Unless we get middle of the road bloggers who can actually look at both sides of an issue.

As noted elsewhere in this thread, bloggers tend to cluster.
Ya got your lefties, ya got your righties, and never the twain shall meet.

If they do meet, it's in the comments sections, at which point the intruder is met with flashing alarms, insults and derision for daring to spout an opposing view.

The content of the blogs is worrying to me. It's no differnt here.
Posts are primarily designed to score points rather than inform.
Posts that are about a subject that is apolitical get a "ho-hum" response, if any (unless its about something truly interesting, violence or sex).

The one you just posted is a great example - only one side is posted, demonizing the other.
Matthews and Oliphant are held up for criticism for "vehement unconstrained rage". Nary a mention of Hannity or O'Reilly or Malkin.

The one thing bloggers do well in some cases is investigation.
Even then, they tend to exclude any evidence that disagrees with their viewpoint.
And if they do find something interesting, they are immediately accused by the other side as being obsessive to the point of hatred....

The media is uniformly bad, and not getting any better. the bloggers are too partisan.
Is there a third option before we start creating either an uninformed or underinformed caste system?