Patrick Murphy (D-PA-08) was sworn into Congress today. I consider him a friend of mine. I’m very proud of him. He served in Iraq, he came home, he ran for Congress to help us change our policies in Iraq, and he won. So, I was a little shocked to see the following header from ABC News:

Charles Gibson spoke with three new House Democrats today, who said that while they’re not satisfied with the president’s handling of Iraq they are inclined to go along with it.

The following is a partial transcript of Gibson’s discussion with Heath Shuler of North Carolina, Nancy Boyda of Kansas and Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania.

Of course, there are two problems with that header. First, it is a partial transcript, and the part they chose is light on the Murphy and the Schuler, and heavy on the Boyda. But, second, they are talking about whether Congress is going to withhold funding if the President asks for a surge, and it appears that only Boyda said no.

Here is the part with Murphy:

Charles Gibson: The poll [after the November election] indicated to us, more than anything else, that the public voted on the issue of the war. So is there a Democratic position on the war?

Patrick Murphy: There is, and the fact is that we know that we need to change. If someone like myself, who served over in Baghdad with the 86th Airborne Division, I saw with my own eyes what’s going on over there.

The fact is that we need to change direction with what’s going on in Iraq. We need to listen to the military experts, people like Gen. Colin Powell, Gen. Abizaid, that say, “Listen, the surge isn’t going to work.”

And a little later, Gibson suggests that Bush has a clearly defined plan for a surge..

Gibson: But, of course, the president thinks he’s defined one, a government in Iraq that can defend itself and sustain itself and govern itself. There’s the mission that he’s put forth. If he says we need more troops, is the Democratic majority going to be compliant?

Murphy: I think what you hear from Heath, Nancy and I is very clear and that’s the president, unfortunately, doesn’t get it. It’s not a military solution that’s needed in Iraq. It’s a political solution.

Now, what part of that would you construe to mean that Patrick Murphy is ‘not satisfied with the president’s handling of Iraq [but] inclined to go along with it’?

Help me out, because I don’t see where Patrick said that. Well, how about Heath Shuler?

Gibson: So when the president, in the next few days, as he is anticipated to do, calls for a surge and more troops going over there, how’s the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives going to react?

Heath Shuler: I don’t think that’s the solution, with the exception, if that’s what our military leaders say — that the increase in troops is an answer, then that would be more acceptable, but not just one person saying, even the president, not just one person saying that increasing our troop level is going to create that sense of security in Iraq.

Did Heath Schuler just say he was inclined to go along with a surge? I don’t think so.

Nancy Boyda, however, did say precisely that. She said it clearer than Bill Kristol or Karl Rove ever could.

Gibson: Would you vote in favor of money to support another 20,000 to 40,000 troops in Iraq?

Boyda: I think we’re going to vote to support what the commander in chief and head of military asks to do. At least, I am certainly going to vote to support it.

Gibson: If he wants the surge, he’ll get it.

Boyda: Yes.… He is the commander in chief, Charlie. We don’t get that choice. Congress doesn’t make that decision.

Gibson: But the polls would indicate, and indeed, so many voters when they came out of the ballot box, said, “We’re voting because we want something done about the war and we want the troops home.”

Boyda: They should have thought about that before they voted for President Bush not once, but twice.

That pathetic exchange gives new meaning to the phrase ‘What’s the matter with Kansas?’. It also shows real moral cowardice. I’m happy we won a seat in Kansas. I’m not happy to see Ms. Boyda’s spineless position ascribed to my friend Patrick and the honorable Mr. Schuler. ABC News continues to suck.