Concern trolls are a subcategory of trolls on blogs. Concern trolls pretend to be on the side of the blogger or the blog readers but sneakily put in opinions and arguments which are the very opposite, all the time bemoaning the horror, horror!, that such arguments can be true, because they totally destroy "our" positions and what the fuck can we do now? Well, blogs are not the only place where concern trolls can be found. Even famous liberal newspapers have them, when it comes to the topic of Hillary Clinton's possible presidential run in 2008.
Here is a beautiful example:
It was political Kabuki -- Bill Clinton, held in check -- on a night that some observers saw as the start of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Bill is poised to mightily help or deeply hurt his wife's White House prospects. Either way, his impact will be profound as he undertakes the unprecedented role of ex-president turned male campaign spouse to the first woman ever to have a serious shot at the presidency.
Yes, Bill can deliver political superstardom. He's a razor-sharp political strategist. He knows the institution of the presidency. His fundraising chops are unrivaled. All that is well and good -- perhaps too good, according to a September CNN poll, which showed his favorable rating higher than hers, 60 percent to 50 percent.
But there's the other Bill, the one who could be a massive and messy distraction. That Bill is the ex-president known for his outsize appetites and indiscipline, the Bill who still revels in the limelight, who runs with global jet-setters. He is prone to pop up in the press for even the smallest of curiosities, like being spotted at dinner with another woman -- bad news for an ex-president already infamous for marital infidelity.
If she runs, will voters focus too much on him? Will they remember too much of the national trauma known as "that woman" (Monica Lewinsky) -- and the presidential prevaricating, hair-splitting (what is"is," anyway?) and impeachment that followed? Can voters look at Bill without thinking of sex? If they don't think of sex, they'll likely think the word: "president," which may also not be such a good thing for the spouse who wants that title.
"If she runs, will voters focus too much on him?" Just in case they won't, the author of this article helps the focus by pointing out Bill Clinton's cocksucking episode as an example of what the voters could, perhaps, just perhaps, focus on. And for the bestest, most astonishing concern-trollery, just savor this sentence slowly:
Can voters look at Bill without thinking of sex? If they don't think of sex, they'll likely think the word: "president," which may also not be such a good thing for the spouse who wants that title.
Do you remember reading an article about George and Laura Bush in these terms? Something about what people might think about events in Laura's past? I don't remember reading one, either, and if such articles are going to be written of one candidate then they should be written of all candidates.
How much of this concern-trolling is because Hillary has the wrong genitals? I'm not sure, but I'm sure of one thing: If the voters didn't have Bill Clinton's shenanigans and stature in mind before reading this article they do now.