Requiem for the Pundit Class

If I can find the link to this, I will. But Broder and Friedman and the rest of the D.C. pundits, should have resigned in shame this morning. Last night Rob Corddry and The Daily Show had the best and most accurate analysis of the President's "Plan" for Iraq that I've heard.

1) Iraq needs a huge and powerful army, capable of fending off all threats.

2) We invaded because we thought it had that army.

3) It didn't, but now we can't leave until it does.

Of course, that's sort of what's being said:

What Americans wanted to hear was a genuine counterinsurgency plan, perhaps like one proposed by Andrew F. Krepinevich Jr., a leading writer on military strategy: find the most secure areas with capable Iraqi forces. Embed American trainers with those forces and make the region safe enough to spend money on reconstruction, thus making friends and draining the insurgency. Then slowly expand those zones and withdraw American forces.

But Mr. Corddry said it in plain language. The kind the NYT editorial says Americans are "clamoring for."

So the award goes to Corddry. QED. The D.C. Pundits have just been proven completely irrelevant.