Naomi Wolf on Monday accused former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin of being part of a "cabal" involving George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove.
The feminist author and political consultant made this accusation on CNN's "Larry King Live."
Fortunately, former Bush adviser Mary Matalin was there to contest Wolf's absurdities:
[T]his is why people think liberals are such fringies. I mean you -- you run around saying that she's such a dope, but you were all duped by the dope. That's what you've said about George Bush, too.
In the end, the paranoia on display, as well as the unchecked hatred for Palin, was nothing less than remarkable -- but Matalin was there to bring some sanity to the discussion (video embedded below the fold with transcript, h/t Story Balloon):
MSNBC's Chris Matthews spent the first 15 minutes of the October 22 "Hardball" haranguing McCain advisor Nancy Pfotenhauer over vice presidential contender Gov. Sarah Palin's view of the role of the Vice President as President of the U.S. Senate. Matthews scoffed that Palin's answers contradict the Constitution, including her telling a 3rd grader today that the Vice President "runs the Senate" and "can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes."
But while Matthews was correct to argue that the majority leader is the real conductor of the legislative train in the upper chamber of the Congress, he was incorrect in insisting it is the Constitution which leaves the Vice President with no say in the daily affairs of the U.S. Senate other than casting tie-breaking votes.
As the U.S. Senate Web site makes clear, while the Constitution restricts the Vice President's votes to tie-breakers, in the earliest days of the Republic, Senate rules of order afforded the Vice President a greater role in the workings of the chamber as presiding officer than they do now. Indeed, at the time of its ratification, some critics worried the executive branch had too forceful a hand in the Senate's workings (emphases mine):
Good thing Nancy Pfotenhauer wasn't in the same studio with Harry Smith this morning. The Early Show anchor might have broken out his hickory stick. Like a hectoring school marm, Smith scolded McCain adviser Pfotenhauer for what he deemed her insufficient citation of a New York Times article tracing Barack Obama's affiliation with unrepentant terrorist William Ayers.
Wagging a stern finger at Pfotenhauer across the airwaves, Smith repeatedly interrupted her, demanding "what was the conclusion, what was the conclusion?"
During the 1 p.m. hour of the July 30 edition of MSNBC’s “News Live,” host Andrea Mitchell once again defended Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), this time in regards to Sen. John McCain’s newest TV ad tagging Obama as a celebrity that isn’t ready to lead America. During an interview with the Arizona Republican’s senior policy advisor Nancy Pfotenhauer, Mitchell asked: “Tell me about the ad and the reasoning behind [the ad]. Why Paris Hilton? Why Britney Spears? It does seem that you're trying to demean Barack Obama.”
Later, when Pfotenhauer asserted that McCain has proven he’s a leader and has put his country’s interests first on more than one occasion whereas Obama has just given speeches, Mitchell questioned Pfotenhauer’s statement about the presumptive Democratic nominee and claimed that comparing Obama to Paris Hilton raises questions: