The New Editor talks about it on the part of both the democrats, and a media that refuses to report on it.

[Update at 8:20 PM EDT]

And Hugh Hewitt continues to express his dismay and amazement (shared by me) at the Star-Trib's treatment of James Lileks:

Of course James is my friend, but a lot of my friends suffer at the hands of bad management, and I don't say a word about it on my blog or my show.

I am exercised about Lileks because it is an astoundingly stupid decision affecting an industry with which I am connected and in which merit used to matter. The collapse of the media business and the rise of mediocrity is what's bugging me.

I offer you Dave Barry as an expert on the field of newspaper columns. Case closed. Ten thousand second stringers can line up and berate Lileks, but we know better, and Barry's assessment just ends that discussion.

And a comment from Dave Barry's post:

Yeah, one thing that Lileks' blog revealed was how much life and quirk was being squeezed out of his writing to make it fit in the Star-Tribune. (For which the editors blame him, not themselves.) Anyway, I don't think we should be bashing the people here who don't find Lileks funny. Humor is individual, they're entitled to their opinion...

...and isn't it interesting that at least they HAVE an opinion of Lileks. How many other writers at the Star-Tribune can anyone here say that of?

And a similar comment from Ken Layne, who would know such things:

This is completely retarded. Lileks is the best-known writer on that whole paper -- if there's any nationally-known writer other than Lileks on that paper, I've never heard of 'em. I wouldn't be surprised if his personal site gets more traffic than the whole Strib site.

Here's a quiz to see if you've "got what it takes" to be a newspaper editor:

You're in a fading industry that's making a slow & dumb transition to the online world. You've moved so slowly & clumsily that most of the things you used to control -- comics, sports news, classifieds -- have already been reinvented and seized by people who aren't involved with newspapers at all. But on your staff, you've got a local columnist who has a big & loyal online readership you would spend millions trying to get on your own. Do you:

a) Give him a substantial raise and have him write exclusively for your online paper?
b) Demote him to local coverage.

If you answered B, then you're ready for a high-flying newspaper management career ... for a few years, anyway, when the last local print newspaper shuts down for good. Jesus ...

A surprising number of Republicans and undecideds also polled by saying Bush knew in advance.

Take a look at the total numbers. 44% of all Americans say Bush knew and 59% say the CIA knew. But "knew" can also mean constructive knowledge as in an ignored July warning that AQ was going to do "something big"

Of course, in a society that demands that intelligent design be given equal time with evolution (How many GOP Presidential candidates are willing to stand tall and admit to accepting the theory of evolution?) and which people argue that Hillary Clinton had Vince Foster murdered, why is anyone surprised?

Anyone know the GOP - Democratic polling breakdown on whether the Moon landings were faked?

= = =

Finally, I grew up in Chicago where the late great Mike Royko loudly advocated that people LIE to pollsters.

This is only a big deal if one is willing to project the poll numbers of the uber right base that believes WMD was taken to Syria.

Look the bases are whacky. The far left is as whacked up over Bush as the far right was over Clinton. I cant recall what the number of far right nutjobs were who thought Vince Foster was killed by Hillary...but the "Reverend" Fallwell made some money by selling tapes about it...

Tom DeLay when Clinton tossed the cruises at Sudan was up banging his drum about how it had only destroyed an "asprin" factory. He (DeLay) refused briefings by the then DCI on the issue much as General Pelosi is refusing briefings by the command staff in Iraq.

DeLay was sure the then DCI was a political lackey and said so on numerous occassions...but when it came to believing WMD in Iraq from the same DCI...there was Tom all on board.

The Dem far left is nutty...so is the zenophobic GOP far right.

Did Bush blunder before 9/11? Yeah so did Clinton... I give them both a pass.

If I am a little "concerned" about anything this administration did referencing 9/11 (other then going nutty on Iraq) it is that While Firefighters were running into buildings...Bush was running for the nearest hole.

Leadership is best done from the front...not Barksdale AFB or Nebraska... but hey...Cheney was in the bunker shooting down imaginary airplanes...

Robert

Bush knew in advance that the Star Tribune was going to hamstring Lileks?

My God! The man's omniscient! We should elect him for a third term!

The man's omniscient! We should elect him for a third term!

I'll bet he knew you would say that.

How many GOP Presidential candidates are willing to stand tall and admit to accepting the theory of evolution?

That question was raised during the recent Republican candidate debate, Bill. The answer is seven out of 10.

Seven out of ten and an appropriate add-on comment by McCain I might add (McCain was one of the seven). I hope most people familiar with getting out into nature can identify with the gist of it whether they dislike religion or mentioning God or not.

The point being that it ought to show there's no inherent schism (even in the US) between believing in God and believing in evolution (personally I think macro-evolution is scientifically flawed although likely to be generally correct regardless).

As for underreporting on the looney-poll I think it's as simple as more educated Democrats being outright ashamed of the Rosie crowd - can't blame them.

I'll avoid the temptation to explain mandatory US government procedures that have been around since the start of the nuclear arms race about fifty years ago.