I doubted Andy and this is why...

[_testify_]

I will tell you why, and maybe you might see that it isn't so unreasonable, even if it was unfounded.

I donated $50 on two occasions. It was never about the money. I could afford it, and I have personal feelings about the fight against cancer. On the days that I donated, I did not question for a moment the legitimacy of the fund-raising. I have not been a member of DU for too long but I have been reading posts here since the 2000 election. I am familiar with the work of many of Andy's supporters. I have not met any of the folks involved, and I likely never will.
My parents taught me that if someone asks for money, and you have it to give, you should give it without any expectations of ever seeing it again. I like to think that I did so in this situation.
However, when I saw Skinner's thread regarding the events of a few days ago, my heart sank. I read the entire thread, post-by-post, and I felt a wild mix of emotions. I was sad that something happened to sully the beautiful effort everyone here made for one man. But it did make me angry to think it was possible I had been suckered along with countless others. That was my pride speaking.
Once the initial doubt had been raised, I found it hard to shake. I looked at the facts. I was very confused. It felt good to give, as it always does. I wanted that good feeling to stay. But it was replaced by doubt as soon as I read the title of Skinner's thread.
I did not post about my doubts, perhaps out of respect for Andy's well-being, perhaps out of level-headedness, perhaps out of cowardice.
I am not perfect. I am not even close. I did something because I thought it was right. But I won't tell Andy now that I never doubted him, because I did. I doubted DU, and I doubted myself.
I have a feeling that there are others like me. I'm not going to apologize for the way I felt, because I had no control over that. If any out there chooses to spit on me, go ahead. I wouldn't be the first person punished for their honesty.

[Bouncy Ball]

1. I have a very straight-forward question.

Please don't read anything into it beyond the simplest meaning of the words, ok?

Why did you post this?

I am not pre-assuming anything, I am just genuinely curious.

[_testify_]

5. I don't even know now.

After I posted it, I thought I sounded dreadfully self-righteous.
I dont mean to be.

I think I just felt guilty.

[Bouncy Ball]

6. Ok, thanks

for the honesty. I was afraid you might think I had some assumption about your motivation and I honestly didn't. As a sometime student of human behavior I was just curious.

Thanks again!

[Goldmund]

9. Not going to answer for the poster,

but I have to ask you: why did you post _this_? The original poster probably posted it because that's what she or he was feeling, and they've chosen to address the drama of the last few days with some intricacy and some expression and some honesty.

Why does there need to be a hidden agenda?

On edit: oops, didn't read #6, sorry

[Bouncy Ball]

11. As you read, I didn't have any assumptions of hidden agenda.

Just truly curious what motivated it.

[Stephanie]

38. I was going to ask the same thing

[Goldmund]

2. Great post.

Naked and honest.

[ComerPerro]

74. I agree with Goldmund. Great post

[Snotcicles]

3. I don't get this post n/t

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. You shouldn't feel bad at all for having doubts.

Let's face it, you've never met Andy or any of the people who were vouching for him. And the Internet isn't exactly a bastion of honesty.

The trolls who brought up fake "evidence" against Andy are the ones who deserve scorn, not you.

[Bouncy Ball]

8. Well said.

[FreedomAngel82]

14. I agree

I don't know much about all that (just seen the post's and when Malloy talked about it on his show) but I don't think it's wrong for you to doubt someone. As Stampede said it's the internet. You never know. So don't feel bad.

[Bethany Rockafella]

7. "About the Andy Stephenson situation"

I don't know why that gave you doubt, but, imo, there's nothing wrong with doubting. You were just being careful, that's all.

[_testify_]

10. I just knew it was going to be one of two things from the title.

Both very bad. the first is what the thread was actually about, the other I don't need to say aloud.

[Lisa0825]

12. When I read Skinner's post, I was a little disappointed.

I wanted a clear cut yes or no answer to put ANYONE's doubts to rest. As for me, I don't know Andy, but I have had a lot of respect for his work, and for the work of many others who call him a friend and know him in person. I made the choice to trust. It wasn't a trust based on in-depth knowledge. It was something I decided to give. I won't rescind that trust unless I have a solid reason to. Rumors and innuendos aren't enough.

[RBHam]

13. Relax. We ain't psychic. Shit happens. Forgiveness is a Liberal idea.

Never forget it.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

15. when i read the skinner post

i was concerned too. Indeed that was the point of Skinner's post, to lay everything on the table. Once I saw who was vouching for Andy downthread though I didn't worry. There were some heavy-hitters emerging in defense of Andy and at that point I knew everything would be OK.

. . . and that Andy would be OK, because a lot of people have his back right now. Get better dude.

[Eloriel]

24. Yes, well put

Skinner did, absolutely, give validity to the fears and concerns. It can be argued that he did what he had to do and he did it in as professional a manner as possible.

But an argument could also be made that it was humiliating, catered to the freeper amongst us while longterm DUers' input was basically ignored (or put another way, the freeper's input was give EQUAL validity to all the rest of us who should be pretty much known by our deeds after all this time), AND that there really has to be a better way.

Count me in the 2nd camp. I found the whole exercise profoundly troubling and appalling and acutely embarrassing -- for DU, as well as Andy.

[bpilgrim]

36. ditto

there needs to be a rule(s) regarding solicitations so this doesn't happen again AND i wish the community could VOTE on every post to help us weed out the BS.

:hi:

peace

[SmokingJacket]

16. I doubt everything.

I'm a secular humanist to the nth degree, but sometimes I think, "What if I'm wrong and I'm going to burn in hell?"

I wonder, "What if the fundamentalists really DO get raptured?" and "What if Rush Limbaugh is really smart and I AM just a weak-minded liberal?"

"What if my husband is really gay?"

In the same spirit I thought, "What if it is a hoax?"

But I trust my gut, I trusted Andy's friends, and I thought, So what? NOT helping a truly sick man because you're a paranoid tightwad is worse than losing your money. A better question is, What if it's NOT a hoax, and you're hurting a sick man?

And if my husband is really gay, well... he's good at faking, so who cares? ;-)

[Lisa0825]

17. LOL! great post!!!

:rofl:

[Bethany Rockafella]

25. LOL!

:thumbsup:

[dddem]

35. Some advice I got when I was very young

and has always stuck with me when I'm in doubt:
"I'd rather trust someone and be wrong, than NOT trust them and be wrong."
As for your husband, ocasionally, when my husband attempts gift shopping for me, I wish he WAS gay, or at least had a "queer eye".

[Dorian Gray]

58. Smoking Jacket....

Love your last line!

[Must_B_Free]

18. My doubt was based on pushing the Gannon-Gosch thing after the photos

from the conneaut lake yearbook came out. To me those ended all question in the matter of if he was Gosch, but Andy still went on TV after that; to his credit, he was mainly saying the issue was open and I have reasoned that it was in support of his friendship with Noreen, but still, it appeared a bit fishy to me.

So sue me. :shrug:

[Goldmund]

19. I agree that Gannon/Gosch thing is a bunch of crap.

But I don't see what that has to do with whether Andy would scam people of their money.

[Must_B_Free]

87. well, it made me think (at that time)

that maybe this guy is an operative whose job it is to emphasize unproductive avenues and sabotage productive ones. And we see what the Neocons do is con people and scam them of their money.

[Bethany Rockafella]

29. Yeah, you were pretty rude in your posting on that thread.

[Must_B_Free]

86. which thread?

[_testify_]

20. Great posts everyone thank you!

Upon further introspection, I think what bothered me was some of the posts I had read that painted doubters with the same brush as the troll who started all of this, and that hurt my feelings some. But hey, those people are just as human as me (I think).

