I've probably mentioned this before but among my many complaints about political discourse these days is the devaluation of the word, "lie." A lie is now anything your opponent ever said which can possibly be interpreted as inaccurate.
To be completely non-partisan about it, here are two examples. In the 2000 Presidential Debate, Al Gore mentioned going to inspect fire damage in Parker County in Texas with FEMA head James Lee Witt. It turned out that while Gore had accompanied Witt to other disaster sites in Texas, the Parker County trip had been with someone else. I thought that was an innocent mistake but Republicans sold it hard as some sort of deliberate falsehood. Over on the National Review site, it's still cited on a page called "Gore Lies."
Last night, Dick Cheney said that the first time he'd ever met John Edwards was when they walked out on stage and shook hands. Democrats quickly produced photos and records that showed the two men had been together on at least two occasions, and quoted Tim Russert as saying he saw them shake hands backstage before the debate. This is being sold in many venues as a lie.
I don't think these things are lies. And even if they are, I don't think they reflect that badly on their speakers. I'd settle for any elected official if the worst lie his opponents could pin on him was something so trivial. The Democrats oughta be hammering Cheney on those aluminum tubes that were allegedly for nuclear weapons but actually weren't, or for statements about Weapons of Mass Destruction or even Halliburton. And we shouldn't be letting anyone get away with defining "lie" so loosely that it loses its meaning.