Perhaps if Ezra wishes to continue to criticize mainstream conservatives he should first start by reading their blogs?

Oh no, an open italics tag. Can I close it? We'll see.

Anyway, I've tried to read Megan regularly before. The problem I find with her is that she often puts forth many things that I know are wrong, but it bothers me if I can't figure out why, so I spend way too much time thinking about it and tracking down alternate points of view. Some people would consider this a good thing, but I only have so much time in a day, and I'd rather spend it on people who put forward new thought-provoking things that I think just might be right.

Bah, it was an open emphasis tag, not italics.

James Joyner is usually pretty good - fair and interesting.

"a frankly inexplicable level of fury"

Her signature combination of simple ignorance with nigh Olympian self-regard is infuriating. Does that help?

Where's Balloon Juice's John Cole? The fact that he's an honest conservative is demonstrated by the fury with which he's turned on the Bush administration.

I don't think Cole counts as a conservative by any measure any more. Hell, he's even a registered Democrat!

Agree with bob: the anti-Megan "fury" is eminently explicable. And she's not engaged in a project similar to yours, Ezra --- she's engaged in destroying the faintest hope that a project like yours will bring about any beneficial result.

If I could get a feed of just his blog posts, he'd probably be atop my list.

You can search Corner posts by author.

Daniel Larison has to be at the top of my list. His definition of conservative is very different from anyone in the mainstream or even libertarian wings of the current Republican party, but it's a perspective sorely missed in national politics. And even when I don't agree with him, I have to admire his principles and intelligence.

Plus he can debunk Cinco de Mayo like no other.

One of the most infuriating things about McArdle is that she's paid to do what she does. There are so many bloggers who are smarter, funnier, and more insightful than she is, who work out their bedrooms after they've finished their real jobs or their coursework for the day - and there she is, pulling down the bucks for the idiocies that float out of the top of her head.

PS- it seems pretty clear that she's the token woman blogger at the Atlantic, no? They now have seven men to one woman. It seems to me that they've intentionally chosen to have an idiot as their one woman, simply to emphasize that she's a token.

I think it says a lot about the state of conservatism that this is the best you can come up with.

Megan's blog is a joke mostly becasue she doens't have the faintest idea what she is talking about most of the time. It is worth reading as a train wreck, especially when she writes soemthing and gets immediately destroyed in the comments and then assumes people just didn't understand her point so then writes 3 more posts that all say the same thing.

Ross is a good thinker at times, but far too often is just a younger version of a reactionary right winger (witness all his posts on Wright) and the fact that he never comments on the war is pretty pathetic. In general I hope the Atlantic pays him by the post and not a flat salary since he seems to only write about 1 or 2 a day at most.

Of your list he and Ponnuru are probably the only conservatives as opposed to Libertarians and neither fo them is really a mainstream, club for growth type.

Ponnuru is probably the most interesting of the lot, but even searching Corner posts by autor to get just his stuff requires that you wade through all his posts that are debates with Derbyshire or other Corner idiots.

Perhaps if Ezra wishes to continue to criticize mainstream conservatives he should first start by reading their blogs?

Precisely. Especially considering that there is no way to learn about mainstream conservatism and what they're advocating, except through blogs.

/snark

The last thing we want is for the blogosphere to become more of a circle-jerk than it already is. If Ezra ends up writing about topics without referring to (or even reading) the blogs of conservatives and instead relies on material from newspapers, magazines, and television, then he's probably providing more added value than he would otherwise.

"... but she also gets in a lot of worthwhile insights, and asks a lot of questions that I find useful."

I'm curious what, exactly, these might be.

Good call on Weigel, though. I'd also add in Christopher

Ezra, if you're going to count Megan and Weigel, why not Tyler Cowen? The thing that I find most likable from Tyler is that his conservatism appears to be born out of many liberal/utilitarian impulses, which is to say I find him first kind and empathetic, it's just that it draws him towards conservatism, and I respect it.

How about Dan Drezner? He's more on the economic side of things than political, but I always find his posts enjoyable to read, even when I completely disagree with him.

You know what? Conservatives run the TV shows and the newspaper op-eds.

I frankly see no reason to promote them on the blogosphere as well.

