A few days ago--- The Washington Posts's own Eugene Robinson smacks Fred Hiatt upside the head over their coverage of Pelosi's trip to Syria...
Check out this appearance by Robinson on Hardball. Robinson defends Pelosi's trip to Syria. And he also says a couple things about his colleagues on the editorial page, which is edited by Fred Hiatt. He says this: "I`m pleased to be able to tell you I`m not a member of the editorial board." And this: "They should tell us what they really think."
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Why is "The Washington Post" trashing Nancy Pelosi for doing basically what Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton said to do, engage the neighborhood over there in the Middle East?
EUGENE ROBINSON, "WASHINGTON POST": I`m pleased to be able to tell you I`m not a member of the editorial board, and you know, I write my columns, they do their editorials. I can tell you where I stand on it, which is that...
MATTHEWS: First of all, let`s hear what your newspaper, the mother ship, has to say on this topic. This is the editorial page. I`m quoting from it. You know, this used to be a liberal newspaper, "The Washington Post," back in Nixon`s day with Ben Bradlee and others back there, Meg Greenfield, the editorial page editor. It is not a liberal paper. It`s a hawkish paper.
Quote, "We have found much to criticize in Mr. Bush`s military strategy and regional diplomacy, but Ms. Pelosi`s attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it`s foolish."
Pretty strong, Gene.
ROBINSON: Pretty strong. You know...
ROBINSON: ... they should tell us what they really think. You know, I mean, I think that she`s right on the substance. She`s clearly right on the substance. Of course, we should be talking to Syria. And you know, this policy that if we don`t like a regime, you know, we pretend -- you know, we cover our ears and we don`t talk to them, is absurd. If Syria can be helpful or is being harmful in Iraq, in Lebanon, whatever, we should talk to them.