[Lisa0825]

22. I can understand that, but....

also some of the doubters repeated the same thing over and over again, despite the fact that people were answering their questions. When someone gets redundant like that, it tends to get people angry.

It makes them feel like this!LOL!
:banghead:

[expatriate]

67. yes - it's one thing to doubt

and it's very human. But there were some who seemed determined to make repeated posts about this, which served absolutely no purpose other than to cause more upset, more doubt, and more pain for Andy.

[Toots]

21. We live in a country of LIARS where lying is rewarded (re-selection) so it

is completely understandable for anyone to have doubts. There is a TV show on FOX called Con. It is glorifying conning people out of their money. Another one called catch a thief. In this nation of con artists and LIARS I don't see how anyone could doubt your concern. In fact I think it is a great testiment to DU that Andy received anything at all. Everyone in the rest of the world and I'm sure even in America know this to be true. Americans are LIARS who are only out to better themselves no matter what the cost. Bush* has much to do with this but it was there to a lessor degree during Clinton's term. Americans LIE and Steal so it is only natural they expect everyone to behave like themselves. I am being very generic here and not directed at you but at Americans in general. It is extremely sad and doesn't look like it is going to get any better. We have a Crime Family in charge of America and people are content with that FACT. :shrug: I find it almost impossible to give to any cause anymore because I don't trust anyone..I donate to local causes where I can see with my own eyes the results. Sad Sad Sad but it is how it is.

[EFerrari]

23. Hey there, _testify_

We've all been under a lot of stress and that's been increased by at least one very destructive troll.

I hope you feel better now, and can feel good about helping someone who truly needed your help.

Beth

[_testify_]

27. I do feel better, and thanks to all who indulged me. n/t

[LostinVA]

26. No worries... I had doubts for a few hours yesterday evening

Just because of what happened with She-Who-Will-Not-Be-Named, and some burns from long-time posters like Vetwife. It only lasted about two hours, because I knew I was being silly. So, don't be so hard on yourself, okay?

[Goldmund]

30. Who's "She-Who-Will-Not-Be-Named"?

PM me if you must. :)

[Malva Zebrina]

28. You weren't alone

Lots of people just did not know, and lots of people contributed because they did not know. It was a very big confusion and perhaps could have been handled better. Whatever--you are not a cockroach, or a naysayer for thinking about things and doubting. No one need apologize for being a well intentioned human being.

[EFerrari]

33. That's just plain wrong

"Lots of people" didn't contribute "because they did not know".

I have a complete record of every cent and every question and every answer that I provided.

I suggest you go back and read the threads that document the efforts that you criticized so casually yesterday. Because, it's obvious you never have. Yet, you were very willing yesterday to accuse and impugn.

It's one thing to have a reasonable doubt, like _testify_. It's quite another to criticize an effort you know nothing about, as you did.

And I await the promised apology from you. And, you owe one to Andy, merh, fly and Will Pitt -- something you would know, had you read the fund raising threads.

Really. We can do so much better than this.

[Malva Zebrina]

34. stop it

I am replying and posting as I see it, from the information I read and attempting to console this person who feels guilt because she dared to have a doubt.

No one needs to apologize for their perceptions especially when done in good will.

The confusion existed and that is not to be denied. Some had doubts and that is not to be denied.

Attacks like yours do not help the situation and YOU can do better.

I do what I see fit, and do not act upon what someone else thinks can be better. If that cannot be accepted, then it is too bad.

I am a human being posting on this board and if the only thing one can do is preach and attack, well that speaks for itself.

I am not a cockroach and I am not a naysayer. No one deserves to be called names because they can think, parse and come to a conclusion that is different from the gang.

LOTS of people just did not know and that is the truth. They donated anyhow.

On edit

No one asked you about any accounting or accused you of sloppy accounting.

[EFerrari]

37. I follow the rules at DU because I respect DU

And if having someone call you on your own behavior seems like an attack to you, you might consider the source of the behavior, not blame the logical consequences that ensue.