When they give us a "fair and balanced" TV channel run entirely by democratic operatives, spewing 95% pro-democratic propaganda, then I'd link to 'em. But not one damn day sooner.

Have to agree with regard to the criticisms of McArdle: there's no there there. James Joyner tends to be more thoughtful and intellectually honest. Drezner is pretty good, except he's absolutely dead wrong on Colombia, but Latin America. I use to read Oxblog until David Adesnik got to be such a McCain lickspittle that I couldn't read him anymore.

Hands down the best conservative blogger - and really the best blogger period - is Andrew Sullivan.

Today's Republican PArty might decry that since he has turned on them - but the GOP is hardly conservative these days anyway.

Andrew is simply the best, honest to a fault, full of doubt, willing to admit error, and a trail blazer of the form.

The good thing about sully is that he posts so often, and turns up so much interesting stuff.

But speaking only for myself, I don't think his insights are especially novel; the value he brings to the table is the links to people who have novel insights.

One of my colleagues (yes, even Clowns have colleagues) calls this "the librarian gene".

Not a bad thing.

On the other hand, he has a lot to live down, more so than most people. Liberal fifth columnists? Anyone who writes crap like that has a screw loose.

And the religious stuff? Gimme a break. There are a number of interesting and positive things that can be said about religion (my Clown colleagues notwithstanding), but I have yet to see sully say anything that struck me as interesting about religion.

"Conservative" means whatever you want it to mean. Just like "liberal". But I think Cole counts as a conservative. And he writes way better than just about anyone else around (for his style of writing.) I wish I could write half that well.

How about BD? But he hasn't posted since 10 Jan. Writing a bit froo-froo (is that a word?), but sensible. How about Cunning Realist? How about Jim Henley and the crew (Mona, Thoreau) at Unqualified Options. (er, oops.) Best MetaThread Ever, and Best Counter-factual Self-Congratulatory Thread ever.

Larison is good, but I've occasionally been unable to understand how his conclusions follow from his arguments. But I'm a Clown, so what do I know?

I look at Drezner every now and again, but not impressed. Matter of personal taste, I'm sure.

Cheers.. FtH

That's FtC, not FtH

Clowns are not known for their spelling.

FtWhatever

I really don't get why so many people pat Ross Douthat and the American Scenesters on the head so much. Ross is a boring, self-righteous scold and a racist. The people at TAS are sometimes better, but sometimes unbelievably awful -- Noah Millman linking Steve Sailer because he "honestly" engages race, etc.

I'll also second what a number of others have said: McArdle really is that infuriating, and I'm pretty sure it's not sexism that makes me feel that way. I had to stop reading her for nearly a year she made me so mad.

See the recent argument with KathyG for why heads explode across the blogosphere when Megan's blogging is praised by people who ought to know better.

My list:

Drezner
Joyner
Bambridge
Steven Taylor

...apparently I'm quite tribal. All political scientists. As are other libertarians or red tory types I read (Jacob Levy and Russell Arben Fox, resp.)

My list:

1. Me
2. Me
3. Me
4. Michelle M.
5. Me

I'm not familiar with TAS, and I'm not familiar with Ponnuru that much, but the other three are establishment hacks who discuss immigration matters without knowing anything about them.

For instance, the phrase "comprehensive immigration reform" - in quotes - brings up 362,000 hits. Megan was unfamiliar with the term.

For Ross' cluelessness explained, see my comments here:
rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/04/absolut_mexico.php

For Weigel's cluelessness explained, see, among many others, the comment here ("Click 'n' Learn"):
reason.com/blog/show/125483.html#936121

Basically, Ezra reads people who know as little and are as cocooned as he does. Those who want to find out what's really going on, with a concentration on immigration matters, should read my site or just scan my archives.

Gosh, who'd have thought that Chris Kelly would descend into even further masturbatory self-parody? Remember, he's standing alone against TheBrownMenace, which will be rising up any time now to force him into exchanging his Cheetos for tacos.

I don't think Cole counts as a conservative by any measure any more.

Why not? American politics will be much healthier when it's sufficiently recalibrated for John Cole to be on the other side of arguments.

