I think there are two other factors that figure into people's reactions to him.

First, for whatever reason, people love to manufacture personal offense on the internet. Despite the fact that this is a medium in which everyone is well aware that people are expressing themselves in shorthand (whether in a blog post, a tweet, a FB update, etc.) and without the benefit of hand gestures, facial expressions and all the other things that provide the necessary context that we take for granted in face-to-face communication to detect sarcasm, hyperbole, etc., a significant percentage of internet readers seem utterly hell bent on construing everything they read as a personal attack.

A: "I had a great latte this morning at Starbucks?"

B: "What the $%^&, why do you hate Peet's so much and why are you so hellbent on destroying the lives of American children? Are you a terrorist?"

A: "Excuse me? Are you speaking to me?"

The second phenomenon seems to be a corollary of the first, which is that people seem to give absolutely no consideration to the source of information. Without trying to make a political point (I absolutely despite politics and conversations about politics, so this is merely a (hopefully balanced) example), certain people get bent out of shape when they listen to someone like Keith Olberman rant and rave about the more conservative elements of our society. He was a SportsCenter anchor before he started doing political talk shows. I'm not sure I'd consider him an "authoritative source" on anything (other than a Giants score) and I can't imagine getting too riled about anything he has to say. Similarly, my understanding is that Glenn Beck never finished HS (although I believe he eventually did get his GED) and yet he seems to have a boundless understanding of our Constitution and Constitutional law. With due respect, I went to three years of law school and passed two bar examinations (one of which is considered the hardest in the country) and I consider myself to have a pretty feeble understanding of Constitutional law (and I think most lawyers would say something roughly similar). A lot of these folks are being extreme because they recognize that it makes good copy and good copy sells advertising and keeps them in a job. Ken is the same way. If he were bland, no one would read the site and there would be nothing to talk about, which wouldn't be very lucrative for him...

Just my $.02. I like his site in the same way that I like reading TMZ. It's a guilty pleasure that is good for a laugh. I don't take "I only shoot JPG and never RAW" as advice to follow, but rather a lighthearted moment to help get me through the day. Obviouly, YMMV.