I just checked the various news channels to see if there was any coverage of the schoolchild-hostages in Ossetia, and found Eric Alterman on C-Span talking about his new book, When Presidents Lie. As I tuned in, a caller was in the middle of one of those questions that are half-question, half-lecture, painstakingly explaining that in his opinion when a president lies under oath it is much worse than lying in the course of a news conference or speech. Alterman dismissed the questioner and his question by saying "I don't actually spend any time on Clinton in my book" or words to that effect. What kind of a dork writes an entire book on lying presidents without covering the most egregious example in American history, an example less than ten years old? I don't think "most egregious" is unfair: as the caller said, lying under oath in court is a particularly nasty and blatant form of lying. So why is Eric Alterman treated as someone worthy of airtime and respect?