Brian Montopoli of CJR Daily dissects some especially ridiculous spin from Mary Matalin on Meet the Press, and does a nice job drawing out its larger implications:

After Russert brought up Pat Robertson’s claim that the federal judiciary is a greater threat than “a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings,” he showed a MoveOn.org ad calling on Bill Frist and Tom DeLay to repudiate Robertson’s words. He then asked Matalin, “Has this gone too far?” Here’s the subsequent exchange:

Matalin: It’s demagoguery. That’s sheer demagoguery.

Russert: Well, you don’t agree with Pat Robertson.

Matalin: I think that was an injudicious thing to say, but that the secular left has behaved imperialistically — there’s no other word for it. They have subverted the democratic process by taking their issues to the judiciary. What the so-called religious right has done has taken their petition and their concerns into the democratic process, into the public square. They organize and they try to affect legislation, as opposed to being the subverted process of democracy which is what the secular left does.

This is all demagoguery. There is a secular left. There is a religious right. It is — the way in which the secular left overestimates its uniformity is funny. They’re not — there’s not just Christian conservatives. There [are] a lot of the people who are concerned about traditional values and in politics and in the public square. There are lots of Jews, there are a lot of conservative Muslims. There are — it’s ecumenical. There’s Catholics. It’s across the board. There is not a uniformity. There’s lots of pluralism and they’re part of the democratic process. And this is just demagoguery on the parts of these left-wing extremists.

Got it? Pat Robertson’s assertion that federal judges are a greater danger than terrorists was “an injudicious thing to say,” but anyone who raises a hand in protest to that statement is a “left-wing extremist” exercising “demagoguery.” Rhetorical backbends don’t get much more twisted than that.

Why, jaded readers might wonder, does this particular abomination so exercise us? After all, there are any number of talking heads out there willing to lie and spin with reckless abandon and then exhibit righteous indignation toward anyone who expresses disagreement — and any number of talk shows eager to roll out the red carpet for same.

But Matalin, and “Meet the Press” itself, deserve to be singled out because they are thought to represent the best of political dialogue: a respected political operative who has worked in high places being grilled on the most revered political talk show in America. If anyone still thinks that the carnival barkers are confined to cable shoutfests while serious political dialogue endures elsewhere, last weekend’s display should be enough to put that fleeting hope to rest once and for all.

(Unnecessary disclosure: Bryan Keefer, who I used to work with on Spinsanity, is assistant managing editor of CJR Daily.)