What happens when one of the old-fashioned “newspapers” converts to online only? Or when the most celebrated journalists work for online-only operations? Will the Pulitzer folks redefine (modernize) themselves also?

Seems as though the conversation this story should have sparked was “what exactly is modern journalism?” not just “are scoops Pulitzer worthy?”

While the shot at Dowd’s Monica Pulitzer was dismissive and easy, it would’ve had more weight if backed up with some facts about her work. Did she predict anything that did or didn’t happen? Did her interpretations of the “meaning” pan out, play out, in any way? Did that particular Pulitzer stand the test of time?

In my opinion, that’s the kind of value, Bernie, you are particularly qualified to bring to your audience. However, the formulation “Dowd + Clinton + Monica + Pulitzer = dismissive shot” can come from any amateur.

Regardless of the Enquirer’s legal status, no publication that’s lost a libel suit should be eligible for the Pulitzer. The Enquirer’s been sued repeatedly for libel and defamation — and lost several big ones, most recently a 2006 suit filed by actress Kate Hudson.

Yes, it is sad that many Americans are more concerned with the sex lives of their elected officials than their actual performance. Having said that, if their sex lives become public, it calls into question their judgement. The point is not whether they are faithful, but whether they exercised good judgement when the temptation presented itself.

And in this country, the media is anything but the President’s worst enemy – and that is one of our biggest problems.