Living Politics: Running Against Osama Bin Laden

George W. Bush's political handlers are obsessed with a date on the calendar. It's not Sept. 11 or Nov. 2. It is June 30 -- the day of the "handover," when America's role in Iraq is supposed to begin winding down. Swing voters who have been withholding judgment about the war want to see if the "transition" produces stability in Iraq and a reduction in American casualties, a key Bush adviser told me. "That's a critical time," he said. "It could set the tone for the rest of the race."

This is the sound of wishful thinking. Team Bush is deluding itself if it really believes that the events surrounding June 30 will lighten the political burden of the war. The reason is simple and depressing: They are not in control of events, and neither are our few allies on the ground in Iraq. Osama bin Laden is in charge. He's the other "candidate" in this presidential race.

And he's winning.

A year ago, the Bushies were planning to run away from the economy and toward the war, outing the president's role as commander-in-chief. Now they might want to run away from the war and toward the economy. Though the president isn't highly regarded for economic leadership, at least there is good news to brag about (not counting the prices of gasoline).

There is precious little good news from Iraq, or from the wider war on terror. In fact, things couldn't be going better for bin Laden if he'd written the script.

To be sure, many members of his inner circle have been killed or are on the run. Finances have been disrupted, and police agencies have had considerable success rounding up potential terrorists. But look at the rest of the wartime ledger from OBL's own point of view. For him, it's all upside.