I keep finding more reactions (all of them unfavorable) to the Times' decision to hire Bill Kristol. At Huffington Post, for example, both Erica Jong and Robert Elisberg have now weighed in.

It occurs to me now, that perhaps it was a good thing for Rosenthal to make such a ill-thought-out decision, if only because so many people have been so inspired to write what they really think about Kristol's lack of common sense or any real analytical ability. That might not have happened if he had merely stayed in his safe zones.

Which makes me think that perhaps all of those pundits that we complain about because they've been so well-rewarded for being so wrong about everything before, during, and after the Iraq invasion and occupation, just need even bigger and better promotions, in order to make them even better targets, too. Something to think about... (Of course, I'm not sure it would have happened for Kristol if Time hadn't first let him go. Sympathy, you know...)

The best part is that everyone has such great points to make and they're not all identical, and none are about Kristol being a conservative. Iow, an organized drive with set talking points obviously was not required.

Rosenthal is getting a lot of grief for this decision, and deservedly so. Let's hope it's the gift that just keeps on giving.

Kind of makes you wonder, though, if we've been going about it all wrong... maybe a few well-placed and (ironically) fulsome letters praising the efforts of the warmongers would get better results. ;~) Making them even more visible...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erica-jong/warmongers-rise-to-the-to_b_79521.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/ny-times-looks-i_b_78917.html

As a matter of fact, I do have a pretty nice set of pots and pans, and I can put together a really got pot of soup.

...a really "good" pot of soup!

If I, a person without the myriad resources of the M$M, could have foreseen a few months ago that Huckabee was likely to rise in the GOP field... I can only conclude that too much proximity actually interferes with reporters' and pundits' analytical abilities.

Naturally, we would prefer the political media to be better. But since they are not, we must enter this election cycle with the media we have, not the media we wish we had. In that frame of mind, perhaps we can use them in ways they would never intend. Some sort of triangulation or parallax (I'll leave it to the more technically minded) of the pundits' stories probably reveals the actual Truth.

Just as we've learned that GWB (and most of the GOP) will project their own bad acts and behaviors onto the Left, we can also be sure that the media are revealing to us in every story and blog post, not the tendencies of the voters, but their own biases, which are probably at odds with the interests of the rest of us.

The process of elimination, or reverse psychology, I don't care what we call it, only that we find a way to use it.

He was also put over the top by independents and Republicans caucusing as Democrats.

When comparing Obama and Hillary by looking at Democrats only, the results were much closer. In upcoming states that may mean something.

And... I am another one who is unwilling to count Edwards out yet.

No cable in my house. So, I have to keep up online. Actually, it's probably better this way...

If even Chris Matthews (noted GOP apologist) is also dissing Kristol, things may be looking up.

It's been a long time since I've heard anyone mention The Peter Principle. Maybe it's time we dusted off a few copies...

That was perfect. And so succinct. ;~)

Re: Dodd

Last night when Jim Lehrer asked Shields and Brooks why Dodd's and Biden's campaigns (and maybe Richardson's, too) hadn't had more traction... Brooks actually said it was the media's fault, that they hadn't covered them well enough.

Can you imagine?

LWM

I think Iowa is an "open" state.

See: http://www.fairvote.org/?page=1801

-- bystander

I was watching PBS last night before and after the caucus, and they explained that voters could register or re-register at the polls. So, I was counting the Republicans who re-registered as Democrats as really being Republicans.

Since we know that Obama has exhibited a lot of appeal for Republicans, there's no sense in considering them as new Democrats yet.