The liberal media starts to take the measure of a media figure they must be afraid of. Make that very, very afraid. Dan Zak of the Washington Post has a long and interesting article on Megyn Kelly, whose new show on Fox News Channel has become a major hit:

It debuted just over two months ago, and so far its ratings among 25-to-54-year-olds have exceeded those of "The O'Reilly Factor" six times. In November, her first full month in prime time after years in daytime, Kelly was second only to O'Reilly in the overall ratings, which means she's the No. 2 person on cable news's No. 1 channel.

I have spent more time than I expected watching her show, which was given the best slot FNC has to offer, following O'Reilly's top-rated show. She offers compelling accept-no-BS interviews and hard-edged analysis in the style of the high powered lawyer she used to be before dumping that career in favor of something more rewarding: TV journalism. And, to be completely honest, it doesn't hurt one bit that she is stunningly beautiful.

Considering the politics of the WaPo, Zak's piece is very fair indeed. It is obvious that he is impressed with Kelly and sees that superstardom lies ahead for her. Bill O'Reilly is nowhere near retiring, but it is quite obvious that Roger Ailes, the guiding hand that built FNC from nothing into the most important news provider in America, has found the answer to the question, "What comes after O'Reilly?"

Zak provides behind-the-scenes views of the TV show, and also a glimpse of Kelly's family life and a review of her background. For Kelly fans (who are legion and whose number is growing by the day) this is must reading.

My own take on Kelly is that she combines fierce intensity with likability, and somehow that quality goes right through the camera and microphone into the viewer. This is what defines a star. And this is why greater things lie ahead for her. Perhaps the most interesting part of a very interesting article is this:

"When Kelly first started [her new show], she came in and she was smart enough to ask me, 'How do you drive an hour by yourself?'тАЙ" O'Reilly says. "You can count on two hands who's been successful at that. It's very hard to drive an hour by yourself. I said, 'Look, it's all about the emotion of the day. You have to know what folks are talking about, and what they care about that day. So it can't be all about you. It's gotta be about them.'"

Zak then offers a sop to his liberal readership that, by this point, is appalled to learn about this force of nature who is conservative:

Kelly has listened. The words "anger" and "outrage" are used frequently on her program, as are vague references to "what is happening in this country." Might this language, however justified on occasion, stoke and sustain a contentious discourse that ultimately corrodes the media and therefore the society it serves?

Whatever.  Liberals are not going to stop whining about effective conservatives. The double standard will never die. Kelly will not miss a beat. This is a lady who goes on air with a sore throat, flies to LA to do the Tonight Show, and flies home to do her show the next day withbout missing a beat.

My gut instinct tells me that a media career, however successful, will not be the end point of Megyn Kelly's professional achievement. In fact, I faintly recall that once upon a time there was a media figure with incredible charisma, intensity, and likability who decided that the nation needed conservative politics more than it needed a media star. Once she has written a few surefire bestsellers and has a comfortable fortune, the restlessness that led her away from law will come into play.

You heard it here first.

Hat tip: Lucianne.com