In response to a recent flap over the Chairman of the RNC appearing to oppose our presence in Afghanistan (something that was later clarified by the RNC), the Democratic National Committee released a statement, hammering the Chairman over what it perceived as his opposition to the President’s plan in that conflict.

I wonder, just exactly what is the DNC’s position on members of its own party – such as Chellie Pingree (or Mike Michaud) – who have voted against war funding and are demanding the troops come home today?

In a wonderful example of political grandstanding, if you simply replace the subject of this response with the name of a Democrat who supports the position the DNC is attacking – such as Pingree – the comic nature of this kind of opportunistic response certainly comes out.

What follows is that statement – amended to change the name of the subject of the attack to be Pingree, who shares the position the DNC is attacking (changes in bold):

Here goes Chellie Pingree setting policy for the Democrats again. The likes of President Obama and the Democratic Leadership in Congress will be interested to hear that Pingree’s position is that we should walk away from the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban without finishing the job. They’d also be interested to hear that the Congresswoman from Maine thinks we have no business in Afghanistan notwithstanding the fact that we are there because we were attacked by terrorists on 9-11.

And, the American people will be interested to hear that Pingree thinks recent events related to the war are ‘comical’ and that he is betting against our troops and rooting for failure in Afghanistan. It’s simply unconscionable that Chellie Pingree would undermine the morale of our troops when what they need is our support and encouragement. Chellie Pingree would do well to remember that we are not in Afghanistan by our own choosing, that we were attacked and that her words have consequences.

Obviously the target of the response was Michael Steele, not Chellie Pingree – however, the position they are associating with Steele (which, again, the RNC has disputed and they are reaffirming the Chairman’s support for the conflict) is one that is held by many Democrats, including Pingree and Mike Michaud.

Was it really a good idea to throw members of their own party under the bus just to score some cheap points against the RNC?

Does the DNC think that Chellie Pingree wants to “walk away from the fight” and “undermine the morale of our troops”?  If they think Steele’s comments amounted to that, that means they feel the same about Pingree and Michaud.  If not, they are being (shocking, I know) hypocrites.