This article has an interesting premise, but it is all fizz. I can't recommend it. The article isn't even about correcting lies (oops - mis-statements of facts) candidates have presented - it's about the perception of these lies. It states but provides no direct documentation that any of the claims are false. I am deeply suspicious of any political article I see in the NYT or WaPo, suspecting it of having a secret agenda, or at the very least, of functioning as a gatekeeper, deciding who is worthy of mention. At least Ron Paul seems to have finally cracked this barrier, as he is accused, with no sourcing, of making a demonstrably false statement. There's already an organization - FactCheck.Org - that does this sort of thing much better, and which has been featured several times on News Trust.