I love non-denial denials. As a genre, the non-denial denial is as close as politics can come to literature--it is the moment when the right words must be chosen precisely.

Witness, for instance, Bill Clinton's famous statement when the Monica Lewinsky story broke: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." Oh, it's so good. It's so brilliant. The best part is the diversionary tactic. First he says, "that woman." So you think you have him! You think he will later be able to deny the denial based on "that woman." But then he names her! And you think, "Well, that is a real denial. Boy howdy. Nothing ambiguous in that denial." Of course, the ambiguity is in sexual relations; at least to Clinton's mind, what he had done with that woman, Miss Lewinsky wasn't sexual relations. It was sexual, sure. But it wasn't relations.

John Edwards was more obvious, but equally outraged in his recent non-denial denial: "The story is false. It's completely untrue, ridiculous. I've been in love with the same woman for 30+ years." He denies "the story." He says he loves his wife. He doesn't deny having an affair.

So check out this strangely worded statement from McCain press aide Brian Rogers: "The fact is that as Mayor, Palin never asked anyone to ban a book and not one book was ever banned, period." "The fact is" and "Period" are designed to seem authoritative, unambiguous. But what is that "as Mayor" doing there? Why would you include the "as Mayor" in such a forceful denial?

Oh, right, because Governor Palin did try to ban books when she was on the City Council.