Scattered amongst references to "Cosmo the Wonderdog" and slams of the French you can find commentary by a conservative Catholic on the sexual misconduct by Catholic priests in Boston. Disparaging remarks about Kenneth Lay of Enron (and Enron itself), approving remarks about some liberals (as they define liberal), and debates on the issues of the day.
As a sample, here are excerpts from two posts that have generated debate on whether or not the Cuba detainees are POW's, and whether Hamas is a military or a terrorist organization.
Well, what's a terrorist but a war criminal out of uniform. A Hezbollah guy who attacks an Israeli military installation is no terrorist--he's a soldier. He gets killed, surely--and not a moment too soon -- but he dies like a man. A terrorist, if the term means anything, is someone who kills teenagers at a bar mitzvah or toddlers and their moms at a pizza parlor. There's a more accurate word for such a person--it's "war criminal." Preemptively classifying all terrorists as combatants means that if we capture them we can try them as war criminals and execute them. And if they're not war criminals, then they're regular POWs, whom we can detain until the war is over. In other words, every captured terrorist is either executed or detained indefinitely--it works for me.
Deeming the Taliban and al Qaeda captives as POWs doesn't help them, it helps us. We're not going to be doing to them the things prohibited the 1949 Geneva Conventions anyway--torture, chopping off their thumbs, etc. But by considering them POWs, we may hold those who aren't war criminals indefinitely without trial (since the war against radical Islam isn't going to be ending anytime soon; Afghanistan was one battle, not the whole war), and if they are war criminals, we may execute them, after all the judicial niceties are attended to (niceties we'd attend to regardless of the Geneva Conventions). Is there anyone who thinks we are going to be more likely to execute them if we call them "unlawful combatants" rather than "prisoners of war"?
As the above shows, it can be an interesting and thought provoking read. The various posts show that not all conservatives, even on the same website, share the same views on POW's, abortion, and other issues of interest. The posts, being written by magazine writers, tend to be well written, unlike many other blogs. If you consider yourself a conservative, or just want to know what the conservatives are thinking, it is a good resource, with some interesting content, and MLP.
It is, however, lacking in some items of interest to people who frequent Kuro5hin. The only way to respond is to send comments via e-mail. There is no threading of posts, it is one long page, archived weekly, which can make it difficult to follow an argument/discussion. And some of the posters haven't quite figured out how to do links properly.
It will be interesting to see where this goes, and also to see if other politically oriented magazines, such as The Nation and The New Republic, try out this idea.