A couple days ago, I noted that Jennifer Rubin, who has fiercely defended Sarah Palin against the charge of ignorance, has failed to address or even mention the utterly devastating new revelations that Palin thought Saddam Hussein planned the 9/11 attacks, didn't understand why there are two Koreas, etc. The closest she comes is this item, wondering why Steve Schmidt would attack Palin:

Politico tries to figure out why a political operative would commit career suicide. The subject is Steve Schmidt, who seems to be willing to trade any chance to work on a future presidential campaign (perhaps any prominent GOP campaign) for the opportunity to bash the former vice-presidential candidate whom he helped select. He’s been on a tear, even before the campaign ended, to berate and insult Sarah Palin. His behavior is all the stranger because she, of course, happens to be, while a lightning rod outside the party, quite popular within it. This makes his attack on her the equivalent of a “Don’t Hire Me!” sign. And then there’s the crassness, the disloyalty, and the sheer lowness of savaging someone with whom you served as a campaign adviser. So why do it?

Maybe because he thinks Palin is dangerously unqualified for the presidency? Given that his disclosures obviously run contrary to his professional interest, we might entertain the possibility that he's acting out of conviction.

This is an interesting way for Rubin to deal with information that subverts her argument. She obviously wants to attack the motive of the source rather than address the substance of his charge, which she continues to ignore. But his interests runs in the precise opposite direction of his action. So she's reduced to railing against him for being irrational. I suppose it beats admitting some inconvenient facts.