I am and have been critical of the Administration for doing the right thing - taking the Islamist threat seriously and responding - yet lacking (or at least not sharing) a clear vision of what we were doing, and downplaying the seriousness and difficulty of the conflict we have been handed. This memo - and article - are glimmers of hope to me. First, they suggest that the Administration, which I have been convinced has pursued a somewhat closed-minded approach in the leadup to the war is willing to look at alternate paths. Next, and most critically important, it means they are asking the right core question - how do we know when we're winning? How do we define 'victory' in this murky conflict? I said, in talking about the economic success of the U.S.:

The success of the American economic model is built largely on failure. It is built on our willingness as a people to try things and to risk failing; built on the fact that we accept failure as part of the price of ultimate success; and ultimately on our willingness to accept displacement and change as a natural part of our social and economic lives.

Our military success is founded on the incredible logistical and technological advantages that our economy has given us - and also on our willingness to apply the same principles to our warfighting; to learn, to adapt, to change. If Rumsfeld hasn't written this memo, he should have been fired, and I hope to God that the fact that so many Democrats are seizing on it is so much political spin, rather than sheer naive stupidity - which is what it is if they aren't spinning.