So here is one of the dominant media narratives in Beltway Punditland:

Petraeus is so manly! And he was criticized. In an ad. In a newspaper! Therefore, Bush and Republicans won the Iraq debate.

As I blogged earlier, based on Greenwald's excellent work, many pundits were tripping over each other to declare Bush the winner. Stuff like this, from Joe Klein:

It seems clear the President has won this round. An optimistic general will trump a skeptical politician anytime.

Or Dana Milbank:

[DANA] MILBANK [THE WASHINGTON POST]: Bush had a terrible August down on the ranch and then has explosive Septembers. And I think he's won this battle already. MATTHEWS: How so? MILBANK: Petraeus --it's no accident he had a Latin name. It looked like he was the Roman general returning to the republic in his gold and purple toga, and they were celebrating him and slaying white bulls. They could not get enough of this man. And anybody's who's even critical of the war wouldn't dare criticize... MATTHEWS: Right. MILBANK: ... except in the most polite way, General Petraeus because then you appear to be criticizing the troops. I think it's game, set and match here.

And so on.

Yet, as eager as they were to speak for the American people, the American people have essentially given them -- and Bush, and Petraeus, and the rest of the GOP -- nothing more than a middle finger.

A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday found essentially no shift in views on whether U.S. forces are likely to win the war — two-thirds predict they won't — and if the United States should set a firm timetable to remove troops. In the days before Petraeus' appearances and President Bush's speech to the nation last week, 60% supported setting a timetable for withdrawal and sticking to it "regardless of what is going on in Iraq at the time." Now 59% do. The findings underscore how attitudes toward the war have solidified 4-1/2 years after the U.S.-led invasion. "In terms of public opinion, it seems like Petraeus didn't really change anyone's mind," says Christian Grose, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University who has studied the impact of the war on voting behavior. "He may have bought the president some time in Washington ... but not in the public's eyes."

Imagine that. People care more about the substance of the war than the do about some silly newspaper ad and the pundits who blather on about it.

No one could've predicted that one...