Here are a few excerpts:

November 19, 2002: “The greatest risk for us in invading Iraq is probably not war itself, so much as: What happens if we win? There is a batty degree of triumphalism loose in this country right now.”

January 16, 2003: “I assume we can defeat Hussein without great cost to our side (God forgive me if that is hubris). The problem is what happens after we win. The country is 20 percent Kurd, 20 percent Sunni and 60 percent Shiite. Can you say, ‘Horrible three way civil war’?”

October 7, 2003: “Good thing we won the war, because the peace sure looks like a quagmire. . . . ”

As it happens, the memorial for Molly coincided, on September 11, with the appearances on Capitol Hill of General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker. These two career public servants are from all accounts as good as their professions produce. Petraeus is a scholar and a decorated warrior. Unlike so many military officers, he understands and even cultivates the media as a way of explaining what he is doing. Crocker’s old school diplomatic style invokes the era of David Bruce and Charles (Chip) Bohlen, who were savvy Cold War envoys and classic gentlemen.

But for all their sincere presence, it was hard to believe their overall estimate of the situation in Iraq and their recommendation, to use President Bush’s infamous invocation, to “stay the course.” One of the corrosive consequences of the Iraq war has been to deepen the popular suspicion of administration experts because they have so often dissembled or been just plain wrong.

From her base in Austin, and acting primarily on her instincts, Molly forecast exactly what would happen. All the officials in Washington got Iraq publicly wrong— every last one, with the exception of Army chief of staff General Eric Shinseki, who said double the number of troops would be required—and was rebuked for his candor. The country’s establishment—including most of the Democrats running for president—and many of our leading pundits did not see what Molly did: that disaster was in the offing.

Now we are being offered the considered judgment of Petraeus and Crocker, supported by the equally straightforward Defense Secretary Robert Gates. They say that if we hang on in Iraq we can get an outcome that will salvage the situation there and prevent upheaval elsewhere in the Middle East. I certainly hope they are right this time. At least for the moment, the country’s political and media machine seems to have been maneuvered into accepting their position, pending George Bush’s departure from office in fourteen months.

That is also what happened in 2002–03. Bush and company seemed determined to go ahead with the invasion no matter what, and the country, on the whole, went along. Americans sought justification in the shock of the 9/11 attacks, the relative ease of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the evil of Saddam Hussein, and the perhaps naïve belief that democracy had a real shot in the Arab Middle East.

The best we can hope for now is to stabilize Iraq and count on some of the unexpected recent developments—mainly the shifting local alliances of expedience among various factions—to provide a politically viable outcome. Calls for immediate withdrawal seem hollow since there is virtually no likelihood that a sufficient congressional majority will go along. Moreover, the tactical situation in Iraq basically rules out any dramatic shift in military posture. What we’ve got there is exactly the catastrophe that Molly said we would have.

So now we know what Petraeus and Crocker think we should do. And for all the political posturing of the presidential candidates and congressional leadership, their views are likely to prevail.

We could sure use Molly Ivins’s impeccable instincts about these expert opinions. Maybe this time, we’d listen. Molly was a populist in a splendid American tradition. One of her best columns opposing the invasion (the one in which she predicted civil war) was on the occasion of Martin Luther King Day in 2003.

“The war is not inevitable,” she wrote “and the person who can stop it is you. Monday Jan. 20 is Dr. King’s holiday. People all over the country will be rallying and marching in his honor, celebrating not only his eloquent opposition to racism and poverty, but his equally passionate protests against militarism. You get more than a vote in this country. You get to speak up.”

In the contest for power in America, Molly Ivins had a good perch in her column, nearly perfect pitch, and, alas, too little influence.

Peter Osnos is Senior Fellow for Media at The Century Foundation. Sign-up to receive Osnos’ columns weekly by email here. Read past columns here.