She's not a good writer....she's a good copy-and-paster.....MAYBE.
And more importantly....hasn't Alegre claimed that she has never met and/or that she does not work for Clinton???
Dosen't this prove otherwise and therefore make her a liar???
Part of blogging is finding an article or something and posting about it (not always, but most of the time). Alegre lays out what she wants well and gets her point across very clearly. Moreover, she has a following. I would say that makes her effective and a good writer.
I have no knowledge of whether she met Clinton or works on the campaign, but particpating in a conference call does not make her a liar on those points.
make one "good" at anything, especially writing.
David Broder has a following.......the Cleveland Browns have a following.....Bush has a following.....O'Reilly has a following.....
Broder is not a good writer, the Browns are not a good football team, Bush is not a good President, and O'Reilly is not a good tv show host.
So, if one meets a candidate, that makes them paid by that candidate? No I don't believe Alegre has said she never met her. I am sure she has, but she is obviously not a "paid" blogger. If you listened to the audio you can tell she is no more a paid blogger than Armando, or the rest of the questioners on the call.
I don't know her personally but I think I've learned enough about her strength and character over the past year to know that she's not one who gives up easily.
