What the Other Matt (Yglesias) said about people who supported the war, or more accurately about the idea that supporting the war somehow creates some foreign policy “street cred”:

This reflects, I believe, an incredibly damaging mindset that’s been crippling the Democratic Party for years and the prospect of excising this mindset is the single most appealing thing about the prospect of Obama being the nominee. Clinton’s ‘street cred’ on national security consists, of course, of being massively wrong on the most important national security issue of her career. Paradoxically, a lot of folks find her massive wrongness on this hugely important issue reassuring because they and their friends were also wrong and they view having made the right call to be a suspicious quality. After all, the Iraq War may have led to thousands of U.S. deaths, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths, and millions of Iraqi refugees all at a cost of over $1 trillion and in ways that’s damaged the strategic position of the United States, but war opponents were all a bunch of hippies.

I say good riddance to that. I got the war wrong, and I think that gives me less ‘cred’ than I would have had had I gotten the war right and I think that, politically speaking, it makes sense to put people forward who aren’t tainted by the war. But most of all we need to ditch the mindset that says ‘cred’ on national security is composed of being hawkish even when that means being wrong.

To me, this means one thing: Howard Dean as Obama’s running mate.