This morning Dana Milbank wrote a story in the WaPo about a Republican Senate candidate running for reelection.  The interview was granted on condition of anonymity to several reporters.

That really bothers me.

But for the time being, I want to focus on what the candidate said not his anonymity:

The source of the candidate's anger -- and his anxiety -- is the Iraq war, which he called "the single thread that is weaving through every issue," including high gas prices and the violence in Lebanon. "People want an honest assessment from the administration, and they want to hear the administration admit we thought this, and it didn't happen that way, and -- guess what -- it didn't work, so we're going to try a Plan B." He continued: "Let's call it what it is. We thought this was going to be a different kind of engagement."

He seemed less agitated by the policy failure than by Bush's unwillingness to admit failure. "I don't know why the people around him don't see that," he said. "It is a frustration, to say the least. I think it is a lost opportunity to bring the American people along on a mission that is incredibly important."

Are we supposed to be grateful that one (or two) Republicans have seen the light but are afraid to "come to Jesus"?

Iraq is the river that runs through everything. The status quo assures that the U.S. will remain paralyzed in the Middle East.  Until I heard General William Odum (Ret) describe  his plan, I felt as many do, that we could not withdraw from Iraq without fixing the mess we've made there.  After listening to Odum, I realize that we cannot fix the mess unless we leave and we will need help to fix the mess after we leave. Here is what I wrote in a comment in the Larry Johnson post: Lebanon, The Rut Becomes a Grave:

Lt. General Wm. Odum, Ret. has expressed a plan that would result in the greatest strategic turn around the U.S. could achieve. He suggests that the U.S. notify the Europeans privately that we are withdrawing from Iraq.  They wouldn't trust that until it actually happened. Tell them that we need their help to stabilize the region in particular Iraq. And convene representatives from the contiguous countries to plan for limiting the damage.

Quietly and secretly meet with Iran, telling them that they can go ahead and have their nuclear bomb - we are taking it off the table. Discuss the objective goals each of us may mutually  benefit from: we need help in Afghanistan-we both don't like the Taliban and al Qaeda; Iran needs to sell oil-we need to buy oil; etc.

Diplomacy with Iran seems an impossible task unless the U.S. is willing to get out of Iraq and admit error.  So far it's the only thing I've heard that makes any sense.

The longer we remain in Iraq the higher the price we pay.  The Bush administration already plans to reduce forces there but there is no indication that they are even thinking about diplomacy with Iran.