Yesterday morning, before the Petraeus-Crocker Show aired in reruns, Tom Ricks of the Washington Post surveyed [1] the Bush administration's Iraqi razzle-dazzle of last fall and extrapolated as best he could:

In Round One, last September, I think the general and the ambassador scored a surprisingly decisive victory.... For months, Democrats expected the September hearings to be decisive, a major and conclusive point in the war.... Instead, the three-pronged outcome of the hearings was a collapse of congressional calls for a swift withdrawal, a realization that there would be no major change in Iraq policy until at least January 2009, and a sense that we are stuck in Iraq for many years to come.

Given that unexpected result, I think we also should be prepared for surprises in Round Two.

But Round Two, Q.E.D., was strikingly similar to Round One. In fact the language, demeanor, senatorial disgust and executive hubris all resting in the familiar stage setting of a strategic sand trap made it impossible to tell April from September. We got all gussied up to attend the big show, only to find we had seen this flick before.

There was one dramatic element introduced, and wouldn't you know it? -- it was all about the senators; not the thousands of lives needlessly lost or the hundreds of billions flushed down a Middle East toilet. No, it was about them and their prerogatives. Having abdicated their constitutional rights of actually declaring wars and defunding monstrously ill-advised ones, the good senators did become a trifle exercised over Ambassador Crocker's elevation of a rather common status-of-forces agreement to a virtual 1000-year formal alliance. It was being done without the Senate's advice and consent. Now that's going too far. There are limits, you know.

Other than that, it was rerun time. I'm not sure what, if anything, Tom Ricks had in mind as he prepared for surprises, although I'm sure he was referring to evolutionary developments that would not have been noticeable in the span of one day. So perhaps something will develop yet -- like U.S. senators growing a pair of some critical anatomical part. But I wouldn't bet on Darwin this time.

No, what we got -- what we were subjected to by the congressionally promiscuous and administratively debauched -- were the selfsame hours of the selfsame rhetorical flatulence already sprayed at us last September. It was like being stuck in some kind of Clockwork Orange video loop, without the mercy.

General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker simply dusted off their autumnal scripts and set out to rethrust us all into a true sense of insecurity. Our progress in Iraq is "significant but uneven," our security gains "still fragile"; hence the process of "relentless pressure" coupled with "consolidation and evaluation" is "continuous."

As will be their testimony today, again, rewound and replayed, before the House of Representatives' very own do-nothing-about foreign affairs and armed services committees. And just to save you a whole lot of viewing time, here it is, an abbreviated transcript, already, in the most predictable of all nutshells:

Q: Are the slim signs of an Iraqi political settlement realistically promising? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Can the American Armed Forces sustain this strain? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Will the Iraqi security forces ever be able to secure Iraqis? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: How much more of the U.S. Treasury is required? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: When will the sectarian slaughter end? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Have we sufficiently vanquished al Qaeda in Iraq? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Is the surge's "progress" permanent? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Are not Afghanistan and Pakistan even greater threats? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: How many more Americans will die? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: How many more Iraqis will die? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Does this unilateral venture enhance our national security? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: After the troop-withdrawal "pause," will we stay paused? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Is Iraq's oil economy finally turning the corner? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: When will all the benchmarks be met? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: When can the refugees return? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Will Iraqi reconstruction efforts ever come to fruition? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Is Prime Minister Maliki in control? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Will the Sunni Awakening undergo a nasty re-awakening? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: When will Iraq's government corruption and incompetence diminish to acceptable levels? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: When will our troops' extended tours no longer be necessary? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: When can we expect regional peace and security from our costly investment in Iraq? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Can we ever define an "achievable goal" in Iraq? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: Is there any end in sight? A: Let's wait and see.

Q: All things considered, will we still be asking these questions six months or a year from now? A: Yes.

Q: Will we get the same answers? A: Yes.

There. Now your day is free.