As for McArdle, she's just a silly, fatuous person, who, like Billybob Kristol and O'Pollohan, has been rewarded for mediocrity and the projection of anecdote into argument.

She also has a nasty streak: her performance in the Iraq mortality study discussions on Crooked Timber, in which she accused others of crowing over a high death toll, was not a moment to celebrate. And, y'know, throw in the 2x4s line.

Plus, she's long had a crop of silly glibertarian fanbois who think their adulation will be rewarded.

Megan has been way too glib about the war. Brad Delong (and others) who took her to task for her "But you should listen more to the folks who fuck things up!" post were right to do so. Writing shit like that should make you an object of derision, and I see nothing "inexplicable" about those who aim to give her what she deserves.

In short: she's sharp, but I'm not convinced she's not some sort of moral leper.

There are no conservatives in the United States - only Republicans and libertarians.

Hey, most of those folks are regular reads for me as well -- you have good taste. Maybe I should come here more often.

I have sympathy for libertarians, having been one myself for much of the 90's, but I think we're seeing here the creeping cronyism that will one day turn all our heroes into the David Broders of the future.

Ezra says he doesn't like how people are so mean to McArdle on the blogs, then goes to to explain why that is... and doesn't acknowledge that the main reason it bothers him is that he knows her.

Douthat is another great example. He's an intelligent guy, but on MANY issues (especially the war) he's your standard-issue glib, cowardly conservative with nothing constructive to say. It just so happens that he knows a lot of prominent liberal bloggers socially, so they like him.

If Ezra and MY were friends with David Brooks and Michael O'Hanlon, we'd be hearing about how misunderstood THEY are.

APS

No love for The Cunning Realist?

Ezra, Megan is frequently wrong--sometimes deliberately so, obtuse, impossibly self-reverent and self-referential, and a really lousy writer, to boot.

Yes, she covers the same issues as you. But so do Hustler and The Atlantic both cover the war in Iraq.

Ape Man nails it. Possibly the most disturbing (depressing?) part of this post is the way it foreshadows a future in which Ezra et al. treat people like McMegan with the same kid gloves the now-established media currently treat people like Brooks. Its like that scene in Episode I where you can see the seeds of Vader in a young Anakin.

[Megan McArdle is] the writer on the right who's engaged in the project most similar to mine: Namely, trying to seriously examine social and economic policy.

Could anyone provide an example of McArdle's "serious analysis?" All I can find is
her being "way too glib" (not just about the war, CynicalAgain), "obtuse, impossibly self-reverent and self-referential, and a really lousy writer."

Seriously, Tyler Cowen is a better writer, seems to be a better thinker (though it may just be the writing), and doesn't tend to use a certain level of dishonesty in the arguments used in the blog.

I claim the above. Sorry for the incompetence.

These are just people Ezra's age who are his friends. The best site for pure rightwingism is freerepublic. How about www.Lucianne.com as well?

"her premise -- and target -- seems to be that the political culture is stacked against the interests of the rich and economically dynamic"

Well, that explains why I should take her more seriously. Ha, ha, ha ...

her premise -- and target -- seems to be that the political culture is stacked against the interests of the rich and economically dynamic

Her other implied premise is that she's one of those bright young things who The System (especially those sick old people) are Keeping Down.

Hence, MeMeMegan. And she really ain't all that.

Kids, this is how the thing works. These comments are window dressing. Wrong and obtuse will never be corrected, even if 500 arguments to the contrary are made below the line. Then somebody that said something rude and nasty about Megan will be used to paint the town uncivil. If people with big bloggos constantly give our boys carrots, but never ever the stick, we'll be up to our armpits in Andrew Sullivans, not matter how much EK tries to pave over his Megan love with "wonkity wonk."

If you give certain people a spot in your club, you're part of the gigantic game of Crossfire that is wrong wrong wrong.

folks get all sorts of pissed off when you approvingly link to writers you disagree with

How you're able to write this without dying of shame - over your commenters or your much smaller, more precious prog-blog circle-jerk - is a mystery to me. That clause is the very definition of intellectual bankruptcy.

Its like that scene in Episode I where you can see the seeds of Vader in a young Anakin.