And sometimes “I haven’t said anything” has an implied “…yet” after it.
One the most dull-witted bit of comment-section rhetoric is the old “I see you’re silent on…[some issue you haven’t written or spoken about]”, usually written to imply “silence equals assent”.
I’ve had a few commenters, tweeps and other people say “I notice you’re completely silent on the issue of the MNGOP “Sex Scandal”, the “coverup”, and the principals involved”.
Well, there’s a grain of truth to that, in that I haven’t written anything on the subject.
There are a few good reasons for that.
I Have Little To Say: All of the principals in the case are, to some degree or another, friends. More importantly, they all have families. Others may believe that their ends – pillorying the opposition – justfify their means, including piling on a couple of families who, let’s be honest, didn’t ask to be part of this. So go read them, if that’s what you want. But before you do, remember…
If You Ever, Even Once, Said “It’s Just About Sex” During The Clinton Administration, You Need To Just Shush: Seriously. It’s private business. It didn’t affect government. Move on. Just mooooove on.
Some might respond “But the relationship was inappropriate! What kind of management style is that?” To which I respond:
It’s An HR Issue: Is every complaint about “inappropriate relationships” aired out in the media where you work? Not until it goes to court, if at all.
Yeah, I know – Koch is an elected official in a position of some considerable power, so it’s a little different. Suffice to say I have no opinion. Yet.
Much Of The Discourse On The Subject Has Nothing To Do With Amy Koch: The “relationship” with the unnamed male staffer is the issue that’s got a good chunk of the Twin Cities leftyblogosphere cackling away with their prurient, projection-addled glee. A name has been popping up, over and over again. But none of the MSM’s sources on the subject have gone on the record with that name yet – not to a standard that a “real” news media outlet can run with yet.
And I’ll confess this to you all right now – I hope the “rumor” is wrong. And I hope that the reason the subject of the tittering speculation is lawyering up is because so many of the Twin Cities’ leftybloggers and less-scrupulous media outlets have stuck their tender extremities into a meatgrinder; that they’ve defamed the “rumored” staffer, and done it because they ignored the standards of fact-checking required to defend a defamatory assertion, and exercised “reckless disregard for the truth” – which is a form of “malice” under Minnesota defamation law that might, with a good lawyer, be enough to void the First Amendment protection they’re all hoping to hide behind. I’ll cop to it; my Christmas cheer is marred by a hope against hope that the next year sees an awful lot of smug leftyblogging and City-Pages-writing prigs bussing tables at Panera to pay off a humongous legal judgment.
A guy can dream, can’t he?
But What About The Coverup?: We’ll see. I’m going to do something that a whoooole lot of – I’ll be frank – dumber bloggers could stand to try; waiting until I know enough to have a perspective worth writing.
Now – as to all of you leftybloggers and comment-section-lawyers who haven’t specifically condemned the massacre at Katyn Wood? Why do you support Russian genocide against the Poles?
Does your silence speak volumes, or what?