What I wrote was that some people had expressed concern that the Times article might have created the appearance of charging that McCain had had an affair. My critics have charged that I was charging the Times with charging McCain with having had an affair. Such a charge would be unfair to the New York Times, since the Times article, if you read it carefully (very carefully), does not make any charge against McCain except that people in a meeting eight years ago had suggested that other people eight years ago might reach a conclusion—about which the Times expressed no view whatsoever—that McCain was having an affair. I have no evidence to suggest that the New York Times suggested with no evidence that McCain was having an affair.And, if ever such a thing were to be written about me, I should be very sad, indeed. Although, it would be pretty fucking cool if Mike Kinsley knew who I was. That might make it all worthwhile.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Legends Of The Absurd
I'm glad that I will never be famous, because if I did become famous, some day Michael Kinsley might write an article about me, like today's take-down of the New York Times for its mismanagement of the McCain/Iseman story of last week.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I can't even begin to follow the multiple uses of words here.... so confused...
Post a Comment