Lying, cheating bastard - slight return

I posted some time ago about a relatively trivial Bush deception.

In this article, Krugman lays forth the important deceptions, and there are many. Krugman effectively distinguishes Bush's tactic, from that of "politics as usual." Excerpt:

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.

In parting, did anyone see Frontline this evening? It was a two-hour account of the candidates' backgrounds, from the Vietnam war to present. It was a relatively even-handed and informative piece. However, what struck me most was its discussion of Bush's campaign for governor against Richards and his 2000 primary campaign for president against McCain. In both instances, allegedly independent groups mysteriously appeared to slander Bush's opponents. The corollary in this campaign is the swift boat veterans for truth. My hypothesis is that this group's distortions have not had the effect of those previous groups and, hence, Bush is now left with the dirty work of lying and cheating on his own behalf. Either way, it is reprehensible tactic, and in the words of McCain, Bush "should be ashamed of himself."

Addendum: Brad DeLong reaches a similar conclusion and offers a nice rule of thumb:

I really don't understand why reporters are having such a hard time covering this campaign. One clear rule is all that's needed: assume as a rebuttable presumption that the Bush campaign is lying. That's all you need to do. And you will 99% of the time wind up getting the story right.