Running Scared.

“In recent weeks, a startling realization has begun to take hold: if the elections were held today, top strategists of both parties say privately, the Republicans would probably lose the 15 seats they need to keep control of the House of Representatives and could come within a seat or two of losing the Senate as well. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich…told TIME that his party has so bungled the job of governing that the best campaign slogan for Democrats today could be boiled down to just two words: ‘Had enough?’“

TIME previews the increasingly nightmarish electoral landscape for the GOP, and the “signs suggest an anti-Republican wave is building, says nonpartisan electoral handicapper Stuart Rothenberg… ‘The only question is how high, how big, how much force it will have. I think it will be considerable.’ In addition, “administration officials say they fear that losing even one house of Congress would mean subpoenas and investigations–a taste of the medicine House Republicans gave Bill Clinton.”

How ’bout an exploding cigar?

“The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Mr. Hussein.” The NYT relates the details of a January 2003 pre-war meeting between Bush and Blair, and it’s not pretty. Not surprisingly (and like the July 2002 Downing Street memos, the recollections of Paul O’Neill, and countless other sources), this new material confirms that Dubya and the neocons wanted a war in Iraq, come hell or high water.

McCain-Feingold on the Road.

“‘There seems to be a disconnect between the rhetoric in Washington about what this is all about and what we hear here,’ Feingold said. McCain responded that he did ‘not want to get into a back-and-forth with one of my best friends.’” While visiting Baghdad, Senators McCain and Feingold argue “cordially and pointedly” over Iraq. “Feingold…said he was dismayed not to hear any of the military commanders he met with mention al-Qaeda as a source of the problems in Iraq. The Bush administration and U.S. officials here often point to the radical group as a major source of instability in the country.“

The boys who lied wolf.

Remember “We’ll be greeted as liberators“? How ’bout “I think they’re in the last throes…of the insurgency“? As the administration reaps the dividends of a severe credibility gap on Iraq, Dubya ventures forth once again to tell the nation about all the progress we’re just not seeing over there. “‘I understand people being disheartened when they turn on their TV screen,’ Bush said, adding that ‘nobody likes beheadings’ and other grim images.”

Blue Monday.

He’s a uniter, not a divider…Watch America turn blue (once again) with contempt over the ineptitude and dishonesty of the Dubya administration, from month to month. (Via Medley.)

Iraq, Year Four.

“If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is.” As the war in Iraq enters its fourth year (US casualities) and civil war appears increasingly likely on the ground, Dubya and Cheney trod out the same stale talking points we’ve been hearing since “Mission Accomplished” (while Rummy attempts variations on a theme.) Update: Slate‘s Fred Kaplan surveys the mistakes.

“An Unbelievable Mess.”

“We may have been seduced into something we might be inclined to regret. Is strategic failure a possibility? The answer has to be ‘yes.'” Several internal Downing Street memos, recently obtained by the Guardian, suggest that our British allies have been wary of US mismanagement in Iraq since at least 2003, when Baghdad envoy John Sawers called the US post-invasion operation “an unbelievable mess.” (By way of Dateline: Bristol.)

Hearing Loss.

“Leave it to Rumsfeld to invoke memories of Vietnam as others in the administration are trying to dispel such comparisons. Leave it to the Senate to miss the slip-up.” In yet another sad example of the AWOL Senate of late, Slate‘s Fred Kaplan watches the Appropriations Committee flub a hearing with Rumsfeld and Rice on Iraq.

Murder by Numbers.

Well, this might explain the recent discrepancy in casualty numbers. Backed by a recent UN human rights report saying much the same thing, an anonymous Iraqi ministry official claims that a Shiite party representative “ordered that government hospitals and morgues catalogue deaths caused by bombings or clashes with insurgents, but not by execution-style shootings.”

Used to be my homies.

“While he remains sympathetic to the democracy-spreading mission, Fukuyama castigates the unilateral and militaristic turns that gave us such concepts as ‘preventive war,’ ‘benevolent hegemony,’ and ‘regime change.’ Neoconservatives, he contends, have abandoned their fundamental political insight, namely that ambitious schemes to remake societies are doomed to disappointment, failure, and unintended consequences. ‘Opposition to utopian social engineering,’ Fukuyama writes ‘…is the most enduring thread running through the movement.’ Yet neoconservatives today are bogged down in an attempt to remake a poorly understood, catastrophically damaged, and deeply alien semi-country in the Middle East. How did these smart people stray — and lead the country — so far off course?“

Um, well, maybe ’cause a lot of ’em read Fukuyama’s The End of History back in the day? Jacob Weisberg reviews Francis Fukuyama’s new book, America at the Crossroads, and, while it’s good to see principled conservatives take this administration’s egregiously inept Iraq policy to task, it’s also hard to believe that the neocons didn’t share Fukuyama’s earlier contention going in that “the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government” was both an historical inevitability and in full flourish. Fukuyama can play the aggrieved realist now, but that’s definitely not how he made a name for himself.