I have to say that I'm a big fan of Katrina and have interviewed her on this blog- (I really enjoyed her book) so it comes as a real bummer for me to have to write this.

Why did you have to use an attack piece on bloggers written by Jim VendeHei of the Washington Post as the touchstone to your own article? Liberal Bloggers--Tim Kaine Isn't the Problem

"Why are so many liberal bloggers up in arms about Virginia Governor Timothy Kaine being picked to give the Democrat's reply to Bush's State of the Union? There's been fury in the blogosphere about everything from Kaine's looks, style, obscurity, his open talk about his faith and his inexperience in national security."

Jim's main purpose was to try and marginalize the left side of the blogosphere because we dared to question Deborah Howell's horrific reporting on the Abramoff scandal and James Brady went into freak mode because she caught flack over it.

Your post focuses on an issue that was barely discussed in the blogosphere at all, except for a few comments back on Jan 18- yet your headline frames the issue as if it was a hotly contested debate. Most of us just nodded our heads and said-OK. Did you suddenly turn on your computer two weeks after the fact and find that your monitor was frozen on this post? (a couple of posts doesn't amount to a controversy)

Arianna objected to Kaine being the speaker primarily because she felt he was much weaker on national defense than John Murtha is and that is a big issue for the Democratic Party. Your whole post is a straw man argument because the main premise is wrong. It only pushes the meme that liberal bloggers are irrational and unwieldy when that is simply not the case. Please do us a favor and if you are going to be a critic of the blogosphere-(we welcome you with open arms) then owe us the courtesy of actually reading what we write.