pollsters is quoted as saying the campaign admired Reagan's above-the-fray optimism evidently that's enough?

Anyway, if you read a little further down, you'll see that the author asserts and provides far more detail as to why Obama's campaign strategy more resembles Gary Hart's 1984 presidential run. Okay, so let's try this again, 

 "Obama models campaign on Hart's 1984 run"? 

Accurate, but not nearly as sexy as that Reagan headline, is it?