Reporters always kvetch about their scoops that do not receive sufficient attention. Well, I feel like griping today. The piece I posted last week about former Judge Radhi al-Radhi, the forced-out anticorruption chief in Iraq who told me that the government of Nouri al-Maliki is so corrupt it ought to be abolished, did not get the pop I had imagined it would. As the world was waiting for General David Petraeus to report to Congress, wasn't it highly relevant that Radhi was saying that Iraqi government is utterly hapless, riddled with corruption, and little more than a collection of pocket-lining thugs? After all, the point of the so-called surge is to provide the Iraqi government breathing space so it can engage in national reconciliation and self-improvement. But if the Maliki government is not much more than a cesspool of sleaze, that overall strategy doesn't look too hot. As Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker appear before multiple congressional committees this week, I hope some lawmakers ask them to respond to Radhi's pronouncements. The question is rather important: what can the U.S. government and military can do, if the Iraqi government is too corrupt to govern? If the answer is not obvious to you, look up "Diem and Vietnam" at Wikipedia. It's deja vu all over again.

REHABBING RICE. My old college pal, Glenn Kessler, now an accomplished reporter for The Washington Post has just published a book on Condoleezza Rice called The Confidante: Condoleezza Rice and the Creation of the Bush Legacy. The book has garnered positive reviews. In it, one of Rice's friends sums her up this way: "Condi is the least reflective person I know." No wonder she has gotten along so well with George W. Bush. How unfortunate for the nation that at this point in time its national security is within the hands of people who cannot think deeply about the critical actions they take. Kessler also notes that Rice "believes that the mistakes the Bush administration has made will be forgotten as long as the big picture -- such as transforming the Middle East -- is viewed as acceptable by historians.'' Talk about self-delusion.

The book is replete with fly-on-the-wall scenes that show how Washington operates. Here's one example. The setup: it's early 2005, and Rice has only recently become Secretary of State. Her image is severely tarnished by the Iraq war and the WMD fiasco. Still, there's a lot of buzz about her--including talk (fair or not) about her choice of footwear. A photo of her wearing long, black leather boots has created a stir (at least among people who care about such things). And her handlers are doing all they can to bolster (that is, rehab) her image. Kessler picks up the story:

The boots photograph appeared in the press on February 25; Rice had only arrived at the State Department on January 27. The transformation was nearly complete, but [image maker and senior advisor Jim] Wilkinson had one more trick up his sleeve.

Wilkinson could rest easy: A star was born.

So a Rice image-maker gets a conservative newspaper to ask a question that he knows will lead to hype helpful for his boss. Such is how bigtime spinners orchestrate news in Washington.

BOBBY AND J. EDGAR AND ME I reviewed Burton Hersh's new book on RFK and J. Edgar Hoover--Bobby and J. Edgar: The Historic Face-Off Between the Kennedys and J. Edgar Hoover that Transformed America--for the latest issue of The New York Times Book Review and gave the book a thumb's down. It was sloppily researched and written, and Hersh failed to escape the gravitational pull of unproven conspiracy theories involving RFK, JFK, Marilyn Monroe, the Mafia and more. You can read the full review here.

Posted by David Corn at September 10, 2007 11:16 AM