] Every citation of contrast is not a negative attack from
] the opposing smear machine. Campaigns are about
] illuminating differences and arguing why your side is
] right.
]
] But voters are entitled to a minimum level of honesty in
] the argument. On that score, Mr. Bush's initial attacks
] fall short. For example, the respective views of the two
] candidates on the proper use of intelligence in the war
] on terrorism are a legitimate -- indeed a critical --
] issue in the first election of a president after Sept.
] 11, 2001. Yet Mr. Bush's attack on a Kerry proposal nine
] years ago to cut the intelligence budget does more to
] distort than to illuminate. When Mr. Kerry proposed a
] $1.5 billion cut over five years in the intelligence
] budget, the United States was reaping the "peace
] dividend" from the Cold War, and the center of
] congressional debate was not whether cuts could be made
] but how much could be cut from Pentagon and CIA spending.
] Mr. Kerry's proposed 1 percent cut was not a "gutting,"
] as Mr. Bush alleged.

[ The Wash. Post in a rare look through the spin... -k]

October in March (washingtonpost.com)