IMHO Baker et al were all incredibly naive.
It's one thing to have a bipartisan commission to recommend how to change Social Security or even immigration. But to use that lame device to decide how to fight a war? Somehow we can use a committee of has-been "moderates" to fudge a consensus on how to proceed?
Take the 'Rats (PLEASE! - H .Youngman) for instance. What is THEIR Iraq / Middle East plan? THEY DON'T HAVE ONE!! That Party can't even agree among themselves, yet these geriatrics thought they could put together a report that would actually get support from a majority of ALL Americans?
Hell, John F. Kerry can't even reach agreement inside his own elongated skull!
And now Nancy Pelosi claims her Party is "ready to govern". LOL, they can't agree in their own caucus what day of the week it is.
All any of these impotent people can do is through tomatoes at GWB. Developing a real strategeric plan is quite beyond their limited abilities; they know less about the military than Ted Kennedy knows about sobriety.
I hope some of our troops get a copy of this report and burn it, because that's about all it's good for.
Its also a good substitute for toilet paper (though copies of the Koran are far superior in this regard).
Baker is an old hand, with much experience and knowledge, so it's not naivete on his part. It's something much worse.