Calame: Factual But UnfairDonald Luskin
forwarded on the work he and I did to Byron Calame, the public editor of the New York Times to see if we could get a retraction/correction to Krugman's article. Calame's response was that the column was "factual but unfair".
Technically, Calame is wrong here:
Given that Mr. Krugman cited only one factor in classifying tribal donations -- whether they occurred before or after the tribe hired Mr. Abramoff -- I don't think his statement constitutes a factual error. Is it unfair? Yes. But the fairness of columnists is beyond the mandate of the public editor.In fact, the American Prospect article lumped tribal donations that occurred both before AND after Abramoff was lobbying for the tribes and compared those to donations that occurred only during the time of Abramoff's tenure. Nice to see that he acknowledges that the analysis was flawed. Will Greg Sargent and TAP be the next to step up to the plate and admit their errors?
