more meta

The topic of the day seems to be tone — how people are speaking and writing about one another, including (especially?) here on the Scene. A worthwhile topic. My own tone lately has been determined by my frustration with the way the sites and papers and magazines I read are approaching the Palin nomination and associated themes. Commenters like Freddie think that I’m way too one-sided, which could be: it’s true that I haven’t said anything about how right-wing outlets are treating the issue. But that’s because I don’t know how they’re treating the issue, because I’m not a reader of right-wing blogs or political blogs in general. Ross Douthat and Rod Dreher pretty much exhaust my right-wing reading list, and a lot of people who call themselves conservatives wouldn’t even agree that Ross and Rod belong in that company. So I comment on what I read. Maybe I should rework my RSS feeds, but that sounds like work.

On the other hand, maybe I should take it in the other direction and stop reading as much from the left. Hanna Rosin has a piece in Slate on why Christian conservatives like Sarah Palin that has a major factual or interpretive error in almost every sentence. It could not possibly be more wrong-headed. The whole damned piece calls for a massive fisking.

But nah. It’s too much trouble. Like the little Dutch boy, I’ve run out of fingers to plug the holes in the dike that holds back the ocean of ignorance. Maybe I should just cut all the political stuff from my RSS reader. . . .