On the cover of the NY Post

I got a Facebook message today from David Henry, who worked as a reporter for me about 25 years ago, before going off to New York and writing for Forbes or some such. It was a bit of a shock:

I got on the train this morning, opened the New York Post and there was your byline on the top of the lede story. That’s great. ‘ glad your having fun with this.

I don’t know about the having fun part, but he was right — I had the lede byline. I had no idea.

Yes, I did some free-lance work for the Post yesterday — I covered the governor’s press conference for them — but they watched it on TV up there, so I didn’t think the stuff I called in to them (and I made a number of calls for them and talked to Jake and all) added all that much. Maybe they just put me up there as an excuse to have a Columbia dateline on it. I certainly had nothing to do with any of the stuff at the top of the story (the “lust e-mails”). I didn’t actually WRITE any part of that story (as you can probably tell … my style is more, um, sedate). I had figured that at MOST I’d be mentioned at the end of the story…

(That’s actually my SECOND NY Post byline. But the first one I DID write, as you already know.)

So I was surprised at the play I got. The irony of this is, as Charles Bierbauer pointed out to me later, all those years busting my hump at The State, and more people saw that byline than ever saw it here when I was EPE.

That was not my only surprise the last day or so. I know I didn’t know what to expect when I went to the press conference, although there had been inferences — particularly in the First Lady’s remarks earlier in the week. In the phone conversation in which I agreed to help the Post, the guy in New York asked me, “Is this going to be a Spitzer moment?” I had no idea. And yet it was. Yes, things had pointed that way, and the odd exchange with Gina at the airport took things right to the brink… but the actual admission at the press conference was just surreal.

All through it, I kept thinking, “And the worst thing he could say next would be…” and then he’d say it. It’s like I was expecting it, but not expecting it. Hard to explain.

I’ll tell you this, though, as I said in a comment on a previous post — I’ve spent a good bit of time today talking to friends and former staffers of the gov, including some people whose judgment I respect a great deal, and there’s pretty general agreement that nobody thought THIS guy would do something like this.

Neither did I. I thought a lot of pretty harsh things about him, but not this.

This whole thing has just felt so weird.

53 thoughts on “On the cover of the NY Post

  1. Karen McLeod

    I’ve been watching and reading about these events as I’ve gotten the chance (rough week at work). I am so sorry for his family. I just hope that there has been little use of state funds for these trysts. I already know he took the car, but that’s minimal. Glad your story got the lede. This can only burnish your resume.

  2. jfx

    Congrats…sorta. That was one horribly-written bit of tabloid scat, and in an ideal world you wouldn’t have your name sitting on top of it like that, or under what may possibly be the worst, most tasteless headline I’ve seen in all the stories I’ve read today (MANY).

    But of course, the ideal world is a fiction. And, as Confucius once said, “Work is work.” Pay the man!

  3. Brad Warthen

    By the way, this story is OVER now for the national media. The King of Pop is dead. Farrah Fawcett, too.

    So we here in SC are left to pick up the pieces — either we have a shattered governor who will be even LESS effective than he was before this week, if that is possible, or we’ll have Andre Bauer.

    The 24/7 TV news folks don’t care about that, though…

    Speaking of media — I’m going to be on Mark Quinn’s show on ETV Radio tomorrow from 1 to 2…

  4. Claudia

    I think a whole lot of people are stunned… it’s been like watching a train wreck in slow motion. Can’t say I care for the man or his politics, but watching Sanford slowly and publicly self-destruct HAS felt weird… the longer it goes on the worse I feel – for him, for his family and everyone involved. I’ve been reading an awful lot about politicians and sex over the past 24 (or more) hours, but this was something different. I guess love can tear as many lives apart as it puts together… this was obviously about more than sex.

    BTW, Brad – nice catch… congrats on the lede. Wish it could have been on a different story, though… I’m sure you do, too.

  5. Claudia

    Don’t know if it’s true or not, but I hear we’ll be calling Andre “Governor Bauer” sometime tomorrow… we’ll see.

  6. Marge Lebowski

    “Don’t know if it’s true or not, but I hear we’ll be calling Andre “Governor Bauer” sometime tomorrow… we’ll see.”


  7. Lee Muller

    Gee, with Mark Sanford’s personal life, Michael Jackson dying, and Jon and Kate breaking up, there is just no time to cover the bloodbath in Iran, North Korea shipping weapons to terrorists, and the economic meltdown under Obamanomics.

