Kagan, you delusional fucktard.
Puncturing Neocon Spin = shooting fish in a barrel.
Surge architect Fred Kagan writes a whiny little piece over at The Weekly Standard. The parsing reaches new, ridiculous heights. I won't torture you with much of it, but here's the money quote - the spin around which the entire article revolves.
Through no fault of the GAO's, the organization was sent on a fool's errand by Congress. Its mandate was not to evaluate progress in Iraq, but to determine whether or not the Iraqi government had met the 18 benchmarks (emphasis Kagan's).
Kagan wants to create the illusion that Iraq's meeting benchmarks (or not) is not how the White House seeks to measure 'progress' in Iraq.
Fair enough. Let Kagan go and argue the point with this guy.
MR. BARTLETT: He'll make very clear that a key element of the new Iraq strategy requires an active and willing partner in the Iraqi government, that they have to take steps to achieve concrete benchmarks that everybody recognizes have to be achieved in order to get political progress on the ground. (January 23, 2007)
Or maybe this guy.
...And this morning, Ambassador Bremer briefed me on our strategy to accelerate progress toward this goal. He outlined a comprehensive plan for action for bringing greater security, essential services, economic development and democracy to the Iraqi people.
The plan sets out ambitious timetables and clear benchmarks to measure progress and practical methods for achieving results. (July 23, 2003)
In Neocon Spin World, benchmarks are the only way to measure progress in Iraq - unless, of course, the benchmarks aren't being met. Then benchmarks are the Stupidest Thing Ever.
Calvinball.
Extra laugh line: I had to include this.
A number of commentators have already pointed out the absurdity of measuring whether or not the Iraqis had accomplished benchmarks rather than considering their progress toward doing so (emphasis mine).
So maybe Kagan wants to set up a system of benchmarks measuring whether the Iraqis are making progress towards meeting benchmarks. Or 'Meta-Benchmarks.' Or something.