Been out of town, so I’m a little late to this thread, but I think you’re exactly right that it’s foolish to discount every article she writes simply because in the past she’s taken positions at odds with many here, including myself at times. I took a break from reading anything political for a long time to try to keep my sanity, but when I finally started to dabble a little again, I started reading Ann’s columns again and listening to some talk radio again.
I was immediately reminded that Ann is by far one of the best researchers we have on the conservative side. I always find out facts in her columns that I never would have expected, and I know do not appear anywhere else. She digs really deep and is an absolute goldmine of information for our side. This article here is a .50 caliber bullet to an argument that most people never even question.
Reading her columns, it’s clear to me that her mode of thinking is that the clear and most dangerous enemy is the unabashed, unflinching Left. The counterargument might be that snakes in the grass on our side are potentially much more deadly, but Ann sees the nukes out in the open pointed straight at us by the other side and says, “that’s the imminent threat; we must destroy that now or be destroyed.” I think, politically, she’s open to compromise on certain people on our side if it will defeat the unquestionable threat on the other side. Her columns along these lines tend to rile up our side, but they are not just “vote Republican because they’re not a Democrat” simplicities. They seem more like war strategy to me, where sacrifice and best-case-scenario decisions have to made. I’m quite sure Ann understands that this is a war more than anyone.
Even if some or even most of our side disagrees with her idea of political troop movements, it’s foolish to ignore her columns. They’re a fully-stocked armory of intellectual weapons to take on the Left.