I cannot help but notice your endorsement of the Obama Administration’s decision not to release the photos of a dead Osama bin Laden. I guess that your post makes me wonder whatever happened to “the validity of asking empirical questions”. Given the fact that there are a number of people who–however foolishly–doubt that bin Laden is dead, isn’t it the case that despite the Obama Administration’s statements on this matter (which I hasten to add that I believe fully), “none of these [statements], alas, prove the [death of Osama bin Laden] the way simple [photos] would”? Why isn’t your “goal in all this . . . simple: to find out the truth, whoever it might embarrass”? Why don’t you accept that “[t]here was no vetting of [the claims that] this rogue [terrorist is dead]“? Why don’t you “stay on the case” regarding this issue? After all, you are a blogger. “If [you] were not a blogger [you] could have ducked this. But [you are obliged to feel] it [is your] duty not to.”
You know, when it comes to the birther nonsense, at least “Obama provided the salient empirical evidence – his birth certificate – one of those humiliations that public figures have to endure sometimes.” Why would it be outrageous to ask that the Obama Administration provide pictorial evidence that bin Laden is dead? Providing such proof hardly counts as “one of those humiliations that public figures have to endure sometimes.” Kindly don’t lecture us about the need to preserve “human dignity”; this Tweet pithily undercuts that and similar objections.
“C’mon, [Andrew]. Clinch this for good and all. You can do it. Just ask [Obama's Administration] for [photos of a dead bin Laden]. And if [you refuse], explain what [your] reasoning is, given [your] position on [investigating Trig Palin's matrilineal line]“.