Would it have made any difference if Colin Powell had said then what he says now, about the follies of what we have undertaken in Iraq?
Or if Alan Greenspan had said clearly* then what he says now, about fiscal folly?
We'll never know. Nor will they. I think that should bother both of them, because those two, unlike the other former Administration supporters who have since recanted, had the stature and influence to have prevented or diminished what they now tell us are very harmful results.
Non-rhetorical question: Who will come out looking better by virtue of his or her service in the G.W. Bush Administration. Will anyone?**
* Greenspan's supporters point out that his statements about the Bush tax cuts contained cautions against fiscal recklessness, etc. That's true. But anyone following the Washington politics of the early Bush years knows beyond a doubt that as a practical reality, Greenspan was seen as giving the OK to the cuts. He is sophisticated enough to know that too.
** One possibility that occurs to me: former Army chief of staff Eric Shinseki. Are there any more?