Looking at it, she certainly stinks. Her views are too convenient. Plenty of atheists out there are the non-angry type, the kind who don't bother going out of their way to correct Christians and will even defend them, there are those who feel no political allegiance to liberalism and break the typical image of atheists in many other ways, but don't display that level of ignorance or self-loating of their own kind. Yes, I've heard an atheist say, "I think Richard Dawkins can be a bit of an arrogant dick", but not sit there demonising atheists as a whole or actively promoting Christianity, instead he understands the problems with Christianity and knows as an atheist that we can't be so generalised and that many of us make good points.
So I can think of 2 possibilities:
1) She's a complete fraud. Set up as part of the media to demonise atheist but have somebody to falsely claim authority.
2) She's an idiot. She probably comes from a Christian background but simply lacks faith, shares the same misconceptions and fallacies, but because she lacks faith she sees herself as 'one of us' therefore she able to talk about us with some authority.
I actually think #1 is the most likely. I mean, faith healings? Psychic readings? All they're doing is bullshitting people for money and for faith. They're basically magic shows. If you watch something like Derren Brown you'll see the parallels are amazing, except the difference here is: 1) Derren Brown is an atheist 2) He's honest about his tricks, he claims it to be psychological and not magic. 3) He demonstrates why religious magic shows are bullshit. 4) He show how he pulls off some of his material, even showing how point #3 works.
If people can actively deceive people in such a way to gain faith and/or money, even on national television, then why should this woman be no different. Obviously, I don't know if she is a fraud, but it seems very likely that she is. It sickens me that any kind of religious people have to be any kind of fraud or to purposefully mislead people. I mean, come on, if their way really is the way, then surely the truth should speak for itself. But I guess this is why we use the phrase, "lying for Jesus".
If she was genuinely an atheist, heck an atheist distant from regular atheists, you think she'd be able to relate to their lack of faith and have the ability to listen, understand and relate to other atheists. Many atheists don't have problems with the religion, many liberals don't want to destroy Christianity and for many it's not a fight of theism vs atheism. The main fight for liberals is not to destroy or suppress the religious, it is for bringing out a secular society based on secular laws with room for religious freedom and freedom for the irreligious. Granted there are atheists who would rather see religion disappear and I'd argue that the majority would rather use reason and not force to make that happen. "Liberal atheists are trying to destroy our religious values and are persecuting Christians" is the kind of argument I often hear from misinformed right wing Christians. We don't want to give political power to religion, because a religion can't represent the people of a country, because not only doesn't everybody belong to that specific religion, but not everybody belongs to the same sect of a particular religion. Case in point: gay marriage. Prevention of it is a Christian law, but not every Christians sect is opposed to gay marriage. So really, even having a Christian country with Christian laws manages to minimalise Christians who don't happen to belong to the favoured sects. This is why we should have secular laws and allow the religious their freedom of choice so long as it doesn't harm other people's freedoms. (A Christian doesn't have to get an abortion or marriage somebody of the same gender).
Interesting too, to the mind of a right-wing Christian a left-wing Christian can't possibly exist. So 'liberal' is synonymous with 'atheist'.
I realise this rant might have gone off on a tangent, so I'll try and bring it round again. If this woman is an atheist who sympathesises with the religious, she has nothing to worry about. AND if she and right-wing Christians REALLY are concern about how the liberal agenda affects them, then they need to focus those concerns. Instead of opposing other people's freedoms because you're worried it'll affect your own, how about you support them but stress that your freedoms remain in tact? Priests who don't want to marry a gay couple? Okay, instead of saying 'no' to gay marriage say, "I'll respect your freedoms, just be sure to respect mine". Yes, I realise it's still ignorant and bigoted of them, but I don't think it's right to change a person's beliefs with force.
But nope, it's people like that so-called atheist that would happily go out poisoning the minds of the many with ignorance so that progress cannot be made in bringing about a secular (and fairer) society and so progress cannot be made in bringing about civil liberties.
tl;dr? She's a fucking idiot.