    Maybe next week.

  8. Bart

    Lee, thanks for the perspective on what is actually important.

    While the media engages in American Idol type pursuits, this country is going to hell in a handbasket and an uncontrolled congress is busy passing global warming, no, climate change legislation that will add even more of a burden to the taxpayers and no one is paying attention.

    Even though I don’t want Bauer in the governor’s mansion, what damn difference does it make anyway? The recent court ruling legitimized the fact that it is the legislature who runs things and makes decisions in this state, not the governor. Bauer can do no more than what Hugh Leatherman allows him to do if he does indeed become governor or the ceremonial figurehead of the state.

  9. Primo Kimo

    a reporter and writer with Forbes wrote this?! “glad your having fun with this.”
    absolutely duh-mazing.

  10. Dan Moran

    Meanwhile, in other news…

    I just caught the news that Philip Simmons passed away quietly Monday. Much too quietly. With all the media and public attention on yet another black mark (no pun intended) for South Carolina, one of SC’s nationally recognized (for something good) citizens has been overlooked. That is sad. Also sad is the fact that The State reported it on Wednesday with an AP byline. The (Charleston) Post and Courier had a very nice story in Tuesday’s edition, written by Robert Behre, one of their own reporters, who has written two follow-up pieces since.

    Special thanks to Robert Ariail for bringing this to my attention.

  11. Karen McLeod

    I see in the paper this AM that Gov. Sanford did use tax money to fund at least one of his trips. He says he’ll pay it back. PAY IT BACK???!!! How is he going to “pay it back” to the lower paid state workers who do very hard work at odd hours trying to make a living? That amount of money (over $9,000, according to the newspaper) was money some had to give up as furlough. Those who give direct care to our disabled citizens, get little enough. Giving up a day’s pay a month (or more) hurt them badly. I want to hear how he’s going to apologize to them (but of course, he’s not). I realize that this money would not go very far with all the workers who lost pay (or entire jobs), but for him to spend that money to indulge his (I wish he had kept it private) lust, in the face of this state’s economic situation reaches a level of selfishness and insouciance that I find morally disgusting.

  12. Doug Ross

    C’mon, Karen…

    $9000 wouldn’t have made any difference in who was laid off.

    You’re focusing on pennies while the legislature wastes millions.

    Read this and tell me you are more concerned about Sanford’s $9000
    than you are over Jim Rex hosting 800 school principals down at Myrtle
    Beach this week.


    The irony of Rex saying an additional $185 million dollars of stimulus money won’t save more than 500 teacher jobs while 800 principals bask in the sun on taxpayer funds is not lost on me. Maybe if Rex cut out these vacations disguised as events, we wouldn’t see teachers laid off. Maybe if Rex didn’t spend several MILLION dollars on consultants (including his future campaign spokesman), we wouldn’t see teachers laid off.

    Sanford’s going to pay back the $9000. Who is going to pay back the millions of wasted money?

  13. Doug Ross

    FYI: $185 million works out to 3700 $50,000 a year jobs. And they can only save 500?


  14. bud

    I’ve spent a good bit of time today talking to friends and former staffers of the gov, including some people whose judgment I respect a great deal, and there’s pretty general agreement that nobody thought THIS guy would do something like this.

    Neither did I. I thought a lot of pretty harsh things about him, but not this.

    Huh??? Are you kidding man. Where have you been lately? That comment is just astounding. These high and righteous “family values” Republicans are the MOST likely people to get caught up in this type of scandal. Sanford has shown his complete lack of compassion for anything other than himself and his adherence to the ideotic coservative mantra for his whole career. And you act surprised at this????? Man you are so naive it’s just unbelievable.

  15. Bill C.

    I’m wondering how The State is going to justify themselves publishing illegally obtained e-mails? Is The State going to start promoting criminal activity to sell newspapers? What next, finding a hacker who can access SSN’s and credit card numbers and publish those too? Maybe the Sunday edition will show shocking autopsy photos of Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett, and Michael Jackson… that should sell a few extra copies. The State is the Jake Knotts of newspapers, just looking for one last shot before kicking the bucket. As far as I’m concerned, it can’t happen soon enough for either of them.

  16. Lee Muller

    How long has this spying on Sanford gone on?

