Daniel Glover Shreds His Reputation Further

Yep, one last look at Beltway Blogroll: A Follow-Up Piece On Paid Bloggers.

To recap: Danny Glover said that the point of his Sunday New York Times article was not that: "anyone... is 'corrupt'.... I don't believe that. Candidates have the right to pay for Internet advice, blogging, etc., and bloggers have a right to be paid..." Never mind that I, and all six people I talked to on Sunday, thought that the point of Glover's article and chart was precisely that Glover thought the webloggers he named were trading favorable mentions for cash.

Danny Glover said that the point of his article was, instead, that: "it's interesting that some bloggers made a name for themselves by fighting the establishment and billing themselves as revolutionaries but at the same time are willing to work for campaigns..."

I then asked: "Which of twelve webloggers you named yesterday do you believe billed themselves as revolutionaries who disdained to work for candidates?"

Danny Glover answered: "Jerome Armstrong, Peter Daou, Tim Tagaris and Scott Shields certainly see themselves as revolutionaries, and I suspect most everyone on the list does."

So we have by Glover's count eight who have not billed themselves as revoutionaries (I would say ten)--if they had, wouldn't Glover know? Eight added to pad out a list that would otherwise have been an anemic four names long.

Saddest thing I've seen in a month.