Truth and accuracy just may not always be the same thing.  Check out this headline, which turns out to be "true" but also to be very misleading if you read a little way into the story (emphasis added):

Remembering the Terri Schiavo circus, it's a hard question not to ask when you read this report:

One of the oldest principles in law is that you cannot have a right without a remedy.  It's common sense: If I have the right to enroll in a state college, and the college refuses my enrollment, there must be a way for me to overturn the college's decision for the right to have any real meaning.

But yesterday the Supreme Court seemed to trample on that principle.

If you've been reading the economic stories here on WTW, you know by now that the public claims of a "red hot" economy and a growing economic pie don't match up with the gritty details--especially when it comes to retirement  Here's another of those gritty details as reported in the Baltimore Sun (emphasis added):

Bill O'Reilly claims to understand public education--what's wrong, what we need, the whole ball of enlightened wax.  That wouldn't be surprising except that this is the same guy who:

--blamed the Malmedy massacre in WWII on the wrong side; twice
--cited a nonexistent economics journal to bolster his claims about French labor laws
--accused a dead man of having smeared him
--called the central Mexican state of Jalisco a city, and claimed that it was on the U.S. border
--cited the wrong man as the Secretary of Energy

One of the least surprising reports I've seen in ages:
GAO warns U.S. vulnerable to oil cutoff

The day that Zarqawi's death was made public, I heard Keith Olbermann mention on Countdown that some web site had posted a piece the day before Zarqawi was killed concluding that he had become more of a liability than an asset to the terrorists, and was likely to become a martyr, one way or another.

Sometimes you read a headline on one day that seems to make no sense, only to get the explanatory headline in the next day or two.  Happened to me this week:

Headline 1, from Reuters: Iraq war bill deletes US military base prohibition

Headline 2, from the U.K.'s Telegraph: US "planning to keep 50,000 troops in Iraq for many years"

Apart from the fact that I think even mentioning Ann Coulter is a mistake (which I obviously repeat here), because it keeps her name/fame alive, I really think that Susan Campbell nailed it on the head in this column from The Hartford Courant:

Not that anyone would ever dream of accusing the Republicans of political opportunism or blatant smears, but.....

Read Older Articles