Their guests are boring and don’t make sense.
David Plotz claimed A) that he’s an agnostic and B) that he argues with God.
Logically, it doesn’t make sense to argue with X if you’re not sure that X exists. Theologically, I thought that God was the source of all goodness in the universe, so to be in opposition to God would make you wrong/evil, a priori. But that jive peachily with the sort of post-modern and -fact relativism this guy oozes.
Plotz writes for Slate. Slate is the most superficial, capricious, dotty website I know. “How Obama’s case for stem-cell research is like Bush’s case for torture.” No it’s not. “Can you spend as much money as Sarah Palin?” Who gives a shit? All of their content, minus that generated by Dahlia Lithwick, whom I admire, is purposefully and supremely unimportant. It’d be fine if they had a website devoted to pop culture and wine and stuff, but they insist on taking contrarian, nonsensical positions on important issues. They might as well be called redherring.com.