Thursday, July 22, 2004

I Wonder If The Authorities View With Suspicion The Disappearance Of Small Children In Glenn Reynolds' Neighborhood

As a casual observer of the art of dark insinuation in the absence of actual incriminating evidence, I direct you to this bit by the reigning expert:
"So Berger knew he was under investigation. As we've seen earlier, Bill Clinton says that he knew months ahead. And, I guess, so did Joe Lockhart, serving as Berger's "spokesman." (Hence the "we" and "our" -- and who else might be included in those terms? And why does a retired government official have a spokesman, anyway? Beats me.) Yet John Kerry says that he "didn't have a clue."

If I were Kerry, I'd worry about what else my staff wasn't telling me."

(emphasis mine)
You know, things like "the Niger uranium claim has very weak evidenciary basis," or "we have set up an internal intelligence operation made up of our own people because all of our intelligence agencies think we're full of shit."

Ha ha.

But seriously. The "you should be worried" formulation, and variations thereof, is an old Reynolds standard, directed at various people he dislikes - from the Europeans, to Chris Matthews, to the mainstream press.

It's yet another one of his little implied threats that really bug the shit out of me. I'm constantly tempted to call it the faintest glimmer of the fascist impulse which I suspect plays a larger part in the mentality of die-hard Bush supporters than they will ever admit, but that would make me a shrill, hysterical, shrieking Leftist, who wouldn't say that kind of thing if he knew what was good for him. After all, aren't I worried that real patriotic Americans would hurt me if they knew what I really thought?


Sidenote: On the subject of insinuations without evidence, in the same post Reynolds quotes a reader who reads dark happenings in the Kerry campaign's lack of angry response to the Sandy Berger story, the implication being that they have something to hide.

Right. Because the Kerry campaign is too stupid to realize that anything they say only prolongs what is, essentially, a non-story, and that the smartest response would be to shut the fuck up about the whole thing and let the 9/11 report knock it off the frontpage.

I know Glenn gets a lot of readers, but why do only the dumb ones bother to send him email?

No comments: