So, I had my first piece published in a serious place today: the
Washington Post published an opinion piece I wrote called
5 Myths About Lobbyists. It's a little strange that the comments are, like, more vitriolic and less coherent than I'm even used to, right?
4 comments:
Man, there are some bitter people out there. You did good. Screw them. Hey, it's better to have nasty comments than none at all. Just be happy you're not a "loobyist" anymore.
Ewalda
Thanks for writing this. With the recent spate of anti-lobbyist rhetoric, I'd been thinking of asking you if you could comment on it based on your past experience. The Post article was everything I'd hoped for and a lot more besides that.
As for the commenters, they're the same bunch of offensive twits who comment on other WaPo OpEd pieces.
Nicely written. As mentioned by a few of us at CP, remember us when you become a Wash Insider.
I'm no fan of lobbyists either, but in my "real" life I've dealt and met with a few and they have actually helped the organization I volunteer for so I admit that (like Lawyers) lobbyists have a purpose that always isn't detrimental.
Reading the comments, I have to say that I'm glad I don't comment on MSM websites. A lot of folks were outside smoking when they handed out brains.
People who tend to comment on newspaper Web sites tend to be a bit more retarded and behind the curve than those who are members of the vanguard (God I sound like a commie) on political blogs (of any stripe) that did not start at newspapers or have any ties to them. If that makes me an elitist, than so be it.
Post a Comment