New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Nominate some new faces in this thread. (Seems like we had one of these started already, but I can't find it.)

Massimo Pigliucci
 

If this isn't a direct challenge to Bob Wright, I don't know what is.

I've heard this guy on The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe. He's good.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

I think Josh Knobe should get Kwame Anthony Appiah to come on Bloggingheads some time. They could talk about experimental ethics, since that's Josh's schtick. Then Appiah could come back and talk about liberalism or multiculturalism or identity politics with a particularly thoughtful conservative another time.

I wasn't happy with Cass Sunstein's fuddy-duddy position on the web, but I'd love to see him come back and talk about originalism or Obama (whom he knows and supports) -- or Roosevelt's "Second Bill of Rights" or just about anything.

Richard Posner would be pretty interesting -- maybe pair him with Sunstein?

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone
The ladies from Feministing.com
Neil Gabler
Professor Dave Berkman - (Retired)University of Wisconsin Journalism Professor and media critic
Amardeep Singh, Assistant Professor of English at Lehigh University
Prem Panicker of Rediff, India Abroad, and Smoke Signals
Amit Varma of India Uncut
Krishna Tunga of Cricket Nirvana
Mary Katherine Hamm
Josh Marshall
Jeff Jarvis

That should do it for now.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Amy Holmes
Any two blokes discussing music.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

rgajria:

I don't know most of your nominees, but I certainly second the votes for Matt Taibbi and for someone from Feministing.

Josh Marshall was on BH.tv before, once I think, long ago. He was good, and I'd like to see him back.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

I'll vote for Dawkins or John Derbyshire arguing against ID. I'll defer to others to choose a sufficiently sophisticated representative for the other side.

For that matter, how about another appearance of P. Z. Myers?

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

That'd be fun, but Dawkins won't do it. Be nice to have Derb on -- a rightwinger that lefties would be cheering for. I have my doubts that there is such a thing as a sophisticated representative for the IDiots, but maybe we could find a sophistic one.

I'm all for that. Meantime, did you catch this? It's not a debate -- it's more along the lines of inviting a star preacher to give a guest sermon, and I was not impressed by the congregation, but PZ has a lot of interesting things to say.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

<laughing!>

Thanks for the non-prophet link - I hadn't caught it.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Not new guys, but a pairing I'd love to see would be Bob Wright and Matt Lee. Bob always takes such an interest in the UN and I think he could ask Matt some great, bigger picture questions.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Pretty much anybody from Tomdispatch.com:

Tom Englehart
Chalmers Johnson
Mike Davis etc., etc.

can't think of too many conservatives (I'll leave that to rep commentors) but I'd love to hear Christopher Buckley (author, son of William F) interviewed next time he's got a book out.

Steven Pinker would be pretty high on my wish-list too. He does lots of interviews, but I think he would really be in his element on Sci-Sat or with an interview with Bob.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

uncle eb:

I'd like to hear from James Poulos. I'm not sure if he's a conservative's conservative, but he strikes me as fairly conservative/libertarian, at first read, anyway. He's a co-blogger on The American Scene, along with Reihan Salam and others. A couple of other people on that site strike me as intelligent, too, but I've only just started reading it.

Not a conservative, but here's another blogger I just started reading: Ta-Nehsi Coates. He's an outer member of The Atlantic mafia, I think. I wouldn't mind hearing from him, albeit again based on only a couple weeks' worth of reading.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Kevin James of Hardball Fame >)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1wSZBTAXRs

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Christopher Buckley

Yes, Yes, Yes

There was a priest Mr. Wright had interviewed for meaningoflife.tv , That guy should be on too.

Matt Lee to discuss predatory lending
 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...041600841.html

I nominate Megan McArdle to conduct the interview.

Re: Matt Lee to discuss predatory lending
 

Weird how that article doesn't say anything about his UN coverage.

Re: Matt Lee to discuss predatory lending
 

There is this snippet tucked in there.
I hope Bob recognizes that we have a star in our midst... Par for the course I guess.

