The Times has a piece out about how some Republican “foreign policy giants” are lukewarm on Mitt Romney.

Why anyone would want the endorsement of these war criminals establishment types, whose ranks include Henry Kissinger and Condoleeza Rice, I’m not sure.

That said, there’s a fascinating line in the piece, which feels like it was spoon-fed to Times reporter Richard A. Oppel Jr. by some members of that establishment, who may, perhaps, feel that their wisdom is not being sufficiently sought by Romney.

It is:

Mr. Kissinger and another Republican secretary of state who has not made an endorsement, George P. Shultz, were unavailable for interviews.

Unavailable for interviews? What, they were off getting their nails done and no one could reach them?

(To be fair, both might be in poor health—they’re old—but if they’re in such bad shape they can’t talk to a reporter, how important could their endorsement be?)

My guess: Both men spoke to the reporter on background, meaning that they couldn’t be quoted, and the reporter didn’t want to say that they declined to be interviewed, which wouldn’t have been true, or that they would not be interviewed on the record, which would give the game away.

Hence: They were “unavailable” for interviews.

Which basically just means that Henry Kissinger and George Schultz feel irrelevant, and so they manipulated the New York Times into making Mitt Romney pay more attention to them. As Oppel himself writes,

Republican foreign policy stalwarts are likely to ultimately endorse Mr. Romney once they get a chance to discuss their differences with him directly.

Too funny.