BUT IRAQ ISN'T THE GRAND NARRATIVE: If we were playing checkers instead of chess with our friends in the GOP, I'd probably agree with Atrios when he says that we Dems can only win the argument over Iraq by clarifying it (i.e., by retrospectively opposing President Bush's decision to invade). But here's the thing: We don't need to win the argument over Iraq. We need to win the national security debate (or at least fight it to more of a draw), and that's not going to happen if virtually the entire Democratic foreign policy establishment falls on its sword to appease the anti-war wing of the party.

Frankly, we Democrats have enough problems in this general area already. (Not to mention this one.) It would be a bad idea indeed to add an all-too-easily caricatured position on Iraq to the issues mix.

PS: To get a sense of just how hard it is for a party to get any real traction on a big issue on which it has limited credibility, see Social Security.