My disclaimer

Disclaimer: I am Andrew C. I am not now nor have I ever been Andrew D. nor Andrew J. nor Andy S.

While I have met the last and constantly receive emails for the one prior I have never even met the first two and despite sharing a last name with the last and working the same job for the same company... I am not now, nor have I ever been any of these gentlemen.

I do not support them for office and have never taken money from any of them... though I did take a candy out of the candy dish on Andy S.'s desk and he did loan me a quarter once or twice when I was a little short of enough to get my coffee... the fact that he knew it might cost him and everyone else in the office their lives if I didn't get my coffee was, I am sure, of no influence on his decision to hand over his money.

Nor, for that matter, am I Andrew Sullivan, nor Andrew Card, despite the commonality of the third letter of the alphabet, rest assured that a card I am not.

This is serious business and I hold my blogging to the highest levels of integrity and felt it necessary that you all know these important facts so that you can weigh in the proper balance all past, present and future comments that may utter or blubber forth from my finger tips.


Not any of these other guys

Tags: (all tags)



So blog leaders are protected mafia dons?
Lead writers on blogs with 300,000 hits a day
be held to any standard of veritas?

Actually, they're not.  Nobody's going to jail.

So why should it bug people when it's pointed out that there's payola on the sly?

Maybe they're pissed because the repugs caught

by zinc7 2005-01-18 05:20PM | 0 recs
That's your second 3 from me zinc7
Because you have got to be kidding. I appreciate a good joke as much as the next guy.
by Gary Boatwright 2005-01-18 06:36PM | 0 recs
Re: So blog leaders are protected mafia dons?
What in the world are you talking about? Do these comments have any basis in reality? Or are you just trying to be as funny as I was trying to be?
by Andrew C White 2005-01-18 07:15PM | 0 recs
Re: So blog leaders are protected mafia dons?
what's funny about journalistic ethics.

Or what has been discovered to be the lack of them.

by zinc7 2005-01-18 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: So blog leaders are protected mafia dons?
Nothing but what has that got to do with this diary or any of the things you said in your first entry here? You need to explain yourself to me cuz you're not making any sense.
by Andrew C White 2005-01-18 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: So blog leaders are protected mafia dons?
Don't know what is so hard to understand... the commenter is a troll.  He believes the RIGHT WING was right and caught DKOS AND MYDD RED HANDED.  Get it?  He's a troll.
by manyoso 2005-01-18 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: So blog leaders are protected mafia dons?
And a wrong troll at that -- but aren't they all. How exactly did the repugs catch anyone red-handed here? If we assume for the moment that the bloggers in question did something wrong (though they didn't), it wasn't republicans or anyone catching them red-handed. It was Treachout who revealed that she was hoping to influence them.

And for umpteenth gazillionth time journalistic ethics do NOT apply to bloggers because BLOGGERS AREN'T JOURNALISTS. Sheesh.

(Sorry for shouting. My words have to penetrate some apparently thick skulls.)

by wordcruncher 2005-01-19 06:17AM | 0 recs
Re: So blog leaders are protected mafia dons?
Exactly so. I always love getting trolls to paint themselves in a corner first before ripping tem to shreds. This guy was so clueless as to be laughable.
by Andrew C White 2005-01-19 09:04AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads