Arianna gets her game on: Arianna Huffington talks about her blistering new book, Fanatics & Fools, regime change in Washington, and advancing gay rights in America.

I've known many sides of Arianna Huffington over the years, socially and professionally. I've seen her serious and driven, witty and oozing charm, both silky and rough. I took a sabbatical from journalism when she asked me to help her launch the Shadow Conventions in 2000. I've watched her grow more liberal and activist. Speaking to her privately after she had just launched the national press tour for her newest book, Fanatics & Fools: The Game Plan far Winning Back America (Miramax, $23.95), I saw yet another shift: The clever banter was being pushed aside for a genuine concern and urgency about the Bush White House and its effect on America. The naturally playful and witty woman was more deadly serious than I'd ever seen her.

Your new book is the most incendiary you've written yet. You blatantly call the Bush administration "fanatics."

Yes, and my analysis of the fanatics is being borne out every day by revelations of the facts. And I think my analysis is not something ... it's not a term I use loosely. It's a term I use medically, as a condition; the symptoms are there.

The current crop of political books is like a siege on the White House--angry, rebellious, almost like manifestos, a return to a '60s sensibility of Abbie Hoffman and Steal This Book.

It's true. There's an incredible energy out there. I've seen it traveling around the country, colleges and elsewhere. And it's not just confined to the young--it's across all generations. There's an intensity, an imperative about getting George Bush out of office. Even personally, I did not feel it in 2000 when I organized Shadow Conventions to reform both parties. This time I've endorsed John Kerry. When your house is on fire, it's not the time to remodel. It's time to get Bush back to Crawford, Tex.

What's the difference between this book and the last?

The energy of anger is not enough. An attack on Bush is not going to get us to the finish line. My last book was outrage. We have to move to the next stage. That was my lesson in being candidate for governor, being in the trenches and seeing that the public was hungry for a vision. I see idealism as the sleeper issue of 2004. The value of my book is the vision of where you go from here.

You, Michael Moore, and Al Franken all slam Bush with humor. Is your philosophy different from Moore's and Franken's?

I can't say. But I can say that our connective tissue is the passionate agreement that Bush must go.

You devote 200 pages to slamming Republicans and only 40 pages to slamming Democrats, whom you call "fools," Obviously, you're persona non grata among Republicans, but are there those who privately agree with you?

There are Republicans who both publicly and privately agree with me. When one of them confided, "I'm a disenchanted Republican," I suggested he start Republicans for Kerry. Behind the scenes, for different reasons, some are very concerned: the libertarians, others who care about the environment, others about the deficit. Then there are the gay Republicans. Whether their disenchantment is still going to lead to voting for Bush is not clear.

I am assuming you don't expect an invitation to the White House anytime soon.

It's very clear that I've not been a friend of the Bushes for a long time--long before [George W.] was elected, I officially left the Republican Party in 1996.

What's your relationship with Arnold Schwarzenegger now?

I see him occasionally in a car pool. We are pleasant to each other. He is doing a great job raising his children and doing a terrible job as governor.

Someone once gave me advice that to be an effective activist you have to focus on "moving the needle," making a tangible difference rather than just offering rhetoric and symbolic gestures. That seems to be your mantra too.

Wanting to move the needle is exactly what is driving me. I look for where the openings are.

So do you see yourself less as a journalist and more as a politician?

I don't see myself as a politician, really. I see myself as a crusading writer, and sometimes my crusades take me to hands-on activism. Who knows what's next? I have no five-year plan.

How can your book move the needle when there is no chance of universal health coverage anytime soon, of energy independence, of stopping the war on drugs? What can the book accomplish when op-ed writers, yourself included, have been saying the same thing for years?

The heart of the book is the vision. The need to not just play defense but to offer an alternative moral vision. The contract is putting flesh and blood on the vision and saying, "This is the vision." The key to [winning] this election is galvanizing and inspiring. People have given up on politics because they've stopped believing change is possible. If you convince them that great presidents can be effective, that fundamental change is possible, then they will reignite their passion.

You changed your book after Kerry was nominated. Why?

Firstly, I believe he has the biography and leadership quality. When it was clear that he was going to be the nominee, we pulled the book back from press and included visionary speeches and an alternative narrative, tying together his bio, his idealism, [which is] resonant of Bobby Kennedy and the 1968 campaign That is the winning are for me.

I know from personal experience that you're pro-gay. Do you think gay marriage should be the rallying cry of gay liberation?

I think it's a civil rights [issue], and it's inevitable--the way that voting rights is inevitable. There is a huge breakthrough this year, and people are getting to know gay couples and the ways in which they bring up children and lead their lives together. It shows people that there's nothing extraordinary about it. I think it's a matter of educating the public.

But politicians, including Kerry, don't stick their necks out to support gay marriage.

Yes, there has to be education so that leaders can have the guts to say what they really believe. Political campaigns are driven by focus groups, and they play it safe. I totally agree with gay marriages. First, John Kerry has to endorse a powerful agenda for America to ensure he wins in America. George Bush owns September 11; Kerry can own September 12.

But it's also about being realistic, you're saying.

Sure, I would prefer he endorse gay marriage. I believe in it. I believe it's the right thing. It makes it clear that democracy stands for all civil rights and all human rights. I endorsed it when I was running for governor. I'm 100% solidly in support of gays.

I've seen that you get along really well with gay people. What do you relate to most about gay sensibilities?

I have friends who are gay and friends who are straight. I don't have a list of characteristics. They are my friends because we connect. I don't segment my friends or supporters. Sexual preference is one part of who you are.

Rothman is a national journalist who contributes to Vanity Fair and 0 magazine and is cofounder of Global Vision for Peace.