Many people have a hard time reading Ann Coulter's articles, regardless which topic she writes about. The leather-skirt-wearing, long-haired blonde, will-someone-feed-me-a-Twinkie conservative writer's opinions are sometimes hard to discern between the humor, historical citations, and acerbic criticisms of all people and events. Her style is both offensive and endearing, but which it is depends heavily on the reader's palate.
Her most recent column, The Elephant in the Room, is no different. Between her disparaging remarks on McCain, Huckabee, Iowa and New Hampshire voters, Democrats, Republicans, the New York Times, Frank Rich, Giuliani, Bill Clinton, (did I leave anybody out?) oh, yea--Billy Carter, Ann Coulter makes an interesting observation; Mitt Romney must be the Republican's best candidate (as in, the most Republican of the field) because Democrats are working so hard to discredit him.
Now, the fun part about reading this article is looking at it from the other point of view. Which Democrat(s) are Republicans working so hard to discredit, and does that suggest those Democratic candidates Republicans are worked into a froth over are the best standard-bearers for liberals?
Unless the entire Democratic establishment is attempting some kind of reverse-psychology, Democrat's tacit approval of McCain and Huckabee should make conservatives wonder about both candidates true conservative credentials.
In March 2007, I wrote Accrediting your Adversary to warn against talking more about your opponent than yourself. In the same way Voldemort marked Harry Potter as his equal (to his own demise) candidates from one party often boost the popularity (and power) of candidates in the other. The more Republicans talked about Clinton and Obama the more credible they became. Ann Coulter's suggesting the more Democrats beat-up on Mitt Romney the more credible he becomes. Even if Republicans don't recognize Romney's conservative credentials, the Democrats do.
This is, of course, how contemporary politics work. Each party seems more concerned with defeating their enemy than they are what's best for The United States of America, and they'll make all kinds of promises to voters, even at the country's expense, if it means winning. A victory for either party means an injury to the other--and well run, efficient, constitutional government be damned. Job losses, budget deficits, national debt, oil dependence, education, and creeping socialism are simply collateral damage on the home-war front.
Instead of a quad-annual game of capture-the-flag, it would be fun to recapture America.