Like many of you, I'm amused when conservatives who once described Barack Obama as the spawn of Satan suddenly begin praising his Cabinet choices.

Karl Rove is "reassured" by the picks so far. Joe Lieberman describes Mr. Obama's picks as "virtually perfect." Condoleezza Rice now opines that "the country will be in good hands." The hawkish journalist/historian Max Boot, a foreign policy adviser to John McCain during the campaign, said, "I am gobsmacked by these appointments, most of which could easily have come from a President McCain."

The opening paragraph of my colleague Jack Kelly's column last Sunday wouldn't have been out of place at The Huffington Post: "It remains to be seen what kind of president Barack Obama will be. But so far he's been a terrific president-elect."

Even those conservatives who occupy the first circle of Dante's hell are suddenly effusive in their praise of Mr. Obama in general, and his choice of Hillary Clinton as his Secretary of State in particular. Rush Limbaugh, who regularly mocked the president-elect as a "halfrican" and "the Messiah," is sounding far more conciliatory these days. He describes the selection of Mrs. Clinton as "a brilliant stroke."

Though he ascribes Machiavellian motives to Mr. Obama for bringing his former rival into his inner circle, Mr. Limbaugh followed up with a few words guaranteed to never come out of Sean Hannity's mouth.

"I've never met him, but he appears to be a sincere and genuinely nice person," Mr. Limbaugh told the deeply empathetic Barbara Walters last night.

Some conservative talk radio hosts are trying to generate mischief in the Democratic ranks by implying that outrage over Mr. Obama's choices is growing at Daily Kos, MoveOn.org and other liberal blogs.

They confuse healthy debate about a Democratic presidency among liberals with early signs of schism. Liberals love to argue and consider the lockstep ideological conformity of the far right a betrayal of the Democratic ideal.

Just because MSNBC's Rachel Maddow has been urging Barack Obama to ease up on the "Team of Rivals" shtick doesn't mean she or any other liberal is ready to jump ship to the Green Party.

It's clear that some conservatives are attempting a bit of post-election jujitsu similar to "Operation Chaos," Mr. Limbaugh's failed effort to dictate the outcome of the Democratic nomination and, thus, the general election.

That prank required Republicans to cross party lines in open primaries to support Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Obama. In retrospect, it was an obvious sign of the impotence of once-mighty conservative talk radio. It was a meaningless exercise that diluted the dignity of the ballot.

The dittoheads who responded to Rush's Pavlovian commands are now wondering why their hero is praising -- albeit faintly -- a man who "plotted" with ACORN to steal the election and impose Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright on the American body politic.

Is all of the love now directed Mr. Obama's way by the luminaries of the conservative movement a tacit admission that most of their campaign rhetoric was nonsense?

Where does this leave the gullible foot soldiers who tune in to Fox News or sit by their radios all day waiting for a rationale for their burning resentments?

In a recent USA Today column, talk radio host Michael Medved astutely outlined the dilemma facing right-wing talk radio hosts like himself in the age of Obama:

"[If] the new president makes credible efforts to govern from the center, then talk radio can't afford long-term marginalization as a sulking, sniping, angry irrelevancy. It makes no sense to react with pre-emptive rage (and an odd obsession over Obama's birth certificate) to a president-elect who has remained pointedly vague about policy."

Mr. Medved ended his column with this observation about the futility of demonizing Barack Obama and Democrats:

"Some radio stars view media debate as a form of warfare, though the ultimate purpose of war involves the total destruction of the enemy. The most effective broadcasters in the Obama Era won't try to destroy anybody. But we should make an impassioned effort to convince everybody."

None of this means conservatives like Mr. Medved or Mr. Limbaugh are "in the tank" for President-elect Obama, obviously, but it may signal the beginning of a sensibility that approximates "nuance" as far as their audiences are concerned.

Wouldn't it be great if conservative radio treated their listeners like adults instead of snarling babies? Could Mr. Hannity manage to go a whole week without insinuating that Mr. Obama is a terrorist sympathizer?

It will probably be years before a more sophisticated version of conservative talk radio trickles down from national trendsetters to the hard-right guppies in markets like Pittsburgh.

Until then, liberals shouldn't resent a little bit of detente. It won't last, anyway.