Dean Floater's circling the bowl. Here's His latest little effort to subvert Constitutional government and weaken Democrats:

A chance for unity on Iraq

I'd say 60/30
against Bush's plan--that is, everyone but the KoolAid drinkers--is about as close to unity as you get in a represenative Democracy. Eh?

But oh, wait. Lil David's talking about "unity" in the Beltway. Sorry. Read on:

Rather than ask the senators to grant him free rein to operate as he wishes, [General David] Petraeus is ready, I am told, to invite and encourage the closest kind of congressional scrutiny of what is happening in Iraq.

Broder, honest broker that he is, is still floating a proposal he made last week:

The suggestion made here last week that Congress require frequent briefings from Petraeus and the embassy in Baghdad, to ensure that Maliki is keeping his promises to supply troops and avoid political interference, is one that Petraeus is prepared to endorse.

Is it not wonderful how Broder is willing to act as a middleman?

The weekly schedule that I suggested is too frequent for the general; it would take up too much staff time.

Now, watch for the detail that gives the game away:

But he could manage a biweekly schedule of closed briefings, and it would accomplish the same goal -- a constant reminder to Maliki that if he fails to cooperate with the strategic plan, any remaining support in Congress for his government will disappear.

Why would any Democrat be foolish enough to fall for this plan?

1. If Congress wants weekly hearings, in public, it can compel them.

2. So why would Congress settle for weekly briefings, in private?

3. Broder says, to put pressure on Maliki.

4. But public hearings would put even more pressure on Maliki.

5. So, what Broder really wants to do is (a) get Democrats tarred with the brush of the Bush plan, when it fails, and (b) weaken Congressional authority.

No surprises here. Nor is it a surprise that Broder fantasizes that he can turn back the hands of time to 2003:

[A] major concern [presumably this is Petraeus covering his ass] is whether the other parts of our government -- notably the State Department -- are prepared for the effort it will take to get the Iraq economy up and running, unemployment down, the oil industry operating, and the government ministries delivering the basic services people need and expect.

Delusional.

Tell me again what's wrong with being "divisive"? Except that there's only one line at the cocktail wienie table, and lining up next to someone you disagree with might cause a moment of social awkwardness?