Regular readers probably recall Neil Cavuto’s meltdown about a week ago when he cut the microphone of Democrat Julian Epstein after he argued against Cavuto’s conflation of the so-called Obama administration “scandals.” Not only did Cavuto start screaming at Epstein, calling him “annoying” and “obnoxious” (as Epstein remained polite and respectful) but moments later, Cavuto shouted, “Cut his mic! Cut his mic! …Cut his damn mic!” Cavuto followed up that segment with an unrepentant commentary in response to an outpouring of viewer reaction. Two days later, Epstein published an open letter to Cavuto on Huffington Post.

I’m a huge fan of Epstein’s so I’m obviously biased. But the fact is, he makes a strong argument as to why the different matters are just that: different. He also noted similar views from Fox News’ own Bill Kristol and Brit Hume as well as Republican House Speaker John Boehner, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

But what's just as important, Epstein calls out Cavuto’s rank partisanship:

(I)n the few moments you allowed me to speak, you made no concrete challenge to the facts I offered. And you did nothing to correct any of the demonstrably wrong statements made by nearly every other (conservative) guest on the show.

…By failing to correct or challenge these wrong and confused utterances of your guests while interrupting me the moment I tried to set the record straight, you seemed more interested in constructing a partisan narrative, not having a real debate. I don’t mind mixing it up on a political argument—you and I have done so for nearly 15 years. But we were not talking about an electoral campaign here. This segment was (I thought) to be a serious argument about big, substantive issues—the role of government, the challenge of terrorism, and privacy in a digital age. And we all lose if even serious conservatives like yourself aren’t willing to have that debate on the merits, but would rather hide behind the most extreme rhetoric and unsupported, empty charges of lawless tyranny and police-state nonsense.

In my mind, the insistence on combining or conflating these different matters is a kind of paranoia akin to the unthinking, visceral compulsion by adversaries of the Obama administration to weave virtually every action big or small into a hazy conspiracy narrative that this president is somehow, someway secretly trying to take away our liberties. This is the kind of thinking that drove the “birther” movement and other fringe and extremist attacks against the President. I think that narrative is infantile and, at its core, represents the kind of naked, bitter partisanship I had thought you also rejected.

…Neil, you owe your viewers an apology, not the lame defense of your actions you made on Monday. I don’t need one. They are the ones hurt here, not me.

Well said, though I disagree with Epstein on one thing: Cavuto owes him an apology as well.

Video of Cavuto's temper tantrum, via Think Progress, below.