It's no fun being in the reality-based community

Would seem obvious to me, but apparently it's true that deluding oneself is the secret to happiness.

RECENT SURVEYS HAVE indicated that conservatives, on average, report being happier than liberals. Two psychologists wanted to know why, so they re-analyzed data from several large national and international surveys. The conservative-happiness relationship was not explained by differences in demographics or thoughtfulness but was largely explained by conservatives' greater rationalization of inequality, including belief in a meritocratic world. According to the authors, such beliefs serve a "palliative function" or act as an "emotional buffer" when confronted with inequality. The same was true overseas, especially in countries with lower standards of living. Moreover, the authors found that the happiness gap between liberals and conservatives in the United States has widened over the last three decades as inequality has increased here.

Napier, J. and Jost, J., "Why Are Conservatives Happier Than Liberals?" Psychological Science (June 2008).

Obama's reliance on economic issues may not be enough to win over working poor whites if they don't recognize the inequalities they face. So, the deluded may once again elect the deluded.

"Irreversible"

Bob Woodward reports today in the Post.

Early on the morning of Nov. 13, 2006, members of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group gathered around a dark wooden conference table in the windowless Roosevelt Room of the White House.

For more than an hour, they listened to President Bush give what one panel member called a "Churchillian" vision of "victory" in Iraq and defend the country's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki. "A constitutional order is emerging," he said.

Later that morning, around the same conference table, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden painted a starkly different picture for members of the study group. Hayden said "the inability of the government to govern seems irreversible," adding that he could not "point to any milestone or checkpoint where we can turn this thing around," according to written records of his briefing and the recollections of six participants.

"The government is unable to govern," Hayden concluded. "We have spent a lot of energy and treasure creating a government that is balanced, and it cannot function."

Later in the interview, he qualified the statement somewhat: "A government that can govern, sustain and defend itself is not achievable," he said, "in the short term."

Hayden's bleak assessment, which came just a week after Republicans had lost control of Congress and Bush had dismissed Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, was a pivotal moment in the study group's intensive examination of the Iraq war, and it helped shape its conclusion in its final report that the situation in Iraq was "grave and deteriorating."

In the eight months since the interview, neither Hayden nor any other high-ranking administration official has publicly described the Iraqi government in the uniformly negative terms that the CIA director used in his closed-door briefing.

[...]

Testifying publicly before the Senate Armed Services Committee two days after meeting with the study group, Hayden was more cautious in his conclusions. He said that there were serious problems in Iraq but that the government was "functioning."

And a window into how the Bush administration "functions."

Bush was joined in the interview by Vice President Cheney, White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and Hadley, but they did not speak. "We thought with that whole group there, we were going to get briefings, we were going to get discussions," said Perry. "Instead the president held forth on his views on how important the war was, and how it was tough."

Churchillian.

Look, no one really would expect Hayden to publicly testify that his boss's crusade is irreversibly heading towards ongoing disaster. But clearly Hayden, Hadley, and whomever else is part of this criminal enterprise have never been able to puncture the delusions of their boss is amazing.

They can throw all the Kagans in the world up against the wall to see if their arguments stick, but it's this lack of candor and willingness to allow preznit's delusions guide policy and how the war is even talked about is why support for this war dropped off the table a few months ago. Spreading more dubious claims isn't going to help at this point.

U.S. Military Calls Al-Qaeda in Iraq 'Principal Threat'

Meanwhile, the "real" al Qaeda -- the one who launched the attacks on our embassies, the USS Cole, the Pentagon, and the World Trade Center -- is stronger than it's been in years and has even greater control over its home base in the hinterlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan. That was a war we may well have been able to win, or at least seriously cripple the terrorist organization. Instead...well you know.

The sham continues

Thomas Ricks and Karen de Young write today in the Post that the administration is "shaving the yardsticks" to show progress in Iraq. Not surprising, since we're playing referee in the Civil War. But the story concludes,

Facing increased public disapproval and eroding Republican support, Bush has stepped up his warnings that a sudden U.S. withdrawal would allow al-Qaeda or Iran -- or both -- to take over Iraq. What is more likely, several officials said, is a deeper split between competing Shiite groups supported in varying degrees by Iran, and greater involvement by neighboring Arab states in Sunni areas battling al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Kurdish region, officials said, would become further estranged from the rest of Iraq, and its tensions with Turkey would increase.

"I can't say that al-Qaeda is going to take over, or that Iran is going to take over," an official said. "I don't think either are true. But I do think that a lot of very, very bad things would happen." If the administration decided to have troops retreat to bases inside Iraq and not intervene in sectarian warfare, he said, the U.S. military could find itself in a position that "would make the Dutch at Srebrenica look like heroes."

For its part, the military has calculated that a veto-proof congressional majority is unlikely to demand a full, immediate withdrawal. But however long the troops remain, and in whatever number, the military intelligence official said, they see a clear mission ahead. "We're going to get it as stable as we can, with the troops we have, and in the time available. And then, we'll back out as carefully as we can," the official said.

So, our president -- "the heart of darkness," as one of his officials describes him -- is devoid of clues but the mission looks pretty clear to military intelligience: we're leaving, we just don't know when. Meanwhile, the sham will continue until, as the New York Times editorial board describes it today, Bush can "dump the mess on his successor."

And while anonymous officials debate the horrors that could happen after U.S. troops begin departing, the horrors continue.

BAGHDAD, July 7 — A suicide truck bomber killed at least 105 people in a single blast north of Baghdad on Saturday, police officials said, leading to further fears that insurgents who fled intense military operations in Baghdad and Diyala are turning to targets away from the American troop buildup.

The explosives-laden truck demolished dozens of fragile clay-built houses and shops in Amerli, a village of poor Shiite Turkmen about 70 miles north of Baquba, the largest city in Diyala. The Iraqi police said that in addition to the dead, at least 240 people were wounded. It was one of the deadliest single attacks of the war.

Zain al-Abadeen Abdul Hussein, a shop owner burned on his right arm and left leg, said the blast sent debris soaring into the air and set people on fire. “I saw children from my neighborhood burning,” he said.

The American military also reported Saturday the deaths of nine soldiers and marines on Thursday and Friday, eight killed during combat or from roadside bombs. The fatalities brought the military’s death toll to 23 for the first week of July, nearly five months since the beginning of the troop increase.

All to maintain the delusions of a handful of men in Washington, in the White House and in the "Think Tanks" where those delusions are formulated and polished to a hard shine.

UPDATE: And in Georgia they plant more trees.