    How many other e-mails concerning the stimulus bill and school vouchers were stolen and passed to the opposition?

    How many other state officials and legislators have had their e-mails and documents pilfered by moles and passed to news media and opposition?

  17. Bart

    When you set standards high, the fall is devastating and the splash will drench those around you. But, if all you do sit on the edge and slip, there may be a few ripples but thats about it.

    Sanford fell off the high dive platform, Ted Kennedy slipped his car off a bridge and a girl drowned. Sanford has become a pariah and Ted Kennedy is a “respected” senator. Foley emailed underaged pages, Barney Franks lover ran a male prostitution ring from Barney’s house or office. Foley resigned and went home, Franks is taking the lead in running this country into permanant bankruptcy. The list of comparisons is long and unpleasant.

    Now, just who the hell has claim to the high ground here?

  18. Lee Muller

    It is known as “expectational ethics” – liberals don’t expect moral behavior from themselves or their worshipful leaders. They expect blacks to be unemployed and drop out of school. They expect Mexicans to work illegally, off the books.

  19. Mike Toreno

    Bart, neither Sanford, nor any other conservative, sets standards high. Conservatism is grounded in group identification and hypocrisy, in making excuses for other conservatives because they are members of the group, and finding fault with everything done by nonconservatives because they are not members of the group. For example, other conservatives will make excuses for the dishonest sleight of hand in your comment; for example, you make a dishonest comparison between Sanford and Kennedy. Kennedy isn’t revered for his wrongdoing in 1969, he is respected for the public service he has performed in the 40 years since 1969. If Sanford develops a similar record of public service, he too will be respected for it. That isn’t going to happen, though.

    Of course the list of comparisons is going to be “long and unpleasant” if you’re not honest in making your comparisons. But of course, if you were honest, you wouldn’t be a conservative. Conservatism has to be based on dishonesty because conservative policies always fail, so in order to remain conservative, you have to be dishonest. In your own case, for example, you pretend to be concerned about voting fraud when, as you have demonstrated, you are really concerned about putting up obstacles to keep the “wrong” people from voting.

  20. marconi

    Top five reasons Brad Boy’s name fetched upon on the Post Masthead

    1.Miles Kimball circular advertising writing dried up.
    2.Channeling C.F. Kane/William Randolph Hearst gave him a taste for no wine before it’s time and fetish for sleds named Rosebud
    3.After appearance on Michael Feldman’s “Whaddya know” in Columbia in massively oversized tennis shoes got the clown lobby against him.
    4.Possible entry in the Walter Edgar look-a-like contest fell through when he found out he had to wear a bow tie.

    And the Number one reason….

    Not enough space in the Page Six column!

  21. jfx

    Doug Ross, there you go again.

    The other day it was “nothing happened, so it’s OK that he was out on the Appalachian Trail, out of cell phone range”.

    Now it’s “Oh, it’s only $9,000 of our dough that he blew while pooching his secret tropicana margarita, and he’s gonna pay it back, so it’s OK, yada yada yada”.

    What about the “principle” of the thing? Isn’t the amount irrelevant? What about principles and values, Doug? That was some of YOUR money, too, Doug. Is there no end to the hypocritical ultra-rationalizing damage-control blame-shifting full court press of the “but somehow it’s OK” minimize-with-a-straight-face libertarian swat team? Every stupid thing Sanford does, you try and spin it around and make it about the legislature. What’s next? Jake Knotts tricked Sanford into dropping his pants below the equator?

  22. Lee Muller

    jfx, you don’t use your real name because all you do is attack straw men.
    No one said any of what you attack. Grow up.

  23. Bill C.

    jfx – Sanford reimbursed $9000. Not all of this was spent to meet up with his girlfriend. He paid that whole portion of the leg to put it behind him. If he had official business in Argentina, in reality it probably didn’t cost the state a dime that they wouldn’t have already spent. Stop making it sound like he took a side-trip at the state’s expense.

  24. Lee Muller

    Old World reactionaries have been trying to kill off free enterprise, limited representative government and libertarianism ever since the Libertarian Revolution of 1776 and its Constitution of Individual Liberty.

    Now, if the school districts could just get their employees to repay the money for their official junket retreat vacations….

  25. Bill C.

    Wasn’t Jakie supposed to have some groundbreaking press conference at 1:00 today? Maybe it was to tell us all he actually left something on his plate at lunch.

