The Washington Post just doesn't get it.

(Update: Since I first wrote this, Jo Ling Kent of NBC reports that Newt has hired three more New Hampshire staffers.)

Today, the Washington Post ran a story titled: "Newt Gingrich: He’s baaack!"

And Chris Cillizza proceeds to list some of the positives from the past few weeks -- the increased fundraising, the poll numbers -- but then he either shows his bias or his ignorance.

He claims Newt doesn't have much of an organization yet in the three early states, ignoring the recent hires in New Hampshire and South Carolina. And in Iowa, the organization is being set up as we speak.

Cillizza then claims that Newt's poll numbers in the early contest states aren't very good, citing the worst possible Iowa poll. He doesn't make any any mention of a recent poll that had Newt at 12% in the Hawkeye State, which was good for third place.

Something tells me Cillizza wouldn't cite the worst-looking poll for President Obama in a story about the latter's re-election chances.