I hope that someone writes a piece about the composition of the Iraq Study Group. Because even though I like that it has rebuked the president, its membership does not inspire confidence. True, some members of the committee belong on such a panel. But I’d say about half the group is political hackery, chosen for their gender, their race, or the party to which they belong.

Let’s start with who has the chops to be on this panel.

Given their careers in diplomacy and the military, James Baker, Lee Hamilton, Lawrence Eagleburger, and William Perry seem like sound choices.

But what about Chuck Robb? Sure, he served in the Senate and oversaw various intelligence matters. But Robb was never reputed to be particularly intelligent himself, and you wouldn’t say he was exactly a towering figure in the Senate. (Although he may have done some towering when he got naked massages from Miss Virginia Tai Collins.)

And what about Vernon Jordan? Where, exactly, does his Iraq-related expertise come from? The guy is a lawyer and senior managing director of Lazard Frères & Co. Could it be a coincidence that he was the only member of a minority group on the panel?

Then there’s Ed Meese, surely one of the most incompetent attorneys general of the 20th century.

Sandra Day O’Connor is a very impressive woman, to be sure. But what exactly is her foreign policy expertise? Or did her gender matter more in her choice? She was, after all, the only woman in the group. (I would have preferred Anne-Marie Slaughter.)

Leon Panetta was a California congressman who became a chief of staff in the Clinton White House and did a credible job in both instances. But I wouldn’t exactly call him a foreign policy expert. His areas of interest were the budget and agricultural issues.

Finally, Alan Simpson was a senator ten years ago who retired and since has hung his shingle at the Kennedy School, a PR firm, a law firm, and various corporate boards. In the Senate, he did not specialize in foreign affairs. Although he did make an ass of himself in the Anita Hill matter, when he threatened her with “real harassment, different from the sexual kind, just plain old Washington variety harassment, which is pretty unique in itself.”

What’s interesting as well is who isn’t on this committee, which is to say, a single person who’s not a Washington insider, “wise man” (or woman), widely respected within the Beltway for basically hanging around a long time within the Beltway.

It’s interesting to consider the group’s report with that in mind.