Ann Coulter makes Bill O'Reilly appear - if only briefly - to not be a hideous person with an evil insidious agenda! Not all that easy to do. But if anyone can, it would be the insipid Ann Coulter.

This sample exchange, and it's "Editor's notes" come courtesy of "Left I..." as taken from the full O'Reilly Factor transcript from May 27, 2004:

"I believe privacy is a fundamental right, and that every American should have absolute control over his or her personal information." - George W. Bush, October 2000

Okay. That's nice...But, as Arch Conservative Bill Saffire points out in today's NY Times, last month, John Ashcroft's Justice Department said - as they were subpoenaing the medical records of about 500 women who had had abortions - that medical patients can "no longer possess a reasonable expectation that their histories will remain completely confidential."

Okay. That's not so nice. Not a surprise - from the Ashcroft clan - but not so nice.

Now, I don't have anything in particular that I feel I need to hide, so I've never been one of those folks to get their panties overly bunched about perceived threats of invasions of privacy by the government. But even I can spot hypocrisy a mile away, and I hate it. Even more than foolish government policy.

The hypocrisy I'm talking about here is not Dubya saying one thing before getting elected, and then doing another. We're all well used to that old trick by now (aren't we? See his statements against "Nation Building", standing up to OPEC to keep spiggots open and gas prices down, not using 9/11 for political purposes etc. etc. etc.) - but it's once again, the Right Wing Echo Chamber of "conservative" talk radio and "news" that's really irritating.

How often do we have to listen to Rush and friends and read Drudge and listen to Fox about how poor poor Oxycontin Junkie Rush Limbaugh is being abused by Prosecutors who are seeking his medical records in a criminal investigation?

Oh, the Right is beside themselves with outrage about the treatment of poor Rush. But - to paraphrase our good friend - not hypocritical at all - William "Lucky 7's" Bennet - where's the outrage when it comes to the 500 anonymous women who are not even suspected of breaking any law at all having their medical records seized?

Has anybody heard Hannity going on about that one?

And today then, we learn that Dubya has had some 270 overnight guests in the Whitehouse and at least that many at Camp David. The bulk of them - you guessed it - Fundraisers.

Now, once again, I don't give much of a damn about it. But I do suspect you won't hear a lot about it in the Media. After all, how many years later were they still on about Clinton's fundraising pals despoiling the Lincoln Bedroom with their very presence?

Apparently it was Dubya himself that said, again, during the 2000 Election Campaign: "I believe they've moved that sign, `The buck stops here,' from the Oval Office desk to `The buck stops here' on the Lincoln Bedroom. And that's not good for the country."

I'm sure Fair & Balanced will be all over it first thing in the morning.

In happier news though, am I the only one who had a flashback while watching Mary Matalin on last Sunday's Meet the Press, trying desperately to describe how good Bush has been for our country and how bad this Liberal Democrat will be if he's elected?

It was like 1992 all over again, and we all know how well it turned out the last time Mary Matalin was forced to desperately defend her Bush.

Fox News Channel's General Manager Roger Ailes announced at a press conference today that, as of this Friday, the all-news cable outlet's primetime news debate program, "Hannity & Colmes", would be officially retitled "Hannity & Christ".

The name change comes after eight full weeks of leading each evening's show with a discussion of the important and breaking news concerning the fact that there is a movie called "The Passion of the Christ" currently playing in movie houses, virtually, across the nation!

"It took a while for us to get our footing there." Ailes said. "For several years we were dallying about with topics of lesser news value at the top of the show, like Americans being killed in foreign lands, or various discussion about the economy, or who might be the next leader of the Free World. Finally though - thanks in no small part to the persistent vision and nose for news of the great Sean Hannity - we've officially gotten our priorities straight."

"Fox News Channel is the most trusted name in news," Hannity told reporters. "If we are to continue to own that title, we must continue to help the average American Family cut through the daily clutter of news and information to understand what is really important to them in their every day life."

When asked for comment on the program's retooling today, Hannity's far Left Socialist Liberal Bleeding-heart Pitbull Adversary, Alan Colmes, came out from under the table where Mr. Hannity was seated, pulled up his pants and informed reporters that "whatever Sean thinks, sounds great to me."

