Idiot Quote of the Day

I don’t usually like to post these, but this one from Mary Matalin just floored me:

The majority vote is tyranny of the minority.

I agree that context is everything, so please, go ahead and read the whole bit.  (You’ll have to search through the transcript; I’ll wait.)

How dumb is this?  Let us count the ways:

1. Ms. Matalin is arguing that the Democrats should not use the process of “reconciliation” to pass health care reform using “only” 51 votes in the Senate (as opposed to the 60 that would be needed to break a filibuster).  That is, she believes a minority of Senators (= fewer than half, in case she’s forgotten what “minority” means) should be able to hold up legislation forever.  That could be a textbook definition of “tyranny of the minority”.  Reconciliation, on the other hand, is a process used to reconcile two versions of a bill that has already passed both houses — and, in the case of the Senate, has already survived the filibuster.  Passing it would be following the rule of majority; that is, democracy as typically understood.
2. Ms. Matalin was perhaps confused or flustered, and meant to invoke the phrase “tyranny of the majority”; that is, the potential in a democracy for 50%+1 to impose unacceptable rules on everyone, including those who don’t agree.  Tyranny of the majority is a legitimate political concern.  It’s why very important things (amending the Constitution, going to war) have a higher bar than simple majority.  But it’s only the very rare things that have that bar.  Most middle schoolers understand that, by and large, decisions should be made by majority.  Saying “The majority vote is tyranny of the majority” would be tantamount to saying that democracy is necessarily tyranny.  What, exactly, does Ms. Matalin propose to replace democracy?  I’d be interested in hearing… though I suspect that the answer is Matalin-ocracy.
3. “Tyranny” in general has connotations of power seized through unconventional means and exercises in an arbitrary fashion.  It would stand as the antithesis of the rule of law.  On the other hand, the Democratic majority was duly elected through the usual process and is contemplating exercising the process of reconciliation, which has been on the books for decades and used extensively.  Reconciliation was created for exactly this situation (finding agreement on budgetary issues in the two bills).  While in power, the Republicans used reconciliation extensively, often for purposes not clearly intended by the original legislation.  Where was Ms. Matalin decrying that “tyranny”?