Coulter, Limbaugh Defend Steele's Comments on Afghanistan...

Here's a thought: Michael Steele was tone-deaf, ill-considered and wrong to adopt the language and tactics of the Democrats, using Afghanistan for cheap political advantage while we have troops on the ground, in contact, in Afghanistan.

Unless, of course, in Michael Steele's world the GOP just isn't all that different from the Democrats...

What Michael Steele did was EXACTLY what the left did to Nixon over Vietnam. The litter wasn't even cleaned up from the inauguration before the war JFK began and LBJ escalated bcame 'Nixon's War' and they dumped everything from Gulf of Tonkin to Tet in his lap. It was wrong then and it's wrong now.

If conservatives want to score points on Afghanistan, what exactly will they say? That Afghanistan is not important enough to warrant the casualties? Then it didn't warrant the casualties we took there under Bush and the GOP. That the war is lost and we should pull out? That we should scale down to 2008 levels and watch Afghanistan crumble around our outposts? Substitute the last helicopter out of Kandahar for the last helicopter out of Bagdhad?

...Look, I hate writing this. I hate even having to approach defending Obama. But it's one thing to condemn Obama's ineptitude and another to assign him personal blame for a national endeavor that predates him. And THAT's what Democrats do, that's what Michael Steele did, and it's wrong. It a boneheaded and frankly hypocritical move that could backfire on the GOP.

Just the kind of move Michael Steele likes.