The name change goes into effect officially tomorrow evening, "which will make it a good Friday, indeed!" announced Hannity.

In other completely wholly totally unrelated news, George W. Bush's job approval ratings continue to fall, 2 more servicemen were killed in Iraq, an International Court has ordered a retrial for the only 9/11 figure ever to stand trial due to the U.S. having withheld evidence, anarchy continues in Haiti and the Bush/Cheney Re-election campaign trampled on 3000 dead people in their latest media buy.

So what's really wrong with America? Take a step into the insular world that is the Conservative Echo Chamber of Talk Radio, Cable News and the Internet and the answer is easy to find?but only if you're actually looking for it.

It is to the shame of America, that most of the millions of folks who listen to Rush and Sean and all the rest of the Talk Radio cabal and who tune in religiously (pun intended) to the FOX News Channel, are NOT looking for what is really wrong with America. They are looking for validation that what they wish to believe is the only right thing for America.

They are looking to affirm their prejudices and cling to their long held intolerance by surrounding themselves in a world of others like them. A world which shuts out all opposing view points, but one which most insidiously of all, creates the fiction that they are actually ?fair and balanced?.

The lengths to which they will go to convince themselves that they have examined all reasonable points of view and have come to the only correct one is astounding. And yet, unless you are actually interested in taking a real look at the many sides of the various issues of societal debate today, you will quickly find the affirmation you are seeking to feel that you are right and everyone else is not only wrong, but ?crazy?, ?whacko? and dead set on the ?destruction of America and all it stands for?.

This is what passes for ?debate? in the Media today.

For example, ?the Left is against keeping our country safe from terrorism? (presumably then, they are actually hoping that Americans will be slaughtered by the thousands), ?they want to destroy the institution of marriage? (presumably then the left is made of entirely Homosexuals who despise Heterosexuality?), and are otherwise ?against the Rule of Law? (presumably then, they want to create an Anarchist state in America.)

For anyone without the desperate need to validate their own hatred and/or shore up their own insupportably weak political positions by finding someone or something to demonize (Saddam, the French, the Gay Community, Trial Lawyers), the statements above are obviously absurd.

But to the desperate Right Wing, clinging to the fading fate of Institutional Bias and Racism, it's not only important to demonize from the get-go, it's important to take the fight to the Left by creating their own set of false assumptions and arguments which are then easily defeated by common sense.

In other words, the argument is framed that ?the Media is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Liberal Left?. This argument immediately discounts the FACT that more folks listen and watch Rush, Sean, Drudge, Fox and the rest of the clan combined each day than the sum total of those who glance at the ?Liberal? media combined in a full week. (An argument that cannot be debated even if you are foolish enough to buy the straw man assumption in the first place that the rest of the media are ?Liberal? and that the Right Wing Media is just fair and balanced ?opposition view?).

But absurd assumptions are beside the point when you're looking for people to agree with you and join your cause.

Absurd assumptions are where the Conservative Echo chamber starts the day, after receiving Marching Orders about what matters on the Drudge Report, and then they play the rest of it out by arguing one side of a debate that doesn't even exist.

This morning Sean Hannity is at the Richard Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, CA, on his ?Hannitization of America? tour plugging his latest manifesto ?Deliver Us from Evil : Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism?. He's playing to a pack of live foaming-at-the-mouth Right Wingers who break into a frenzied standing ovation after Sean's every sentence. It doesn't matter what he says, they're in favor it!

?Andy Rooney has employed hate speech because he described Pat Robertson as a ?whacko' after Robertson reported that God spoke to him to inform him that Bush would be re-elected in a ?blowout'?. {STANDING OVATION}.

?The Liberal Left wants to destroy the ?Institution of Marriage' in this country!? {STANDING OVATION}

?Democrats don't believe that Business should be able to profit from their hard work in this country!? {STANDING OVATION}

You know the story. It goes on and on. Take a look at Chaplin's classic The Great Dictator (1940) to see how easy it is to rally a crowd seeking a leader who will tell them what they want to believe. Simply create a false premise, argue the one side of it that represents any form of reason, and then add someone like the hapless Alan Colmes to the mix for a few minutes to give the impression that the issue has been debated fairly. Never mind the fact that the real debate has never been put on the table in the first place.

