Christopher Caldwell now covers Europe from a conservative American perspective for FT; back when he was on staff at the Weekly Standard, my fellow commie pinko symp husband and I hung out with him a fair amount. We mainly talked about personalities and not politics, but the subject -- of course -- came up. I remember reflecting on how we disagreed on stuff, but that I would rather talk to him than most people I agreed with. Chris rolled his eyes and said, that he appreciated the compliment, but that he hoped I'd keep it to myself. "What's the biggest insult a liberal pundit can give to a conservative one?" He joked, "Calling him 'thoughtful.'" Caldwell's point was that if a liberal thinks a conservative is "thoughtful," he probably isn't really conservative. (I could go off on a McCain tangent here but. I. Won't.)
James Joyner's somewhat coy response to a similar compliment from Juan Cole references the same phenomenon but tries to be constructive, and asks readers for suggestions about conservative bloggers who are "1) civil, 2) analytical in style and substance, and 3) not so in the bag for the Republican Party as to be a hack." He rephrases it simply: "what conservative bloggers would be worth reading even if you disagreed with most of their posts?"
My own blog-reading habits are eccentric enough that I'm not sure I can even answer the question. I read and enjoy a lot of blogs out of a perverse sense of anthropological excitement, like I'm observing a fascinating, obscure culture (The Corner, Daily Kos); and I watch those with the ability to come up with spectacularly wrong theories of political engagement like they were a years-long trainwreck. (How much do I love Dan Riehl? I love Dan Riehl a lot.)