  26. Bill C.

    There’s a time and place for situational ethics, not everything falls within guidelines of written in stone ethics.

  27. Karen McLeod

    Doug, I’m not in a position to know why Mr. Rex decided on the principal’s meeting (retreat? convention? whatever), but a) I see no lying, no betrayal there, b) at least he kept the money in SC. Would you rather they had gone to Florida or Vegas? It’s not that the $9,000 or so makes a lot of difference in who could or could not stay hired; it’s that the Govenor used that trip as an opportunity to see his lover. That’s definitely not in his job description. How specifically did SC benefit from that trip? Did it create any new jobs, bring in any new business, or provide needed information or training in any area? Can’t you see that to someone who’s making about $20,000 a year, on a shift type job, where they don’t always get Christmas and/or Thanksgiving off, a day’s furlough is painful. To them the govenor’s trip to Argentina that includes a visit to his lover is a slap in the face.

  28. Bart

    Mike, any comment coming from you is like encountering a foul, rotten odor with no cleansing wind to disperse it. It hangs in the air, assaulting the senses, providing odoriferous proof of true intellectual dishonesty and a public display of the fringe element occupying the far left.

    You call me dishonest and using sleight of hand in my comments? You are the most dishonest poster on this blog and your comments often bring criticism from those on the left because you offer nothing but attack after attack after attack. No common sense, no reasoning, no civility, in short, you contribute not one damn thing. The only time my conservative standards are lowered is when I sink to the depths of actually responding to your mindless meandering trips into nothingness.

    In the 80s when two members of the House were caught having inappropriate relations with a minor, the conservative Republican resigned. The Democrat who had an affair with an underage male page was censured but he turned his back to the speaker during the censure. He was ROUNDLY applauded with a standing ovation by his fellow DEMOCRATS back home for his defiance and blatant disregard for the law. He was reelected six more times and held top positions on several committees. Now, how is that for rewarding a pedophile?

    As far as putting up obstacles to keep the “wrong” people from voting, you’re damn right I would put up obstacles to keep the “wrong” people from voting. When you solicit people off the streets who are not registered, never have been, have no clue about who is on the ballot and is either drunk or high on an illegal substance to walk into the voting booth, that is the epitome of irresponsibility and in the case of the “liberals” who were pushing this practice, constitutes an abuse of the system to the point of criminal behavior. I would be even more upset with “conservatives” if they were to engage in such practices.

    That was the point I was trying to make but in your ever contracting universe, you never took one moment to even try to understand my point so there is no sense continuing to seek out signs of intelligent life in your posts.

    But, this is still a democracy and you have the right to express yourself and intelligent people have a right to continue to disregard your fractured attempts at logic.

  29. Doug Ross


    I never excused Sanford’s behavior. I said he should resign. – what he did is unacceptable on all counts.

    All aspects of it were wrong. All I am looking for us even the smallest sense of applying the same standards to all politicians particularly when worse behavior by members of the democratic party is brushed aside.

    You don’t appear to be bothered by government waste on a grand scale, only symbolic waste by a man you never liked.

  30. Lee Muller

    The waste of billions of dollars is a much more serious offense, and has more direct impact on our lives.

  31. Lee Muller

    I don’t believe in “situational ethics”, but I doubt Martin knows what the term means.

    Liberals don’t believe in ethics at all. They are still angry over Bill Clinton having to plea bargain is way out of perjury and witness tampering charges.

  32. Mike Toreno

    Bart, you don’t lower your conservative standards because conservative standards can’t get any lower. I was discussing your sleight of hand about Kennedy versus Sanford. The difference between Kennedy and Sanford is Kennedy’s 40 years of public service. You ignored that difference, and your pretense that the two cases were the same is a dishonest and clumsy sleight of hand.

    Finally, you admit that you’re not really concerned about keeping ineligible people from voting, but in putting up obstacles to keep eligible people from voting. You call the “wrong” people “drunk” or “high” or “uninformed”, but of course you have no way to know what their condition is or how informed or concerned they are. Whether American citizens are solicited off the streets or not, they are American citizens with the same right to vote as you have. What’s important is enforcing the right to vote, not requiring prospective voters to conform to your view that they are “worthy” and putting obstacles in the path of the “unworthy”. You advocate putting up obstacles so that you can reduce obstacles in the path of people that you want to vote, and increase obstacles in the path of those you don’t want to vote, and then you disparage those who are unable to overcome the obstacles you put up as “unworthy” and then, once you have deemed them unworthy, you disparage them by claiming that they are drunk, high, or uninformed.

