corrente

I want to have Paul Krugman's children. There being biological factors (among others) making that unlikely, I will settle for seeing him, next year, win the Nobel for Peace, Economics and Literature; the Pulitzer for all categories; the Elijah Lovejoy Award, and a MacArthur Foundation genius grant.

Short Krugman: Bush is lying (with eight specific examples). Kerry isn't. To "report" otherwise in the name of "balance" is to lie too. Go read:

(via NYT)

By singling out Mr. Bush's lies and misrepresentations, am I saying that Mr. Kerry isn't equally at fault? Yes.

Mr. Kerry sometimes uses verbal shorthand that offers nitpickers things to complain about. He talks of 1.6 million lost jobs; that's the private-sector loss, partly offset by increased government employment. But the job record is indeed awful. He talks of the $200 billion cost of the Iraq war; actual spending is only $120 billion so far. But nobody doubts that the war will cost at least another $80 billion. The point is that Mr. Kerry can, at most, be accused of using loose language; the thrust of his statements is correct.

Mr. Bush's statements, on the other hand, are fundamentally dishonest. He is insisting that black is white, and that failure is success. Journalists who play it safe by spending equal time exposing his lies and parsing Mr. Kerry's choice of words are betraying their readers.