And if all else fails, despite all attempts to the contrary, should the real debate actually show it's face ? as in the issue of the Constitutionality of Gay Marriage ? we can always try and change said Constitution to reflect what we wish to be true. No matter how much it may violate the heretofore Death Worthy Cause of defending that same Constitution.

That's their game, and ? as far as they know ? they are winning. If the debate can be framed as Good versus Evil, who could possibly defend Evil? Who would want to? So as far as they are concerned, they are winning simply because there is nobody in their room, on their air, or on their bookshelves to tell them otherwise.

So the question remains: Are they winning?

They certainly have a lock on the Free Mass Media, dominating Talk Radio, Cable News and the Internet. They will forgo and/or twist their own values without blinking an eye at a moments notice if it keeps one of their own ?in power? (never mind the stuff they used to care about, like Fiscal Responsibility, States Rights, Right to Privacy and Conservative Interpretations of the Constitution that were once held so dear). They will buy enough books to re-affirm what they already believe in order to get the Super Stars of their Fallacious Strawman Debates (Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, Ingraham etc.) to the top of the Best Seller Lists.

Winning a non-debate is easy. Who is there to defend the other side of the non-issue? They are counting on this. Appearance is everything.

So will they succeed in foisting their insular little world on the rest of the majority of Americans who actually do believe in Peace, Tolerance, Freedom, Property, Liberty and the Love of Constitution?

I don't know. I suppose we'll find out on November 2nd. They pulled it off once briefly (in 2000) and I suppose the question is whether America will fall for the same trick again.

If the Media is the Message, then the Message, no matter how falsely created and debated, wins the day. The Media is everything and the Right Wing owns it. No matter what you may hear when you tune into FOX NEWS or Rush.

If the people are smarter than to fall for that old trick ? and I have no real reason to believe that they are, even though they were smart enough to fend off the absurd attempted coup during the Clinton Era ? perhaps America can get back on course to become Ronald Reagan's ?Shining city on the hill? again. Though that won't happen if Sean Hannity and his insular, rabid, and determined band of Choir Preachers have anything to say about it.

Bill O'Reilly's work and reputation well proceed me. So I needn't go into too many details on the Number One Cable News Personality. At least not with the other excellent bloggists, like Maddox hot on the trail in his latest scholarly article entitled: "Bill O'Reilly is a big blubbering vagina".

So just a quick note to mention that on tonight's "Talking Points", O'Reilly continued on his mad crusade as he totters ever closer to his emotional tipping point and the inevitable melt down to follow. He again railed against the "Smear Merchants on both the Right and the Left". He said he was going to call them out, by name, from here on out since these sleazeballs are destroying our American Way of life. Or something to that effect.

Okay.

And then he went on to his first guest of the evening, "Fox News Analyst", Dick Morris.

We report. You decide.

I sent Mr. O'Reilly an Email the other day, but it looks like this one won't be making it onto the air (not "pithy" enough?). So I'll post it here for you:

Any idea what the coming Fall of O'Reilly will be? Live boy? Dead girl? Married to his own mother? Keep those comments and email's coming...but remember, keep 'em pithy.

Bill Clinton believed there were WMD's. So did the French and the Germans and the British and the Russians and the UNITED NATIONS for Christ sake!

How many times will we have to sit around listening to Sean Hannity et al repeat that blather before we can find a Media-Approved-Liberal who is smart enough to pipe up and say "RIGHT, THEY DID! BUT THEY DIDN'T SEND OUR BOYS TO WAR FOR IT, YOU JACKOFF!".

You'd think the level of certitude required for a "Pre-emptive Strike" would be a bit higher than "Uh, well, geez, Bill Clinton said they were bad guys too!"

Just about everybody who reads this, and knows who Scott Ritter is, most likely owes him an apology.