The Fuzzy Math of CBS News

What to do about Iran?: Over at Lawyers, Guns, and Money, Robert Farley tries to articulate a semi-expert opinion on what a more reasonable policy course towards Iran would have looked like between 2001 and today. It's interesting stuff.

From today's vantagepoint, where there is widespread global distrust of the U.S., it's hard to overestimate the degree to which the world was united in its support for America. I have to believe that efforts to pressure Iran would have been met with a more receptive ear in Tehran and had stronger support from Russia and China before the US lost so much of its credibility with the rush to war in Iraq and the occupation that followed.

Even before the Iraq War, a land invasion of Iran would have been incredibly difficult, and likely would have required the combined U.S., U.K., and Russian armies in addition to other smaller countries. Therefore, in almost all scenarios, the most damage Iran would be likely to face is a series of aggressive bombing runs. And it's unclear if such attacks would force the country to cave in to global demands.

While the rest of the world covers the colossal failure that is the Medicare prescription drug "benefit", CBS demonstrates that it is in the tank for the White House with a puff piece on how Medicare enrollment is exceeding White House projections. This is, to put it bluntly, ridiculous.

First of all, the White House deliberately lowballed projections to hide the true cost of the bill from members of Congress, knowing that they would lose a number of votes on the Republican side of the aisle if it were too expensive.

Second, as has been well documented, the drug "benefit" is a policy failure of staggering proportions. Eligibility requirements are confusing, certain drugs are excluded from coverage for what appears to be no good reason, the "donut hole" leaves lots of seniors without any prescription help ... it's really just a gargantuan pain in the derriere for no good reason.

There aren't any successes that can make up for these failures. The bulk of enrolled seniors were enrolled automatically by a pre-existing healthy plan, so at the moment, only 2.5% of all seniors have used the program to increase their drug coverage, and it's possible some of them may have switched from an existing prescription plan.

Is there anything this executive can execute on successfully, other than short-term political tactics?