Re: Matt Lee to discuss predatory lending
 

Huh. Can't believe I read right over that. Twice. Oh well. And thanks.

Yeah. That article certainly boosted my impression of him. I thought he was pretty cool for doing what he does just at the UN. Add in all this other stuff ... wow.

Thanks for the link, look.

Re: Matt Lee to discuss predatory lending
 

y/w

:)

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Matt Taibbi? Ugh. Have you ever seen the guy on Colbert or Bill Maher's show? Taibbi in front of a camera is like a deer caught in headlights. I think his writing generally sucks, but he's way, waaay better on the printed page than in an extemporaneous setting.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

That is not at all my impression of him, based on seeing him several times on Maher's show. I think his writing generally rocks.

We're agreed that his writing is better than his on-camera persona.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

1. Daniel Dennett -- Noted philosopher and athiest, engaging speaker. Would be swell on an episode of Science Saturday or Free Will. Was once on Bob's Meaning of Life show.

2. John Derbyshire -- Old-style conservative columnist with interesting perspective on cultural issues. Would be a nice counterbalance to the almost uniform and unquestioning support for social tolerance and diversity among current diavloggers. Would surely provoke strong reaction from audience and fellow diavlog participant.

3. A conservative lawyer to discuss torture, terrorist surveillance, Geneva Conventions, etc. (Jack Goldsmith? David Rivkin?) -- The diavloggers who regularly discuss these issues come from the left/center-left (Balkin, Glenwald, Brookes), and it would be nice to hear the perspective of the other side.

4. Christopher Hitchens -- Always great viewing, preferably when paired with someone who disagrees with him.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Elvis:

I second all your nominations. Good choices.

I point out that for #3, we've had Eugene Volokh on. Which is not to say that I consider that box permanently checked.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

TSE, I don't read NRO, but the two items I've come across about Derbyshire are that he questioned the bravery of the massacred VA Tech students (quite soon after the event, to boot), and that Linda Chavez complained that he seems to find it amusing to call Mexicans Aztecs.

Would you mind linking to some pieces of his you especially liked?

I would love to see Hitchens on, too, but I wonder if he's too big-time for that. I just hope he wouldn't discuss religion.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Derbyshire is a special case. He'll go way out on a limb with an incredible insensitivity to anyone, on occasion. He often gets accused of racism - a charge he's denied, in my opinion plausibly. He's also a graceful writer with a towering intellect, and a sense of humor. And when he turns his gifts away from the dark side he can be a real warrior for truth. He, with maybe Heather MacDonald, fights a lonely campaign against ID against most of the rest of the Right.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Thanks! Volokh has been on bloggingheads once, and then to discuss constitutional issues relating to religion and the right to bear arms with Jack Balkin.

I'm more interesting in hearing the conservative legal perspective with respect to wartime issues. The diavloggers have been uniform in taking an anti-Administration position, but there is in fact another side to the debate.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

I could swear that we've had a torture-related legal debate, with one of the two diavloggers taking what I'd call a conservative stance. Didn't know the guy beforehand, so his name isn't coming back to me ... oh, wait, Teh Google!

Ah, yes.

I don't know if you consider Eric Posner a conservative or not, but this diavlog with Jack Balkin seems to be what you're asking for. As I remember it, torture was one of the debate topics, and there were other war-related issues discussed, IIRC.

Posner has been on two other times, as well, another episode with Balkin and one with Heather Hurlbert.

Again, I am not saying the issues you're interested in have been settled. Just referring you to those diavlogs in case you missed them.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

I second AemJeff's defense of the Derb, at least as far as the intelligence regarding IDiots goes. Read this (h/t AemJeff) and this to get a taste.

I can't comment on his possible racism. AemJeff: got a link to his defense?