    But no matter what protestations you make, we know the real reason you want to deny some people their vote.

  33. Bart

    Quick, someone open a window and let some fresh air in. That awful smell is here again. No, wait, Toreno is back. Never mind.

    I never said the two cases were the same. If you brain had a gear that allowed logic to be engaged, you would have understood the reason behind the comparison. One committed adultery and has been vilified and by your own words, will not be redeemed. One was responsible for the death of a young woman, left the scene of the accident, got off because of his family connections, went on to serve 40 years in the Senate and has been canonized. But what is noticeable is your total disregard for the comparison between the two House members.

    Hypocrisy, thy name is Toreno.

    I based my position on observation of facts when activists were literally dragging drunks and drug abusers off the streets, taking them to register and then to vote and they had no idea of what they were doing, who was on the ballot, or what day it was. They only knew they were getting a free meal in exchange for their vote.

    And to address your observation of conservative standards and how low they are, at least we have some. After reading your tripe, it is obvious the same cannot be said about you. If you want to glorify pedophiles, unprosecuted manslaughter criminals, male prostitution patrons, go right ahead. I think the record can speak for itself.

    In case you missed the point, both sides have their issues with standards. I never said they didn’t. Its just that enablers like you keep giving cover to the likes of Studd, Kennedy, Franks, and others while turning on a Sanford or any other conservative who falls from grace.

  34. Doug Ross

    The wife of Democrat Congressman John Conyers, head of the House Judiciary Committee (irony alert!), has pleaded guilty to bribery charges.
    I’m SURE he had no idea what was going on.

    Republican, Democrat, doesn’t matter. They’re all corrupt.

    Term limits. That’s the path to getting ethics back into government.

  35. Lee Muller

    Mrs. Conyers used crude and direct methods of extorting bribery.

    A more sophisticated white Democrat would have his wife become a lobbyist, and be paid legally for peddling influence.

    Or he would defer his compensation until he left office and returned to his law practice or “medial consultancy”, then be paid a huge “retainer fee” for no work.

  36. Mike Toreno

    Bart, when you say that my opinions are malodorous, you aren’t saying anything about them, you’re saying how you feel about them. You’re not saying anything about me, you’re saying something about yourself. You’re saying you don’t like my opinions. Who cares. That’s different from my saying you’re a liar. I say you’re a liar because you tell lies.

    I checked the Barney Frank story from your previous post and found out that you had dishonestly mischaracterized it by omitting the fact that Frank fired the guy when he found out about the prostitution ring. So I didn’t pay attention to the new claim you made.

    And the fact that I’m sure you’re lying about seeing drunks and drug addicts pulled off the streets to vote isn’t even important, what’s important is that you aren’t entitled to decide whether other people’s reasons for voting are worthy or not. The fact that you originally lied and pretended you were interested in stopping ineligible voters from voting tells us everything about you we need to know. We know what kind of voters you think are unworthy. It doesn’t matter how many lies you tell or how many stories you make up about what you’ve supposedly seen, we know your motives. If your motives were honorable, you wouldn’t have lied about them in the first place.

    As to the various public officials you mention, I don’t accept your characterization of any of them because you’re a liar. As for Sanford, we are laughing and pointing at Sanford not because he had an affair, which is not the greatest thing in the world, but is a human failing, but because he had an affair after spending his life poking his nose into other people’s sexual conduct.

    We haven’t “turned on Sanford,” we’re just eating popcorn and watching the show. We condemn Sanford because he’s a bad governor, under his leadership the state of South Carolina has been failing worse and faster than it was in the first place, causing hardship to many people. You make excuses for Sanford not because you have any kind of consistent system of morality, but because your whole system of morality is based on group identification. Members of your group can’t do anything wrong, those who are not members of your group can’t do anything right, to the extent that you call them drunks and drug addicts for voting.

  37. Lee Muller

    What has Barney Frank done to “cure” his lies about FNMA and FMAC being solvent, and the special loan treatments he got?

  38. Bart

    Sniff!! Randy and Toreno!! Wow!

