Conan O'Brien Gets to Interview His Crush, Erin Burnett

      Ok, I've been wanting to write about Erin Burnett for a while: just needed some excuse. Don't get me wrong: at this point all I really care about is the election. I haven't even really properly mourned the Yankees' debacle as all I care about is making our President a two term President.

      I still can't believe that there are many Americans-much less women-who see Romney as a viable choice at this point-though I think the media has over hyped it. At this moment the Romney high point was October 11-when Obama was barely over 60% in Nate Silver's Nowcast. Now he's back at about 70% and we still haven't yet seen what his bounce from Monday might be.

      Still, I have wanted a reason to write about her. Less because I had much compelling reason to but that my two previous posts about her have both blown up. Particularly one I wrote back in early September.

       http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2012/09/erin-burnetts-fact-checking-flop.html

       So this post-that I've wanted to write for some time-is about giving the readers more of what they want. For whatever reason, in the last few weeks I've seen a huge surge in people reading the above link. It always interests me when I suddenly get lots of traffic to an older post of mine-often ones that I've totally forgotten.

       That post was only my second about Erin. Here was my first

       http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2011/10/erin-burnetts-let-em-eat-cake-moment.html

       As the title shows the piece about her "fact checking flop" was not complimentary. I had thought she had done a pretty clumsy job in her post-convention analysis of the DNC. She also had some pretty dubious monetary analysis sounding like something of a gold bug. So I criticized her for doing Republican talking points. She insists that she's not biased but in that case she had some very poor analysis.

        The second link, though, was actually last year and in that post I kind of defended her in a rather counter-intuitive way. It was after her ultra-snarky "Seriously?" piece about Occupy Wall Street. I gave her a pass-I argued-because: she's a woman, and I kind of found her smugness charming:

        "I gotta say that I'm inclined to give Erin a pass on her recent impolitic comments."

           http://mediamatters.org/blog/201110070005

         Why do I give her a pass where I haven't for people like Rush Limbaugh, Herman Cain, or Jim Broun? Is this inconsistent on my part? Maybe. What is different about Erin? For one thing, quite honestly, she's a woman. Maybe-again candidly-she brings out my chivalrous instincts a bit. In addition, her piece entitled the snarky "seriously?" was kind of an interesting segment. It wasn't a simple slur like in the case of those gentleman listed above or others of their ilk.

           For my feeling about them lest there is any doubt please see

           http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2011/10/rush-limbaugh-calls-occupy-wall-street.html

           Why should her being a woman make any difference? Well as Zizek-who spoke at Liberty Square on Monday-tells us Woman is a symptom of Man.

           "Or as Nietzsche says, "All of humanity is innocent of its existence but woman is doubly innocent. Who can have oil and kindness enough for them?"

           "Gay Science, pg. 126, aphorism 68 Walter Kaufman version.

           "Interesting that I am going to Nietzsche-often viewed as a hater of womankind-for a defense of a woman ."

            It turns out that Conan is a big fan of Erin's; indeed has a crush on her. In September he had vowed to "build a shrine to her."

            I would love to visit a shrine to her. Despite her fact-checking flop-after all, she does work for CNN which makes it kind of a job requirement that you now and again produce very shoddy analysis to prove that you're not a partisan liberal-I too am a big fan of hers and am happy that her Out Front has lasted as long as it did and wish her continued success.

            She can call me a dirty hippie any time she wants to. Here now, is some of last night's interview with Conan. Here she insists she is not partisan and that she is always being accused of being partisan from one side or the other.

             On Tuesday, CNN host Erin Burnett visited Conan, where she and Conan O’Brien (who, as you might remember, harbors a big ol’ crush on Burnett) got to talking about the election.
Burnett recalled a recent plane trip she took where she and a woman both watched one of the presidential debates. When the woman, who had been watching the debate without sound, turned to Burnett and asked whom she thought had won, the journalist demurred, citing her role at CNN. The woman then nodded knowingly before accusing Burnett of being “in the can for Obama.”
You can’t ever win, Erin. Rule #1 of covering anything even tangentially related to politics.
Later, she shared Mitt Romney‘s sole vice: eating a bowl of Cocoa Puffs when he’s stressed. O’Brien found this highly relatable, while we all know that Burnett is quite amused by Romney’s “full tummy.”

             http://www.mediaite.com/tv/on-conan-erin-burnett-describes-awkward-plane-ride-with-passenger-who-said-shes-in-the-can-for-obama/

              Ok, I get it that claims of partisanship are often specious. Still, that last line about the "relatable" Romney is kind of making me wonder if she isn't a partisan Republican after all. She did work for CNBC didn't she? There is nothing relatable about Mitt Romney: unless you're a schizophrenic.

               But I digress. Great show, Erin! All the success in the world.