See You In 2038?

Ross Douthat (via AS):

Now Bush’s hopes for vindication depend on the Middle East’s following a gradual, Fukuyaman track toward free markets, democratic government, and the “end of history.” And just as crucially, they depend on American troops’ staying in Iraq for as long as it takes for that to happen. If these events come to pass—if the Iraq of 2038 or so is stable, democratic, and at peace with its neighbors, and if American troops have maintained a constant presence in the country—no one should be surprised to hear hawkish liberals as well as conservatives taking up the idea that George W. Bush deserves a great deal of the credit.

We'll see what "hawkish liberals" say a few decades from now, I guess. (And Douthat goes on to lament the part of our national character that idealizes "activist" leaders.) As for conservatives, at least the unrepentant kind, we already know how the script will read until then. President Bush, 12/19/05: "I still think it was the right decision to make. But history will judge." Condoleeza Rice, 3/16/06: "I think the outcome, the judgment, of all of this needs to await history." Donald Rumsfeld, 3/19/06: "History is a bigger picture, and it takes some time and perspective to measure accurately." Karl Rove, 8/31/07: "History’s concern is with final outcomes, not the missteps or advances of the moment."

History's verdict is the last refuge of a failure -- and psychologically, a rejection-free zone. So expect the no-expiration-date rationalizations to bubble up from Texas for the next few decades.