Murphy's law

Eschaton's comments aren't working so I post a comment on this here.

Reading JIM MURPHY, executive producer, ""CBS Evening News with Dan Rather": The entire staff of the "CBS Evening News with Dan Rather" was pretty miffed after reading Paul Krugman's column today that claimed not a SINGLE issues piece has aired on the big newscasts in the past two months."

I almost popped over to www.nytimes.com to see the Krugman op-ed which I had somehow missed (even though www.nytimes.com is my browsers initial page). Only when I read Greg Mitchell's response did I realise that Murphy claimed to be referring to this op-ed. The distortion of Krugman's claim was so extreme, that I honestly assumed that, no matter how dishonest Murphy might be, he must have been writing about another collumn.

New Murphy's law. If Murphy can be wrong Murphy will be wrong. If Murphy can't be that wrong Murphy will be wronger.