Just after Lamont's primary victory, I noted that Hillary Clinton has

tried to keep some distance from the party’s noisy anti-war wing. Appearing with Lamont may endear [her] to the party’s base, but it would also tie [her] to a candidate, who, in the words of Joe Lieberman, holds views that are “dangerous for our troops, disastrous for the Middle East and really make America vulnerable to another terrorist attack like 9/11.” So can Hillary afford to stay away from the race? I doubt it. The liberal blogoshere will demand that all the ’08 candidates kiss the ring of Lamont, and given the muscle they’ve flexed in outing Joe, the Hillary folks will likely decide they have no choice but to submit.

Well, Hillary has jumped on the Lamont bandwagon, as today’s New York Post editorial explains:

It's nice finally to know where Hillary Clinton stands on something.

On Friday, Clinton hosted Connecticut Democratic Senate nominee Ned Lamont in her Chappaqua home. Also on hand was the senator's senior aide - and state Democratic Party spokesman - Howard Wolfson.

After the meeting, the left-wing Daily Kos site - one of Lamont's biggest online boosters - promptly announced that a Clinton campaign source promised that Sen. Clinton would do a fund-raiser for the Lamont campaign.

Plus, Wolfson has been tasked to serve in an "advisory role" for the Lamont campaign.

Sen. Clinton is, of course, entitled to do as she wishes in support of Democratic candidates.

Lamont is the official nominee of Connecticut Democrats after his defeat of incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman - who campaigns on as an independent.

But no one should mistake what's going on here as anything other than opportunistic politicking of the crassest kind.

Lamont won his nomination based on a single issue - full-throated opposition to the war in Iraq (and, by reasonable extension, the War on Terror itself) - and fueled by activist Web sites.

In contrast - until now - Clinton walked a very fine line on the central policy issue of the moment: She voted for the war and - despite some rhetorical wriggling here and there - has generally stood by her vote.

Until now.

For there can be no denying what she did in overtly embracing the Lamont campaign.

The nation is at war. And Hillary Clinton is giving aid and comfort to the anti-warriors.

Given the dynamics of New York state, this decision is unlikely to cause Clinton any political damage in her re-election campaign.

But this is a vivid reminder that the Democratic establishment can't be trusted on national security - and, now, neither can Hillary Clinton.