On Clinton's proposed tax hikes for the nation, his figures add up to a $46 billion tax increase (the $150 billion is offset by $104 billion in tax cuts). This is nearly $100 billion less than Bush raised taxes in 1990 (thus making himself a liar by rejecting his 1988 promise of no new taxes).

And Bush has openly, baldly lied to veterans groups. In Indianapolis just before going to the Houston convention, Bush told the Veterans of Foreign Wars that he wouldn't touch a dime of veterans' benefits. But in the one set of budget-cutting measures the president has sent to Congress, he included reductions in benefits that go to some vets.

The point here isn't that Clinton's character shines with moral polish. It doesn't. The Arkansas governor has withheld at least some information about his draft status (although not all the charges against him appear to be true). He has all but admitted marital infidelity. He has waffled on free trade and federal abortion funding.

But two points should be made. First, much more media attention has been showered on Clinton's "character" than on Bush's.

Second, when the alleged violations of the two are compared, Bush's seem more serious. Lying about Iran-contra versus lying about a 20-year-old's draft status. Waffling on abortion versus waffling on federal abortion funding. Fudging free trade versus fudging a treaty with China.

Bush wants you to decide this election on the issue of trust. In light of all his shortcomings, so do we.