Sorry, but there just isn't enough lipstick in the world for this pig

Hard to believe, but there are still some pundits out there who are trying to salvage the legacy of President Thirty Percent by preparing the public for some grand announcement to save Iraq that just isn't going to happen:

PUNDIT KATHLEEN HALL JAMIESON: LACK OF SOLUTIONS TO IRAQ QUAGMIRE HELPS...BUSH!

Sit down, everyone. I think I've found what is far and away the most perfect example of "no-matter-how-bad-it-gets-it's-helpful-to-Bush" punditry ever produced anywhere.

It comes courtesy of Kathleen Hall Jamieson, the director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. Jamieson appears to believe that the fact that the Iraq quagmire has gotten so bad offers hidden political benefits to the President in that it will make Americans more receptive to Bush's imminent solutions to it:

Even with that seemingly no-win set of expectations, the president does have room to succeed, said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania...

What people want is to hear Bush explain a clear route to an honorable outcome — one in which it is clear that the war left Iraq and the U.S. better off, Jamieson said.

"There are times when a country roots for a leader. I think that's what happening with this," Jamieson said. "A lot of people who voted for Democrats want the president to succeed. I think he has some advantage coming in, because the public so desperately wants success."

Bush has an advantage "coming in"? Do we really believe that the American public is so dumb that it's forgotten that Bush created this problem?

This one really does capture punditry at its worst: It's completely, even laughably divorced from reality, and contains no discernible desire to root opinion in anything resembling empirical evidence. And it displays an all-too-typical refusal to acknowledge that there already is a course of action preferred by the American electorate.

(hat tip: Atrios)