Is Ann for real?

The short answer to that question is no.

Ann hasn't been a legitimate pundit for years. She is more like a professional wrestler compared to a real sport competitor. It's all about self-promotion, outrageousness and such.

I've wondered why anyone listens to her for more than comic relief.

I'm not saying she isn't smart. She has made millions with her act, and at some level she might even believe some of it. But it is an act.

When she appears on a show, that is a sign that the show is not serious about the subject at hand, but it is serious about entertainment and ratings. Like a professional wrestler, Ann ignites the passions of the audience. Either they want to cheer her on or boo her.

Pro wrestlers need the attention (positive or negative) in order to be successful, perform in large arenas and get the big paydays. If the crowd is apathetic, they end up wrestling in a converted barn in front of dozens.

With her bizzaro world logic of supporting Clinton over McCain, Ann is working hard to stay in the arenas.

Right wing off the deep end

I've always been amazed at the coordination of the right wing noise machine's message. And right now the meme they are pushing is McCain is so terrible,they would rather see the democrats get the White House and be responsible for the resulting carnage so the conservatives can ride back into DC on their white horses in 2012. That seems to be the united message of Rush, Sean, Ann, NRO and such. Though I believe there are some on the right who are not yet prepared to go along with that strategy. They have hope that Romney can still win or at least force a brokered convention.

I wonder what all of the reasons are for such a strategy. I can think of afew:

1) Rush, Fox News and such are seeing their ratings drop and figure that ratings would jump with a democrat in office they could attack.

2) They are seeing a base audience that is disillusioned after Bush. The right wing noise machine has had to "rally around our guy" a number of times over the past 7 years and they are losing their audience because they've had to go against their past "principles". With a liberal in office (hence why they like to label McCain as a liberal), they can go back to their tried and true formulas.

3) Access to power. McCain doesn't listen to them. He seems to think Tim Russert is more important to talk to then Rush. These guys want access for several reasons, and don't like being shut out.

4) Some might actually sincerely believe... Who am I kidding? It's always about power and money.

5) #4 might be too cynical. Some might have been reading from the right wing talking points for so long they have become fanatics. Think of them as being like the 14 year old boy in Pakistan who has only gone to school at a radical madrasah. That boy believes the lessons he has been told to such a level that blowing himself up for the cause seems reasonable.

Rush and his ilk now think that any compromise of their positions is treasonist. Yesterday I listen to Rush condemn McCain because he reached has reached across the aisle in order to get things done. That's how our government is supposed to work!!!

In their quest for purity, they are demonizing any who stray. This explains their contempt for Congress since a legislative body can only work through compromise. This also explains their love of a strong and growing stonger executive branch.

I don't consider these pundits to truly be conservatives. Conservatives value the Constitution and do not seek to undermine it. They value the wisdom of the Founders. They understand the value of checks and balances and the need for compromise.

Romney as Clinton?

I think I've finally figured out why Rush, Sean, Ann and the rest are pushing so hard for Romney versus McCain.

I took some time to look at Romney's website. If only he would have chosen to be born again, he would be the perfect dittohead. His platform is a tailored fit to what the most popular conservative pundits have been asking for.

Why do I say "Romney as Clinton"? All through the '90's, we got to hear how poll driven Clinton was. This was normally part of an attack on Clinton. This was to make us see how Bill had no big vision, but would just deal with problems as they appeared, after consulting his poll data.

In some ways, that was Bush's 41 style as well. If you remember, GHWB struggled with the vision thing.

It appears that Romney is the same type of character. In Massachusetts, he needed to be a liberal on almost all social issues, so he was. For the presidential primaries, he needed to tack way to the right, so he did.

He would probably make a great Cabinet Secretary since someone else would provide him the vision, but I'm not sure he has what it takes to be the president.

Why Rush, Sean and the rest have decided to believe this current edition of Romney is real is a topic for another day.