The thing about Saunders is that many journalists could read fifteen articles in papers like the Guardian and the New York Times and write one of his columns with little difficulty. He's there to give a large segment of the Globe's readers what they want to hear because it confirms what they believe.  Most columnists do this to an extent, many almost exclusively.  Only rare exceptions, like  Coyne and sometimes Ibbitson, have their own take on important questions and give us new insights. Saunders and his ilk are mainly there to get people cheering for a side. If they're on the right side and write passably they win prizes, because most journalists are on the same side.