    The fact that Barney Frank fired the guy doesn’t change the fact that it was only AFTER he was caught and it came to light did he do anything! The male prostitute he hired with his personal funds ran a ring out of his apartment for 18 months and Frank didn’t know about it? Give me and everyone else capable of reasoned thought a break!! “BS”

    Yet, you in the face of documented proof of the behavior of Studd and the others I listened, you won’t believe the truth, documented truth all because of your obvious lack of intellectual curiosity.

    You claim I am lying about the practice of dragging drunks and drug addicts off the street yet you offer no proof of any lies on my part. You only call me a liar because of my position that it is my belief that it constitutes voter fraud and an abuse of the system. Other than calling me a liar, you offer nothing. So, the next time you go to vote, go to the streets, grab the first drunk or someone high on drugs you find, give him or her the keys to your car and let them drive you to the polling place. Depend on their good judgment to operate your vehicle, determine how to get there, and all of the other things necessary to be a responsible operator of a vehicle. Put YOUR money where your mouth is.

    I spent too many years in my youth working for African Americans who were disenfranchised and subjected to voter intimidation. I learned the value of my vote and hold nothing but the highest respect for the right. But, I also learned how the system can and has been abused by extremists on both sides of the aisle. Rights can be and are abused across the spectrum of humanity. Criminals in prison lose their voting priviledges, justified or not, it is the law. Once released, they can regain their right to vote. The same law should apply to anyone who shows up at the polls obviously under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Sober up, clean up, then go vote. Until then, no.

    Another point, if you had the ability to read, reason, and comprehend, you will find nowhere in any of my posts where I defended Mark Sanford for his failure or for his lack of leadership. I never made excuses for Sanford, period. On that fact alone, you are not only a liar, you are a DAMNED liar!!!! Now you dishonest, enervated, nugatory obscurant, show me proof or stand convicted as a liar yourself.

    I make the point that hypocrisy is on both sides but you ignore it.

    You used the word lie in different forms nine times in your juvenile rant and that leads me to one conclusion. Anyone who disagrees with you on anything is a liar. Anyone positing a point of view that does not coincide with yours is not being truthful in your little world.

    If Randy considers your response as surgery, then a medical malpractice suit should be filed against you and Randy. Not only was there a missed diagnosis but the operation was botched as well. Maybe what we are witnessing is an example of the forthcoming government sponsored healthcare system. No wonder Randy likes you.

  39. Bart

    Mike, instead of usind “code worded” comments, tell me who are the voters I want to stop from voting other than the ones I mentioned. All you have done is use the word liar repeatedly but have offered nothing else. Now, have the intestinal fortitude to say what you actually mean and stop beating around the bush.

    “We know what kind of voters you think are unworthy.” Who is this we and again, who are the voters you mention?

    I find pseudologists like you to be the most vocal when considering the likelihood that you never physically placed yourself on the firing line – for anything. You find solace hiding behind a keyboard espousing questionable ideas and expressing faux anger and indignation over anything you disagree with.

    Quite frankly, I find you boring and totally without merit. You still stink the place up and and are now joined by Randy. Take a bath in reality, it will do you good.

  40. Mike Toreno

    Bart, again, your omitting the fact that Frank fired the guy when he found out about the prostitution ring demonstrates your dishonesty, so I paid no attention to your further claims. Now you go on and on about drunks and drug addicts, as if you had really seen such a thing, but you earlier pretended that you were concerned about vote fraud, that is, multiple voting by the same voter, or voting by ineligible voters. ID requirements at polling stations, and refusing to permit same day registration, won’t keep drunks and drug addicts from voting. What same day registration in particular will do, will be to keep voters from being turned away because of being removed from the voter rolls through fraud or error on the part of the authorities, with no ability to correct the problem.

    You lied about your motivations, therefore you don’t want your motivations known. The fact that you dont’ want your motivations known tells us what they are.

  41. Bart

    Toreno, go back to your day job as a video game character where you are much more believable and apparently, less offensive. Again, you bore me with your lack of character or guts.

    Coward, tell in plain language, not innuendos which seems to be the preferred method of attempted character assassination of your “kind”. I don’t hide my motivations, they were stated very clear.

    Agains, people who must identify with fictional characters indicate their lack of self esteem and difficulty relating with anyone in the real world. See, I didn’t cloak my opinion of you in “code words”. You are a coward – plain and simple.

Comments are closed.