Among other things, you accused us of avoiding truth, of keeping no records, of attacking people who disagreed with "Andy's friends" -- as if we're some monolith.

None of those things are true. And we'd all be farther ahead if you copped to your false assumptions stated as facts and we could just get on with the real business of this board.

Do it or not, that's up to you. You choose your own adventure, finally.

[Malva Zebrina]

40. I also follow the rules and there is nothing about my behavior

that does not follow the rules. Otherwise, I would have been deleted by now or banned.

And I do not need your advice on what I should do or not do. Apply your sage advice to yourself and not to others of whom you know nothing.

Among other things, you accused us of avoiding truth, of keeping no records, of attacking people who disagreed with "Andy's friends" -- as if we're some monolith.

Avoiding truth? Where did I say that? Keeping no records? Where did I say that? Kindly provide me with that evidence. I said nothing of the sort. And there is no doubt to anyone who can read, that Andy did have "friends" and there is no doubt that anyone who ASKED QUESTIONS was attacked by those friends--further it was not DISAGREEMENT, but the simple act of asking questions to allay some doubts. But even if it was disagreement, why would that not be accepted on a message board? Was total and complete agreement required somewhere?

You have resorted to distortion of the facts. Why?

[ultraist]

45. And the end result is...

MANY DUers donated and we raised a lot of money! MOST Duers who DID donate, had no doubts. The few that did have doubts handled them well. Only a small number of people embarrassed themselves with vicious posts.

Certainly, we can learn from this and handle things a bit differently in the future, but all in all---DUers have a lot to be proud of and I consider the fundraiser to be a HUGE SUCCESS on a board of 65k people!

:woohoo: :bounce: :patriot:

Here's to a SUCCESSFUL FUNDRAISER FOR ANDY! :toast:



Why don't you give it up, Malva? Let the negativity go.

[Malva Zebrina]

48. Yes, I do think there is a lesson here to be learned

and thanks for saying it. It is the first admission that I have seen that perhaps much could have been avoided.

What negativity?

[BamaBecky]

69. Well did you learn your lesson?...n/t

[ultraist]

71. Malva

My comment about the fundraiser being a learning experience was in general terms. I don't have any specific suggestions, but there is always some room for improvement and expansion.

Again, the fundraiser was a smashing success and those that led it up did a FABULOUS job!

In response to "what negativity?" Read your posts on all of the Andy threads and THINK about it.

[EFerrari]

43. No one asked you about any accounting or accused you of sloppy accounting.

Yes, in fact you did:


"You don't know who contributed or who did not, in spite of the fact that they may have had questions to ask about it but were too intimidated to do so. Is that a good way to conduct a fund raiser?"

Your words, post 132 in Skinner's thread yesterday. Apparently, you don't read your own posts either.

I'm done with this. This board accomplished a near miracle in the last two weeks. That's enough for me :)

[Malva Zebrina]

44. that is an accustaion of sloppy accounting?

The post was an answer to another attack on persons who did not go with the flow but had questions. The poster was attacking others. It addresses the knowledge of who and who did not contribute which the poster did not have, and not the methodology behind the accounting.

Unless of course you shared that information with him.

[EFerrari]

47. Your words. n/t

[Malva Zebrina]

49. and as I have pointed out, they are not appropos to your accusation

You have dissembled. You are spinning. You are making false accusations, making the words fit your conclusion, which is false.

[EFerrari]

51. Malva, I'm so sorry. I have to feed my family now. Would you

please just look at what you just wrote and think about who is accusing and attacking? Good luck and thanks for all the fish.
B.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

54. It is humbling to get such an amazing response for a just cause.

DUers, you rock!

[Malva Zebrina]

61. Thanks nt

[swag]

31. Nice post. I donated too.

But if you have ever been victimized a con, or have studied the methods of con-artistry in books like "The Art of the Steal" by Frank Abagnale or the classic study "The Big Con" by David Maurer, you couldn't help but feel at least a little hint of suspicion, and maybe a more compelling twinge that you should be more careful.

