The liberal rag, The Washington Post, is stumping for John Kerry and giving him some free advertising. WaPo sets the tone from the very beginning, by describing Bush's attacks on Kerry as "unprecedented negativity" in what they call "a typical week in the life of the Bush reelection machine." How something is both "unprecedented" and "typical" at the same time, they fail to explain. But make no mistake, they are clearly in support of Kerry. Can you imagine them running this article if the roles were reversed?

Scholars and political strategists say the ferocious Bush assault on Kerry this spring has been extraordinary, both for the volume of attacks and for the liberties the president and his campaign have taken with the facts. Though stretching the truth is hardly new in a political campaign, they say the volume of negative charges is unprecedented -- both in speeches and in advertising.

Three-quarters of the ads aired by Bush's campaign have been attacks on Kerry. Bush so far has aired 49,050 negative ads in the top 100 markets, or 75 percent of his advertising. Kerry has run 13,336 negative ads -- or 27 percent of his total. The figures were compiled by The Washington Post using data from the Campaign Media Analysis Group of the top 100 U.S. markets. Both campaigns said the figures are accurate.

Of course the Post's figures appear to only include political speeches and paid advertising. They make no mention of the volumes of unpaid advertising Kerry is receiving from major media (like WaPo), non-profit 527 groups like Moveon.org, and anti-Bush hacks like Michael Moore, all of whom have made it their mission in life to see that Bush loses in November. The Post does point out that Kerry has made some exaggerations of his own, but claims that it doesn't compare to the volume of Bush's "untruths".

Then again, the primary calendar may be skewing their results.

The attacks have started unusually early -- even considering the accelerated primary calendar -- in part because Bush was responding to a slew of attacks on his record during the Democratic primaries, in which the rivals criticized him more than one another.

None of these primary attacks, apparently, are counted in Kerry's figures.

In trying to deflect some of the criticism against Kerry, they even try to compare his record to that of Dick Cheney, who isn't even a candidate for President.

It is true Kerry has voted numerous times to eliminate weapons systems and opposed the 1991 Iraq war. But Cheney voted against many of those same weapons systems, and Kerry has voted for several defense increases, especially in recent years.

I can hardly wait for the Kerry-Cheney debates.