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Agreed with AemJeff. I think Derbyshire clearly fashions his writing in the style of Evelyn Waugh, a famously mean-spirited yet funny British author. If you accept that Derbyshire's pose is at least partially a gimmick, it may make it easier to swallow, even if you may still cringe at the occassional article (like why this one about his hatred for Chelsea Clinton). It may also help if you believe that Derbyshire's tone is somewhat self-effacing -- he wants you to dislike him a little bit.

For examples of the more thought-provoking side of Derbyshire, check out his negative review of Ramesh Ponnuru's anti-abortion polemic, The Party of Death, or his articles on race. I certainly don't agree with everything the man believes in, but I think it's worthwhile for intellectual discourse to have a person like him around.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Thanks for the links. I now remember watching those and being rather dissatisfied, because Posner's entire argument in each is based on a pragmatic view that Bush broke the law, but it needed to be broken. That's a decent secondary argument, but it would be nice to have a conservative actually argue as to whether anything we've done actually breaks the law in the first place. I've read plenty who make that argument (in my opinion, convincingly with respect to some issues), and I'd like to hear them debate some of our liberal diavloggers on these issues.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

I think this blog post from the The Corner is a pretty important factor in any exegesis of Derb's writings on race. He definitely doesn't have a liberal's kind of default view of race, but I think it's an easily defensible point of view.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Elvis:

Good recommendations. Thanks. And yeah, that Chelsea Clinton piece was pretty bad, to the extent that I read it.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Huh. I haven't come across anything that attempts to defend torture, except in the pragmatic sense that you attribute to Posner or by arguing that specific acts aren't really torture. So you're saying that there is a point of view out there that says torture is legal? (I do remember reading Dershowitz's argument that it should be.)

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Thanks. An interesting post.

I don't know that it counts as a complete defense, given some other things I've seen pointed out in his writing, but he does at least convey an attitude different from most outright racists.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

I'd agree that it's not a complete defense. It does provide an argument, a place to stand from which he make that case.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Just to be clear about the case I'm trying make, here. I don't think that Derbyshire would ever feel the need to make a clear declaration on this matter. I actually believe he'd find that somewhat beneath his dignity - or maybe, as Elvis suggests (and I concur) would see it as breaking character. So, and this is one of the reasons I enjoy his output, there's no choice but to look to indirect reference, to infer the framing. It's also true that I've made the case that Charles Murray's magnum opus is uncomfortably close to the line. Derbyshire's admiration for the man and the book leave me open to a charge of inconsistency. Then again, my assessment of Murray is open to question, as well. Murray took a lot of heat for his position on Obama's speech in March.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

AemJeff:

Thanks for the link to the Murray piece. Interesting. I'm glad at least one part of his brain works properly. His closing bit about Obama's liberalism and having "learned nothing from the 1960s," especially in light of what the last eight years have shown, makes me think he's still got some serious blind spots, though. Or maybe he just threw that in there because he knows which side his bread is buttered on.

I take your point about Derb and it not being in his character to make a comprehensive declaration on what he thinks about racial issues. I have nothing profound to say in response.

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Thus, did you ever read the little mini-feud with Bob that ensued from Dennett's appearance on Meaningoflife? It was pretty entertaining. Google Bob Wright Dan Dennett Feud and I think you'll find it. Two incredible minds going at it to the point where frankly, I began to lose sight of the original points of argument. Definitely worth a read. --Uncle Eb

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

Uncle Eb:

I forgot all about it until you mentioned it. Re-reading it, I can see why it slipped my mind -- that was the dullest, most mind-numbing debate I've ever witnessed. Maybe it's because I don't think off-the-cuff answers to questions in a conversation should be treated the same way as carefully though-out positions taken in written books or articles, but it seemed to me that Bob was making way to big an issue out of Dennett's "concession."

Re: New diavloggers we'd like to see
 

I'd like to see Richard John Neuhaus discussing bioethics. Also, I've thought it might be fun to have an occasional fine arts episode. Roger Kimball has written a book entitled, The Rape of the Masters: How Political Correctness Sabotages Art. I haven't had a chance to read it yet, but it sounds like a fascinating topic of discussion.