I have two major con artists in my family, and many members of the extended family have been taken for very convincing and expensive, yet ultimately hollow and false rides by these family members (who are still at it).

I don't know Andy at all, except through his posts here and through a streaming video I once saw about a matter involving James Guckert's "mother." Still, I felt compelled to give. And I hope that his surgery goes very well. Best to you, Andy.

But even though I feel my money went for good this time, I will be much more cautious next time.

Everyone else in the world may have 999% confidence in someone who is proposing something or who is soliciting donations, but it's important to note that "confidence" is what a "con" is all about. The stories are always compelling, and the objective is always to gain first the confidence and then the money of the "mark."

Also, I think all these Andy threads need to go in the lounge, but I have expressed this to the Admins.

[_testify_]

32. I agree with you on all counts.

My father was swindled out of his life savings by his BOSS of all people. My church was swindled out of its donations by our pastor. I personally have had my rent money stolen by someone I would have taken a bullet for at the time. It's hard not to be cynical, but it still makes me feel dirty.

The definition of a cynic, according to HL Mencken:

"A cynic is a man who, when he smells flowers, looks around for a coffin."

[Malva Zebrina]

39. I agree with you

about the lounge. I also think that all fundraising events should NOT be acceptable on DU in the future.

A personal web site dedicated to raising money is the better vehicle for those who want to help any one person, imho.

[merh]

41. testify

Please, don't assume that comments made regarding certain posters actions were meant to include you or anyone else that had doubts after the trolls sabotage of the efforts made on behalf of Andy. Thank you for your honest post. Don't feel bad about having doubts. :hug:

The cockroach comments are meant for the pseudo DUers that come here to instigate such hate fests as what you observed and whose only goal is to harm respected DUers and spread their hate. They know who they are, after awhile you will be able to tell who they are. They feign true concern, they logically explain away their actions, which are fostered by their contempt, and then they go running under rocks when the light of truth is shown. You will be able to tell by their tone and their posture. Some come running to threads like this to say all sorts of things, but you can tell from their posts that they are mean and just want to hurt and attack.

DU did a wonderful thing, as did you in donating based upon blind faith. Thank you for caring. We all should be proud and celebrate what we did. Not just for Andy, but for the sake of our community.

Don't let the name calling get to you. For the sake of entertainment, you may want to read this locked thread. It is a great explanation of the troll or freepers attempts and methods.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=229715

Welcome to DU! :hi:

Thanks again for caring and sharing! :hug:

[Malva Zebrina]

46. and you know what

I have just discovered today, that there is a huge battle between someplace called CU and the FR. THAT is the problem here. If you want to fight those people go there. If you want to carry over the paranoia to people who have genuine and honest concerns who are valid DU members, then think twice. Because they expressed an opinion that does not go with any so called accepted opinion, they are disrupters from those other places and they are called names and they are harmed

That is not right.

Take that battle over there, because it eats away at everybody and harms a lot of well meaning people.

It reduces to sheer vindictiveness, suspicion and hate to anyone who may offer up some alternative opinion.

Imo that is a sickness and blight here.

[merh]

50. I didn't address you and I would prefer you not post to me.

I thanked testify for the honest post and provided some background that may be helpful in understanding the dynamics and the evil under currents that can occur here.

I did not mention any names, but gosh, if the shoe fits :shrug:

I am sure you rushed to Andy's threads to review the documentation so that your innocent thirst for truth and proof could be satisfied. I bet you even apologized for being one of those that expected the proof.

Hey, if you donated and want you money back, let me know. The offer I made yesterday is still good. I'd hate for you to be out one penny, but then again!

:hi: May you reap all that you sow! ;-)

peace!

[Malva Zebrina]

53. then put me on ignore

I will answer anywhere I see fit.

