bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran

How far down the rabbit hole has Chris Matthews fallen? I give you this portion of the transcript from last night's show. You be the judge.

On Hardball, in response to Bush's declining poll numbers, talk of wagging the Persian dog.

Tweety's guests are Pat Buchanan and the Washington Post's Dana Milbank:

Buchanan: The x question here is Iran. The president is going very, very tough on Iran. And you know he’s talking about their nuclear weapons. And Cheney says they won’t be allowed to get 'em. And McCain says the military option’s on the table. You elevate this issue into a hot confrontation by fall, and the Republicans are back on their home court.

Milbank: It certainly would cause a rallying effect, so I mean, everything in this poll says lame-duck presidency. But you have to remember terrorist strike, national crisis — well, he’s still probably not going to get tax reform through — but suddenly he’s a strong national leader again. So you certainly can’t rule out that possibility. You know on your--

Matthews: Could they also think he’s insane?

Buchanan: No, no. The Demo--

Matthews: I’m dead serious about this. Could that be too radical a move? I’m trying to find this out.

Milbank: Every time--

Buchanan: They’d support him, the Democrats would support him. Hillary would support him, Lieberman would support him, Biden would probably support him.... I don’t think he’s going to do it for political reasons, but if he did do it for political reasons, you’d do it in October.

Matthews: Why? To win.

Buchanan: Sure, you’d go right up the polls. Just like, you’d go right up, you’d win the election.

Matthews: Dana, I’m staggered by the possible truth in what he just said. That a blitzkrieg-type action by the president, do something before the public even thought about him doing it, would put him on top of the heap again.

Milbank: There is undoubtedly a rallying effect. There’s no way, there’s no way around that.

In case you're wondering why I didn't link to the actual Hardball transcript, there's an easy answer. The conversation cited above is missing from the official document. Odd.