The way he writes, although like I said I don't agree with what he writes, is a strong editorial structure. He is definitely not reporting news in a traditional sense but his biases are very clear. At the bottom of the page he has a paragraph saying "these are just my ideas" (I would even challenge him to move this information farther to the top). He functions at a level of transparency that should be emulated by other bloggers. Along with that every post is well cited and well research, he is not just an opinion, a rant but is attempting to disseminate information with complete acknowledgement that is arriving through his lens.
I also found very interesting the section on "what people are saying about me". Some of the comments were not in favor of him. I'm not sure if that was a move of complete self awareness or a cheap trick to appear to want dialogue in this blog. I'm leaning towards a self awareness that he stimulates his opposition because he seems to have many followers that are opposed to his view point, and comment on his post that enhance the dialogue. I think this is a mark of a good blogger when people from the opposing party or politics go to your blog to find out what the other side is saying.
I wonder if he sees himself in the lineage of partisan papers like many bloggers are starting to follow?
Something that I found off putting was all the adds on his blog. Does he get to choose what is advertised? Is he allowed to veto an add that he feels is compromising his ethical standards? How much is he making off of the ads? Is he ok with it detracting from the format of the blog, since the ads definitely intrupt the flow?