[merh]

55. How adult of you.

:sarcasm:

[Malva Zebrina]

60. Merh

the function is there. Just use it. I will continue to post to those posts I see fit to respond to.

[merh]

62. Keep going, soon you may just go off on someone

or lose your cool all together. I mean, you know, some times being so deliberate and so cautious in what we say can really tax us. Hate to let those true feelings show. :eyes:

So, since you insist upon posting to my posts, tell me, what did you think of the records, do they satisfy your concerns? :shrug:

[Malva Zebrina]

63. What records?

Do you mean the records posted by Andy? Yes. It was unfortunate,but so far all that has been recorded in this case has been public for at least 60,000 people to see and read about from the beginning somewhere in the beginning of March. It was necessary to clear up some lingering questions, even by some who were with it all the way. It is also unfortunate that this could not have been clearer from the beginning.

The part about it that was really cruel and that is disconcerting was the reaction of posters to those who questioned, in their zeal to support Andy. Those names were not necessary. That, I suspect, now that I have been to CU and FR and understand the dynamics here that goes on, was aimed more at them over there than at any DU'er. And that is crazy, imo.

I will not lose my cool. Too old to do that--might get a stroke or something-- although I did use the "F" word for the first time in my entire life just recently.

[merh]

64. As I tried to explain to you yesterday, before you began your

attacks on me and your petty condenscending comments about me wanting recognition, those that were "attacked" were the same ones that had promoted the discontent and perpetuated the lies.

No one objected to the questions, they objected to the repetitious asking of the questions by the same posters when they knew full well that the questions had been answered.

Your resentment of fundraisers is noted, but your resentment should not be a hinderance to completing the efforts or to celebrating the success of the efforts.

If you enjoy being unreasonable that is your right I suppose. I just don't think you have a right to attack me or others and then accuse us of attacking you. You are quick to defend those that ask questions, yet slow to apologize to those you have insulted. Can you understand why those varied postures can make one question your sincerety?

[Malva Zebrina]

66. I am a poster here

I am poster here like you or anyone else.

I am not on an agenda to attack you or anyone. You responded to my posts and I replied according to my sincere views.

Reasonable or unreasonable, is a subjective judgement.

I don't believe I have insulted anyone. The insult may be perceived as a difference of opinion but

I have not resorted to name calling , such as "cockroaches" because anyone person had reasonable questions .

Look--there were questions. People had them. They avoided posting because of fear or some other reason. What is so bad or threatening about that? What about that could not be handled by anyone, if the person was sincere?

unless they were unfairly suspected of being enemies and CU'ers instead of Du'ers--

Do you think that is a possibility? If not, how do you explain the hostility?

[merh]

68. Stop bringing those other forums into this.

And you intended the insults that were contained in your petty posts, you can't deny that. You would be surprised at the number of other posters that pmailed me wondering why you were attacking me. We could have had a free for all, if I had taken them up on their offers to come to my defense.

Then, when rational efforts are made to explain the situation to you, instead of understanding, you again attack. You claim to be older, yet you react like a youngster.

As far as cockroaches, I can't explain why a general description of habits of negative folks bothered you. That is something you have to contend with.

Simple question (you do have a tendency to slip). Two posts or so ago you purportedly had just learned about one of those other forums, now you are an expert. How in the world did you gain such expertise? I mean, how odd is that!

If the shoe fits, the first chicken to cackle, the first cockroach to scurry. They are just phrases, they are not the direct attacks you have made on me and others.

Since you read the threads, I would suggest you go back and reread your posts. Maybe you will see how poisonous they were.

[Malva Zebrina]

73. and you would be surprised at the ones who PM'd me

This is a new discovery for me--those other sites.

No doubt in my mind that the vehemence directed at others who are well meaning Du'ers but whose opinions may differ, stems from a big adolescent type fight with those on those other boards. There is where the real "naysayers" are, not here. But some of us may have interpreted insults directed at those on those sites as directed at us.

IMO that approach is sick and it is destructive, imo.

