Aside to the writer of a certain flushed comment

Gentle readers, I beg your indulgence for a moment while I address a post to a single reader, Anon.

Yes, I know, nearly all of the persons who leave comments here are all named Anonymous -- a remarkable coincidence -- but I write here to the particular Anon who says I'm moving too slow on stories about candidate objections -- "intentionally withholding a major story," Anon writes, breathlessly, "because it affects two people [you] want to protect, as you have in past cycles," to wit, a "perennial shill" and another "perennial flimflam man."

I naively thought I haven't updated the blog as frequently as I might have liked because I had some legal work to to do -- still do, actually, because I had to get some personal matters attended to first -- and then because my wife and I spent most of the weekend babysitting one set of grandchildren or another so that their parents -- our children -- could get their Christmas shopping done. And we still had to get our weekly errands done besides. And finish our own Christmas preparations -- I've gotten our Christmas card insert done, I just haven't had a moment to get it printed. Maybe today. Although I can't shake this persistent cold....

At least that's what I thought I was doing. Anon, you clearly know lots more about me than I do, including the identity of the shill and/or flimflam man I'm so carefully protecting. You should tell me more. Don't be so coy. Your comment will no doubt still be flushed, but you will have contributed to my awakening and you will have that private satisfaction.

I find myself in a position analogous to that of poet Sara Holbrook, who found that she couldn't answer questions about her own poems on standardized tests given in Texas. She thought one thing about her poems while the much-smarter test makers knew better. As you, dear Anon, know better than I about how I spend my time and my deep-seated motivations for so doing.

And, so, Anon, let me say thank you for trying to rouse me to my duty. I might have used another two-word phrase, but most of my readers have already figured out what that phrase would have been. So there's no need.