The Highest Level of Concentrated Wrongess Ever Acheived

Wow, I see that Fred Kagan has teamed up with Mr. Bill Kristol to tell us what to do about the colossal disaster they and their allies made out of Iraq.  Goody!  Admittedly, they have plenty of company among the idiots who brought us this catastrophe.

Of course, none of this stops Kagan from getting an uncritical-to-fawning profile from the newspaper that hired Kristol to write the worst regular op-ed column in known human history.  It contains this rather chilling passage:

But Exhibit A for what Robert Kagan describes as his “mainstream” view of American force is his relationship with former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who remains the vessel into which many interventionists are pouring their hopes. Mr. Kagan pointed out that he had recently attended a dinner of foreign-policy experts at which Mrs. Clinton was the guest of honor, and that he had served on her bipartisan group of foreign-policy heavy hitters at the State Department, where his wife worked as her spokeswoman.

“I feel comfortable with her on foreign policy,” Mr. Kagan said, adding that the next step after Mr. Obama’s more realist approach “could theoretically be whatever Hillary brings to the table” if elected president. “If she pursues a policy which we think she will pursue,” he added, “it’s something that might have been called neocon, but clearly her supporters are not going to call it that; they are going to call it something else.”

While I think that the Democratic primary electorate got it right in 2008, however, I would be much more worried if these characterizations were coming from Clinton. In this context, Kagan’s record of being wrong about everything is somewhat reassuring.

My question: other than Hillary Clinton, has anybody in America’s political elites suffered any negative consequence from supporting the Iraq War?