[merh]

75. No one has insulted you - you are the attacker.

And if you got pm's, I'd check their sources, they could be from those posters from that other world you seem so fond of referencing.

BTW: a valiant try to recover. :hi:

[EFerrari]

88. "Imo that is a sickness and blight here."

We just raised $50,000.00 for a friend in need that contradicts that.

In 10s and 20s and with love and dedication.

Sickness and blight? No, that's just plain wrong, too.

[ultraist]

42. I appreciate your honesty, testify!

I think you made a wise choice in waiting until more facts came in to post about your doubts and concerns. There were a few posters who obviously were jumping on the chance to be vicious and judgmental. Some, if not all, probably didn't even donate.

It seems to me, if someone was sincerely seeking out the truth, they would have PMed their concerns or waited until all of the facts were revealed, rather than publicly humiliate someone who is already struggling. Why would someone want to cast a shadow on all of us who donated and someone who is already struggling? I can't help but to question their motives. We were told that this was being worked on.

This is not to say, that having concerns or doubts is unreasonable, simply that it's the way in which they are handled which is important. Civility and decorum can go a long way, as you have demonstrated here. ;)

I also agree that when we choose to give, we should give with no strings attached. That is the true spirit of giving. I think it's despicable to make a donation and then ask for it back. We must take responsibility for our actions.

[n2mark]

59. I doubted also

but today I mailed my to check. Andy has been around DU for quite some time and enjoyed reading his posts. The fact the Will Pitt knows Andy is enough for me. I respect Will Pitt alhough I don't know him, but he does have credentials. If Will is lying all I have to say is he is messing up his future. Don't think so! He is too talented. So Will Pitt whoever you are thank you.

[_testify_]

77. thank you. I sort of regret posting this now though

I didn't want people to get upset and all...I just needed to say what I did in the OP, pretty much for selfish reasons. But thanks for the kind words :hug:

[lonestarnot]

56. Ah fuck you!

[Bunny]

65. Do you mean this? Seems pretty harsh.

[lonestarnot]

79. I just think that before causing such a stir, this person should have done

some look see for themselves.

[_testify_]

78. succintly put.

[Sparkle]

84. I didn't know we could respond to other posters this way.

Thanks!

[lonestarnot]

85. LOL

[Catherine Vincent]

57. We forgive you.

:-)

[elehhhhna]

70. Dear Freeps on DU: Baltimore? Give us some credit!

Said it before, please say it with me now : If a TrueBlue DUer wants to scam somebody, the purported treatment will be somewhere BETTER than Baltimore-- most certainly OFFSHORE.

We're not morans.

[merh]

72. LOL

:rofl:

[Spazito]

76. I appreciate your honesty, no negativity from me

I donated to Andy and never had a moment's doubt for a number of reasons, most to do with Andy himself and a little to do with a sense of guilt and sadness that anyone should have to do what Andy had to do to receive care that everyone should be entitled to automatically. Being Canadian, I know I will never have to do that to get care if I become ill and need surgery to live. I certainly cannot donate to all in the US who have health needs and cannot get help due to cost but I could help Andy, someone I have the greatest respect and admiration for in both his work ethic and his passion for justice.

I knew, however, there would be those who would doubt due to the horrific, insidious and calculated attack that was timed just right and I could understand those doubts. I respect you very much in that you did not try to alarm others but dealt with your doubts within yourself and you did wait until you knew how it would resolve itself within you before posting your struggle. I think you dealt with this in a very best way you could.

[ultraist]

80. What a dignified response Spazito!

I'm not surprised though, coming from you!

:toast:

[Spazito]

81. wow, and thank you so much for your kindness!

I appreciate it beyond words.

[enigmatic]

82. Great post.

You nailed it.

[enigmatic]

83. Thanks for this post.

It was honest, from the heart, and most importantly, devoid of malicious intent.

It took alot of guts to post, and I salute you:)