Post Gets it Wrong on Harry Reid
UPDATE: Wait 'til you read this!
A reader has a beef with the Washington Post... "OK I give, how do we get WaPo to listen. ... Notice they bring up the Marianas without a mention that Reid was a co-sponsor of the bill to raise the minimum wage. Many thanks to Josh (more here) for picking up on the BS. But IMO this deserves to be slammed but good. ..." - kewala
We're all over it. The Cato Institute reprints an article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal entitled, "Harry Reid is Right." There's a big difference between taking lobbying money from your constituents, which is legal, and taking lobbying money in a pay to play pay off scheme, in which Jack Abramoff and the Republicans were engaged. Remember, the Republicans control Congress, and Harry Reid didn't take a dime from Abramoff because Jack didn't give a dime to Democrats.
As for how to contact the Post, kewala, they've devised a feedback form that is attached to the reporters name in the byline. I can't wait to hear what you have to say about that one.
A reader has a beef with the Washington Post... "OK I give, how do we get WaPo to listen. ... Notice they bring up the Marianas without a mention that Reid was a co-sponsor of the bill to raise the minimum wage. Many thanks to Josh (more here) for picking up on the BS. But IMO this deserves to be slammed but good. ..." - kewala
We're all over it. The Cato Institute reprints an article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal entitled, "Harry Reid is Right." There's a big difference between taking lobbying money from your constituents, which is legal, and taking lobbying money in a pay to play pay off scheme, in which Jack Abramoff and the Republicans were engaged. Remember, the Republicans control Congress, and Harry Reid didn't take a dime from Abramoff because Jack didn't give a dime to Democrats.
As for how to contact the Post, kewala, they've devised a feedback form that is attached to the reporters name in the byline. I can't wait to hear what you have to say about that one.
posted by Taylor Marsh at 10:15 AM
4 Comments:
This is intentional and selectively disingenuous dissemination of misinformation (or you can try to believe they're all just really lazy), and Peter Daou is spot on about how and why this continues.
This issue should be "howelled" just as loudly as were Ms. Howell's actions - the raison d'etre for this blog - and repeated with every attempt to play hide and mis-speak with the facts.
Harry Reid is caught in this scandal like a couple of male prostitutes at Barney Frank's condo.
Admit it - Reid may well be the first one to be indicted in the Abramoff scandal. And oh how rich that would be.
Nancy Pelosi will stop using that "culture of corruption" crappola real fast.
Hello again Jimbo Brady!
Once again you are nattering away about the mean old bloggers who make you cry. My god you have got to be the biggest damn sissy I've seen since elementary school. You've got thinner skin than old 60-grit Kate herself!
Now since several THOUSAND people have emailed you, and left posts on the WAPOO blog which have been selectively deleted by you, I am convinced that you know that your paper is continuing to LIE. It's not that you are getting the issue wrong. YOU ARE DELIBERATELY LYING.
Now I have to ask myself, why on earth would a formerly respectable institution like the Washington Post go out of its way to LIE about these extremely important stories of the day? And of course I can't help but notice that all of the other main stream media outlets are also LYING, or just plain ignoring these important news stories. (Yes I know, that runaway bride really needed 24/7 coverage for a month...my god the horror if we hadn't been up to the minute on that drama!)
I'm not sure exactly why you are LYING, and CONTINUING TO LIE, but here are my speculations:
1. You are a devout, wacko Republican yourself, and you are going to twist any story that makes the party look bad.
2. You are a completely immoral shill, being paid lots of money by the Republicans, to spin bad news for them.
3. You are really a decent person, but you did something bad a few years ago, and the Republicans are blackmailing you.
4. You are just a thin-skinned fucktard.
Now please kindly identify which of the four is true, so we can make more informed decisions about whether or not to continue paying for Wapoo services?
Oh, and could you please do us all a favor, and stop crying like a girl, and actually do your damned job?
Thank you!
I can only believe it is a large case of hubris. The entire paper seems to have it.
Post a Comment
<< Home