That's how it is. The Washington Post hides under a liberal cloak much the same way Tom Davis does. The Post effect is to muddy the waters and confuse the Democrat's ideas as to either they're not united or they're wrong, whatever.  So what you have is the Washington Times all conservative and the Washington Post split up, the net effect is GOP victory.

Tom Davis and his connections at the Post work in the same way and together. Davis uses his ins at the Post to get the moderate vote, and he's already got the conservative one--so he's ahead there. Davis record indicates that he is a solid right winger. Plenty of examples, too numerous to go in to now. But hey, maybe that's why Davis gets so much good press from the Post, they're alike!!!

WaPo showed it's Red State streak again when it criticized Edwards on the front page yesterday for "few fresh ideas" on poverty.  Well, we know how to fix the worst of poverty, DUH.  Hillary had a plan to fix it a decade ago.  We fixed the ugliest and vastness of elderly poverty with Social Security, and we can do it for children, now that they make up most of the country's poor.  Where Edwards is different in committment, prominence, visibility, and action.  That's new.  The last time the Post was interested in poverty was in 1980 when it hired fiction writer Janet Cooke to do a news story on "little Jimmy's World."

Not sure about Dana Priest (Andrea Chamblee - 5/8/2007 10:38:54 PM)

Salon's Mark Benjamin was the one that broke the Walter Reed story in 2005.  And the Post admitted it knew about "black hole" prisons for years before it covered that story, too.

If the NYT hadn't been trying to break the Pentagon Papers in the Post's backyard, Post editors and the Graham family would have sat on that, too.  (They are Republicans, you know, and they benefit from the FCC deregulation because without it they could not buy radio and TV.)  As a rule, WaPo hates the NYT; that's why they run endless stories on Jason Blair who had to resign in disgrace.

The Boston Globe runs stories on Tom Davis that the Post won't run. If it were the Times, WaPo would get off its lazy tuchas.

These days the WaPo does seem to go out of its way to avoid investigating the Establishment. Most of its news articles seem to be stenographic fluff based on press handouts/briefings or wire service themes.

What happened to the shoe leather, the phone calls, the cultivation of sources, the search for embarrassing documents, the wish to inform the public?

Every time I extend my WaPo subscription, I ask myself: "Why am I doing this? I'm certainly not getting any news value added this way."

Back to the web.

Ok I am fired up now you happy

Loyal members of the loco left

Dan Froomkin
Eugene Robinson
Marc Fisher

There three left wing flaming liberals off the top of my head happy jeez

Go ahead and troll rate me Im pissed

Marc Fisher is no flaming liberal dude. I would put him as a moderate republican, along the lines of a Rudy G from New York. He comes down pretty damn hard on the dems at times. So calm down. The Washington Times helps the GOP more than the Washington Post helps the dems--thus the GOP win print media in the area. Fact.