http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-meets-press-lunch_701158.html

President Barack Obama had lunch Tuesday with members of his cheerleading squad, the anchors of the networks...But we likely won't find out what was discussed: The entire luncheon was off the record.

"The anchors of all three broadcast evening newscasts -- NBC’s Brian Williams, ABC’s Diane Sawyer and CBS’s Scott Pelley -- will be in attendance," Huffington Post reported today.

Former aides to Democratic politicians who are now working as [supposed]  journalists were scheduled to be in attendance, too. And there are quite a few of those!

"Some cable hosts will also be on hand, including MSNBC's Chris Matthews (may need medication to control his tingling). George Stephanopoulos, co-host of ABC's 'Good Morning America,' is attending." George did the dirty work for Clinton, no doubt he can advise the latest liberal President as well as getting his marching orders... George is the head of ABC News, which has had very little critical to say about Obama....funny, that.

The lunch is an annual affair. "The annual lunch, which is off-the-record, allows the president to frame his upcoming speech before influential figures in TV news, all of whom will be leading or part of their networks' [fawning] coverage later on. "

Two Fox News hosts were supposedly invited, the literal skunks at the Garden Party, no doubt.

"Bush did it, too" ...in 3...2...1..

Do you think Wallace and Breir were also given their talking points?

 

 

Oh NO! Obama did it so it must be bad .

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

What a whiner you are.

But no doubt they needed the foxnews shiny t*rds in attendance to have someone to make fun of.

 

 

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

Ah.

 

So really, you just made this up, then ranted. As always.

 

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

Yawn

Chris Wallace, Sheppard Smith, and Brett Baier were the FoxNews anchors invited to the lunch.

And yes, Bush had these lunches as well.  As did Clinton, Bush Sr, Reagan, Carter...etc.  Its an annual tradition. 

How dare anyone think that the POTUS is a darling to the alphabet media!!

you are just a mad republican and should be silenced!!

Get  yer WH talking points here, freshly delivered yesterday at the off-the-record lunch... 

George Stephanopoulos on Wednesday's Good Morning America delighted over Barack Obama's "dramatic," "emotional" and "ambitious" speech. During live coverage of last night's Republican response, however, the former top Clinton aide lectured viewers that Marco Rubio's speech was "hard-edged."

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz2KntRMq00

George S. also spewed the liberal drivel at Marco Rubio when he appeared as a guest...

Good of Georgie to gave Marco Rubio hard questions, all pols should get some; too bad Georgie can't do so to his liberal friends and drinking buddies ...

In response to DamainAllen's comment:

'

 

Again.... 

60+% of alphabet reporting was critical of Bush.

60+% of alphabet reporting is positive of Obama.

 

In response to tvoter's comment:

Maybe because Bush wasn't a good president?  9/11, two unfunded wars, GITMO, presiding over the financial collaspe as the bubble grew then burst, and thats just the big ticket stuff.  Not every president is created equal and Bush had an appalling run of 8 years and we still haven't shaken off the stink of his presidency. 

 

In response to DamainAllen's comment:

Spoken like a true blue blind partisan. Thank for playing!

In response to tvoter's comment:

Except that it's all true.

 

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

Its also true that the current admin is no better.

No jobs

still getting attacked

doubled our debt

super partisan

Gitmo still open

expanded the privacy issues that were bad pre-09!

less accountiblity

less transparency

et etc

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

 

In response to tvoter's comment:

 

In response to DamainAllen's comment:

 

Maybe because Bush wasn't a good president?  9/11, two unfunded wars, GITMO, presiding over the financial collaspe as the bubble grew then burst,

Spoken like a true blue blind partisan. Thank for playing!

"Except that it's all true."

Kind of proves the point, doesn it? The liberal media reinforces your liberal views....rarely do the networks cover a story in a way that doesnt fit with their preconceived liberal notions...they do not make their fellow liberals uncomfortable.

"Bush was a bad President" , like "Obama has done a great job with the economy" is an opinion: this is self evidently true to you and all who share your skewed progressive world view: Brian Wiilliams, George S., and all the  progressive faux reporters in the mainstream media...

Journalists are not supposed to take sides...but they do.

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

No, it doesn't.

The examples given above are beside the mainstream media opinion, not in spite of it.  One could argue whether they amount to "good president" or not, but not with the events themselves.

I don't see anyone or anything reporting that Obama is doing a wonderful job with the economy.  I've never said it either.  The question is how much of the economy is within or without his control.  The recovery has been slow, but it's still a recovery by any standard.

And none of this accounts for our inherent bias...which seems much stronger in the righties here than the lefties...but again, that's just my opinion.

Or maybe you should learn the difference between fact and fiction.

 

 

 

In response to DamainAllen's comment:

 

The.......Larch....