There's nothing wrong with a political party that advocates for key planks in its platform. But when its leaders heap disproportionate blame on one individual, defensible advocacy degenerates into a petty smackdown. And it moves the party no closer to its stated goal — in this case, getting a civil unions bill passed.

In July the O'ahu leadership of the Democratic Party voted to reprimand Gabbard for sending an e-mail to a party activist asserting that he'd work to persuade fellow senators to oppose the bill authorizing civil unions. That reprimand was upheld on appeal to the party's state central committee.

His critics charge that through inflammatory speech, such as characterizing the issue as a "war," the senator went beyond merely fulfilling his legislative duty by voting his conscience.

Gabbard was a leader of the opposition to same-sex marriage a decade ago; even so, he was welcomed by various party leaders who touted the Democrats' "diversity" of ideas.

The party now leaves itself open to accusations of unfairness; other Democrats among the Senate leadership opposed the civil unions bill with no consequences at all. It's hard to see the rational basis for that decision.

If getting a bill passed was the objective, party leaders could have invested their energy in the work of lobbying lawmakers to revive the issue next year — an election year. That's a long shot, but it would have made more sense than this.