The Washington Post to host cozy $250,000 meet and greets between lobbyists, editors and Democrats

The Washington Post’s revenue plan of facilitating expensive meetings between lobbyists, Post writers and editors, Democrat and Obama administration officials has finally been outed. There was even a slick marketing piece promoting the deal that would cost big pharmacy, trial lawyers and “green” energy lobbyists up to $250,000 to dine and meet with the elite.

Sickening. But this has been going on “informally” at the New York Times, LA Times, San Francisco Chronicle and Washington Post for years. Only the editorial elites didn’t charge for it.

More on media bias…

Know we know that the Washington Post and Kaiser (cheap health care) org were planning a July get together at the publisher’s elegant home. Any news in your daily newspaper about this? 

Next, we find out that about 30 elite reporters went to an “off the record” party at the White House on July 4th.

US WEEKLY — I have a new name for the racist rag: PU-US Weekly or Puss Weekly. Note the magazine didn’t touch the John Edwards cheating on his dying wife scandal.

Babies lies and scandal for Sarah Palin. Love and apple pie for Michelle Obama.

With the pressure on from blogs, and falling respect for the mainstream media, the Washington Post’s Deborah Howell did a little research and admitted to the obvious. At the same time, Pew research reports falling ratings and trust in mainstream media. Only 30 percent trust CNN.

By Deborah Howell
Sunday, August 17, 2008

Democrat Barack Obama has had about a 3 to 1 advantage over Republican John McCain in Post Page 1 stories since Obama became his party’s presumptive nominee June 4. Obama has generated a lot of news by being the first African American nominee, and he is less well known than McCain — and therefore there’s more to report on. But the disparity is so wide that it doesn’t look good.

In overall political stories from June 4 to Friday, Obama dominated by 142 to 96. Obama has been featured in 35 stories on Page 1; McCain has been featured in 13, with three Page 1 references with photos to stories on inside pages. Fifteen stories featured both candidates and were about polls or issues such as terrorism, Social Security and the candidates’ agreement on what should be done in Afghanistan.

Yes, we knew. Thanks for coming forward. It’s a day late and a few dollars short.

The Media Research Center has been reporting the fall in credibility for a decade.

1. Media Credibility Plummets, Just 30% Believe ‘Most Trusted’ CNN
“Over the last 10 years,” the just-released biennial news consumption survey from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press determined, “virtually every news organization or program has seen its credibility marks decline” and “Democrats continue to give most news organizations much higher credibility ratings than do Republicans.” Based on past Pew polls, CNN touts itself as “the most trusted name in news,” but the percent who “believe all or most” of what CNN reports has fallen 12 points, to 30 percent, since Pew first posed the question in 1998. Yet, in a sign of how far the news media have fallen in the eyes of the public, that puts CNN at the top of the 12 television news outlets analyzed, as well as above all the newspapers and online sources. Believability for ABC News, CBS News and NBC News is down six points over the past ten years, to 24 percent for ABC and NBC, 22 percent for CBS, but that’s still better than the mere 18 percent who “believe all or most” of what they read in the New York Times. The extensive polling conducted in May also discovered that the audiences for CNN and MSNBC “which were heavily Democratic two years ago, have become even more so: fully 51 percent of CNN’s regular viewers are Democrats while only 18 percent are Republicans.” And “the regular audience for nightly network news also is now about two-to-one Democratic (45 percent vs. 22 percent Republican).”

“Liberalisim Is a Mental Disorder,” According to Michael Savage

Leeland Eisenberg, the crazed hostage taker in New Hampshire, is a liberal Democrat. I wonder what he was asking for? Why didn’t CNN report what Eisenberg wanted? Is this going to be another coverup by the elite, liberal media?

UPDATE: Now we hear from the hostages. They are talking. Eisenberg wanted help from Hillary Clinton! He was a fan and a Democrat and he thought she would get him free meds! What a country!

By Mick Gregory

A best-selling book by Michael Savage titiled “Liberalisim Is a Mental Disorder” may not be so far off the mark, after reading online about the Hillary Clinton hostage crisis. It turns out that the man with a fake bomb strapped to him was asking for Hillary’s help. Leeland Eisenberg is a local resident of the run down New Hampshire town called Rochester, and a well known liberal. Mr. Eisenberg has issues with the tiny town’s administration and “unlawful searches” by police. See what I mean in the rest of the story.

Leeland Eisenberg sounds a lot like Hillary, Obama and especially Harry Reed.

It turns out that Eisenberg even wanted to talk things over with Wolf Blitzer at CNN. What was it he wanted to discuss Wolfie?

I thought something was odd about the coverage. There were no details on what the irate man wanted. No statements what so ever. How about just a few words about what he ways saying? It must have been a little too much for the public to handle. The truth will come out in a few days on Web sites.

Wolfie Blitzer on CNN’s Situation Room said “on air” that the man had called the CNN bureau in Washington during the crisis and talked to staffers — not Blitzer. The CNN anchor also said that Eisenberg had called another CNN office as well. He apparently is fond of CNN and has the utmost respect for the leftist network.

Blitzer said the cable news network executives decided not to reveal these conversations earlier in the day, so it would not interfere with any negotiations. (Blitzer was recently in the spotlight for playing softball with Hillary during the Democrat presidential candidates debate). I think they didn’t want to report the embarrassing subject matter this liberal was spouting off.

Police and locals said that Eisenberg, who took the hostages, has had “issues” with local law enforcement. There was a case recently, involving Eisenberg, who reputedly has some mental problems. Yeah. So? Don’t most liberals in small, cold, rust belt towns?

Back on March 16 this year, local media reported on
Rochester police coming up with a public safety idea for fighting auto theft. But some residents — including Eisenberg — were outraged at their plan.

The plan: checking car doors, and if unlocked, leaving behind a warning flyer to the owner.

“It’s an outrage, it’s an absolute outrage,” said Eisenberg in one report. He claimed the intrusion into his Chevy violates the Fourth Amendment, and raised such a fuss that his picture appeared in a local newspaper.

“That’s a crime. They violated my civil rights and the rights of many citizens in this city that are not even aware of it,” said Eisenberg, who was now asking state and federal authorities to investigate the Rochester police.

Eisenberg said he thinks police searched his car illegally, because it was clean when he parked it for the night and dirty with ash from the ashtray the next morning, when he found the flier. How about those Hillary ’08 bumper stickers?

Meanwhile, a scientific study out today backs up Savage as well.

A new research study by the well-respected Gallup organization finds:
Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats or independents to rate their mental health as excellent; forming their opinions from their environment.

Fifty-eight percent of Republicans report having excellent mental health, compared to 43% of independents and 38% of Democrats. This relationship between party identification and reports of excellent mental health persists even within categories of income, age, gender, church attendance, and education.

The basic data — based on an aggregated sample of more than 4,000 interviews conducted since 2004 — are straightforward.