Carly Fiorina says she apologized to Hannity for her comments about him -- but why?

Before an interview with a Sacramento ABC affiliate yesterday, Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina said into an open mic:

I find it really surprising that on the first day of the general Meg Whitman is going on Sean Hannity. Did you hear that? I think it's bizarre. I mean, she's never been on Sean Hannity. I think it's a very bad choice actually. You know how he is. ... But why, after saying no to all these people, would you go on Sean Hannity? That's not the one you would do. ... Sean Hannity is not an easy interview, you know?

As ThinkProgress noted, last night on Fox News' On the Record, Greta Van Susteren asked Fiorina about the comments:

VAN SUSTEREN: And I see that you learned the first lesson about getting caught on a hot mic. And I listened to it, and as I listened, I thought, Uh-oh, Sean's going to be mad at you. [...]

FIORINA: I talked with Sean a little earlier this evening and I apologized because what I was trying to convey was that he is a tough interview. By the way, that's his job. It's his job to be a tough interview. And I'm going on his show on Friday night and really looking forward to it.

Why did Fiorina apologize to Hannity? Obviously, she is aware that by upsetting him, she risks upsetting the greatest ally Republicans have on Fox News. Just as Republicans who criticize Rush Limbaugh inevitably apologize to Limbaugh, Fiorina is proving that Republicans cannot afford to lose Hannity's support either.

But, again, why would Fiorina apologize? She said, “You know how he is.” Did she mean that he may be too rabidly partisan for her?

Consider Fiorina's last appearance on Hannity. It took place live at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California, on March 30. Hannity opened the show -- in front of an obviously partisan crowd -- by stating that “we are kicking off our 'Conservative Victory' tour, defeating Obama's radical agenda in a state that could elect a Republican to the United States Senate for the first time in almost three decades.” Fiorina was on with primary opponent Chuck Devore and Hannity's first question was: “Is Barbara Boxer up for a defeat this year?”

Here was Hannity's next question and the exchange that followed:

HANNITY: Do you see what China now is actually suggesting that if we sell arms to Taiwan?

FIORINA: Yes, well --

HANNITY: That they might start selling off our debt?

DEVORE: Right.

FIORINA: For the first time in our history foreigners own more of our debt than Americans.

HANNITY: It's frightening.

FIORINA: And China and Japan trade places for number one and number two debt holders. But you know, Sean, you did a really important special here in California several months ago. Many months ago now. You talked about the water situation and how --


FIORINA: You did a service to the nation. Because what people saw in that special was the callousness of out-of-touch government. And it's more than Barbara Boxer being a tax and spend liberal, she is that. But she is also a person who has refused to lift a finger, to help the poor people of Central and San Joaquin Valleys.

She has refused to turn the water back on. And an example of utter corruption, two Democratic congressmen in this state got the water allocation increased for their vote on the health care --

HANNITY: So they're turning in the water for their vote.

FIORINA: I mean the cynicism.


FIORINA: The cynicism of that. That is what Ronald Reagan used to call the Washington buddy system. Ronald Reagan talked about it and it is alive and well in Washington, D.C. And Barbara Boxer is a huge proponent of it, which is why she's got to go.

DEVORE: Right. And it isn't just water.


Clearly, “Sean Hannity is not an easy interview.”

There's absolutely no way that Fiorina could have possibly meant that Hannity was a tough interview because he asked tough questions. So the only logical explanation is that he is so fanatical, so zealous in his conservative views that Fiorina is worried about a Republican candidate coming across as being too conservative. Or perhaps she recognizes that Republican candidates might get stuck agreeing with the sort of misinformation he trades in.