The Washington Post was busted last week for trying to put on a series of "salons" that would have brought together lobbyists, lawmakers, other D.C. bigwigs and representatives of the newspaper.

The Post couldn't backtrack fast enough after it was reported that the newspaper's marketing department was trying to shake down sponsors to the tune of $25,000 per salon, or $250,000 for 11 events.

Fliers sent out to potential sponsors read: "Bring your organization's CEO or executive director literally to the table. Interact with key Obama administration and congressional leaders."

I won't bore you with details of the Post's response to the uproar. The publisher basically said that while the newspaper was actively looking for new ways to make money, the flier "completely misrepresented what we were trying to do." A spokeswoman for the paper said the intent was to have a minimum of two sponsors for each salon, to limit the influence of any one group, but the flier said there would be no more than two.

That's what is known as "spin," and not very convincing spin at that.

If nothing else, though, the incident did convince me to cancel my own little discussion series, "Koffee Klatches with Ed."

The idea was that I was going to meet with people who wanted to hear insights on the news business, stories that were interesting but not newsworthy, or jokes that were too risqué for family audiences.

So much for that idea

I had no plans to solicit sponsors, and I wasn't even going to accept free coffee, but now with the Washington Post making a hash of the whole concept, I am canceling the series. I didn't want to field phone calls from journalism-ethics watchdogs, asking me if was fair to offer extracurricular access to newspaper readers, some of whom may not have been physically able to get to the coffee shop, or others who may have had religious scruples about indulging in caffeine.

(If anyone wants to pay $250,000 for 11 such get-togethers, however, I am prepared at least to rethink my ethical misgivings. Please contact me.)

The good news is that my near brush with ethical failure gives me all the more standing to weigh in on a variety of recent incidents involving ethical boundaries, moral principles and other matters of conscience.

For starters, there is the ethically tricky question of whether the Obama administration should have spoken in advance with a "reporter" from the Huffington Post about pitching a question at a presidential press conference.

I think it was wrong. Obama should simply have charged the reporter $250 for the opportunity, as he does with representatives of the mainstream media.

The easiest ethical question of the week was whether South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, after saying he hoped to reconcile with his wife, should have gone on to say of his Argentine mistress: "I will be able to die knowing that I had met my soul mate."

If newsprint wasn't so expensive, I would have this word - "NO" - printed in foot-high letters. Sanford makes the Post publisher look like Einstein. And let me just say that Mrs. Sanford would be justified in requesting, and the South Carolina Legislature would be justified in granting, an appropriation to buy the governor a one-way ticket to Buenos Aires.

Hopping to the other end of the Western Hemisphere, was Sarah Palin acting responsibly when she resigned Friday as governor of Alaska? Although the temptation to say "You betcha!" is almost irresistible, I have to conclude that, on the whole, she is shortchanging the people of Alaska.

With her in the governor's mansion, Alaska got more free publicity than at any time since the great earthquake of 1964. Of course, if rumors are true that she is resigning only to become queen of the Independent Sovereignty of Alaska, this would be a gold mine for her subjects and there would be no ethical problem.

Finally, was it ethical of Gazette copy editor Craig Lancaster to point out on his "Watch Yer Language" blog that this headline ran over a story in the British tabloid The Sun: "Mexican wrestling midget brothers found dead after hooker romp"?

Since it gave me the opportunity to reprint the headline while distancing myself from it, my answer would have to be "yes."

And there's this: On June 21, I wrote about "The Greatest Place to Stand in the United States" contest, and I nominated a few of my own favorite spots in Montana. To look at nominations (and a couple of photos) sent in by readers, go to the online version of today's column and follow the links.