RT list: "it is what it is"

From yesterday's column, by W. O'Reilly, online:

"And don’t tell me 'it is what it is.' I hate that. What does 'it is what
it is' mean? Should we go around saying stuff like 'hey, look at that
alligator — it is what it is.' I know that. I know what I’m seeing and hearing.
I don’t need someone to tell me. That is sooooo not cool."

----
Anyway, this may connect with R. Carston's (2009)  precis of Grice (1961), 
Causal Theory of Perception:
the 'double-dekker'  example (on p. 38) which is meant (friendly) to 
supplant Grice's  
(i) That box-pillar seems red to  me.
----
Carston writes:
"[the] oddness need not militate  against the use of [(i)] in a[n] ... 
analysis" -- or theory,  indeed.
"because ... the proposition expressed ... is PERFECTLY true and  that is 
all that matters for the ... analysis".
Now back to  Grice
A: And  you supported Thatcher's policies during the "Sink the Belgrano!"  
campaign?
B:  (i) Well, women are  women.
(ii) Well, war is war.
(Grice WOW, ii -- adapted).
Now add  O'Rilley's 'it is what it is'. I don't think I ever heard that, 
but apparently  it _is_ an Americanism.
"And don’t tell me 'it is what it is.' I hate  that. What does 'it is what 
it is' mean? Should we go around saying stuff like  'hey, look at that 
alligator — it is what it is.' I know that. I know what I’m  seeing and hearing. 
I don’t need someone to tell me. That is sooooo not  cool."
----
In any case, I'm never sure what _it_ is -- for the  Duck it was a worm 
(and J. Stanley's late 'relentless literalists' are clapping  in their graves 
-- why is it always that they have to be turning on their graves  in disgust?)
"Edwin and Morcar, the earls of Mercia and Northumbria,  declared for him: 
and even Stigand, the patriotic archbishop of Canterbury,  found it 
advisable--"' `Found WHAT?' said the Duck.  `Found IT,' the Mouse  replied rather 
crossly: `of course you know what "it" means.'  `I know what  "it" means well 
enough, when I find a thing,' said the Duck: `it 's generally a  frog or a 
worm. The question is, what did the archbishop find?'  The Mouse  did not 
notice this question, but hurriedly went on, `"--found it advisable to  go with 
Edgar Atheling to meet William and offer him the crown. William's  conduct 
at first was moderate. But the insolence of his Normans--" 
I,  personally, don't see anything wrong with the (classical, paleo-, 
orthodox)  Gricean account of tautologies like that of the header as 
implicatural, a  common-or-garden one, if you wish. The usual non-foolproof procedure 
appealing  to the Kantian/Gricean maxims of 'Quantity' mainly, as _flouted_.
So  O'Reilly is missing the Gricean point -- as usual. And I'm here to find 
 it!
Cheers,
J. L. Speranza  
**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy 
Steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222887319x1201497660/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jul
yExcfooterNO62)