A reader writes:
Great job on Torture/Reyonlds. It's why he is my least favorite commentator around - he can never argue a position straightforwardly or honestly. At least with Michelle Malkin or John Hinderaker, for example - or even the NRO types - you know exactly what they believe, because they say it.
But Reynolds constantly tries to preserve credibility by arguing that he opposes X but then spending all his time attacking and mocking anti-X advocates and promoting pro-X views.
He does that with global warming specifically and all political issues generally. Even though it was a small example, the most vivid case I ever saw of it was with the Jerome Armstrong/astrology mini-"scandal." The day that emerged, Reynolds did more than any other person to give that story visibility - he literally linked to one post after the next from right-wing bloggers pushing the Armstrong story, but then he inserted into the middle of a post, as a fleeting dependent clause, some sort of dismissive claim that he didn't really think the whole thing was a big deal, then proceeded again to link to more and more items about it.
That way, the same person who did more to bring publicity to the story would, if you made the point, say: "Oh, no - I made clear I didn't think the story was a big deal." It's the most dishonest and cowardly way possible for engaging in public debate - pretending to have one position and then doing everything possible to promote its opposite.
Just baffling. We all have a different blogging styles and, to be fair to Instapundit, his brief, often opaque one-liners can be misleading. But a long look at his archives will reveal the pattern my reader detects. Make your own mind up. My own view is that he holds consistently libertarian views, unless they offend the Republican base, in which case he stays quiet or targets base enemies. Maybe if he weren't so talented, smart and sharp, these things would not matter to many readers. But after a while, you feel like you're being taken for a spin, not a journey. Thousands of others, it should be noted, strongly disagree - and vote with their mouse-clicks.