One of the funnier moments during the debate was when Bush said: "I own a timber company? That's news to me."

FactCheck.org takes this tact on the matter:

Bush got a laugh when he scoffed at Kerry's contention that he had received $84 from "a timber company." Said Bush, "I own a timber company? That's news to me."

In fact, according to his 2003 financial disclosure form, Bush does own part interest in "LSTF, LLC", a limited-liability company organized "for the purpose of the production of trees for commercial sales." (See "supporting documents" at right.)

So Bush was wrong to suggest that he doesn't have ownership of a timber company. And Kerry was correct in saying that Bush's definition of "small business" is so broad that Bush himself would have qualified as a "small business" in 2001 by virtue of the $84 in business income.

So Bush was wrong, right? Uh, apparently not...

Kerry got his information from an article we posted Sept. 23 stating that Bush on his 2001 federal income-tax returns "reported $84 of business income from his part ownership of a timber-growing enterprise." We should clarify: the $84 in Schedule C income was from Bush's Lone Star Trust, which is actually described on the 2001 income-tax returns as an "oil and gas production" business. The Lone Star Trust now owns 50% of the tree-growing company, but didn't get into that business until two years after the $84 in question. So we should have described the $84 as coming from an "oil and gas" business in 2001, and will amend that in our earlier article.

This is odd. Kerry bases his information on a FactCheck.org article, which they themselves admit was misleading, yet Bush is in the wrong here? Look, whatever Long Star Trust holds today, it is simply not true to say that Bush actually received $84 from "a timber company" (in 2001) when Lone Star Trust had nothing to do with timber at the time.

Nor is it clear that Bush was "wrong for suggesting" he was unaware of such a holding. I did a little digging, and discovered, along the way, that Thousand-faced Moon had beaten me to this conclusion:

The PDF of the tax return tells us that $84 was net profit from something called the Lone Star Trust. Any number of sources will tell you that the Lone Star Trust is what is known as a "blind trust." So-called because the grantor of the trust or the beneficiary don't know how the assets of the trust are invested. Blind trusts are very popular with politicians, because they help the politicians avoid being accused of conflict of interest. So of course it's news to Bush.

One crucial point remains: Does, in fact, receiving $84 income from a blind trust qualify you as a small business? Here, FactCheck.org seems to contradict itself.

When Cheney claimed that 900,000 small businesses would be affected by Kerry's tax increase, FactCheck.org disputed that number, arguing it was absurd because it would have qualified President Bush as a small business owner.

Now, FactCheck.org says Kerry makes a valid point, a contention based on the argument that Bush is indeed a small business owner.

We might try to resolve these two by saying that FactCheck.org is taking the stance that the current legal definition of "small business" is unfair to use in political debate.

But that seems a rather partisan tact: I wouldn't think it the job of an allegedly neutral group like FactCheck.org to take some stance on whether the actual legal definition of a small business ought to be changed. It's their job to stick to the existing facts, not subtly lobby for some changed version of reality.

But that's a moot point: Kerry's tax hikes will be applied along legal lines, not according to the preferences of the anonymous writers at Annenberg.

This brings up another important point: FactCheck.org sides with Kerry in arguing the existing legal definition is, perhaps, too broad. But this argument cuts both ways: If the existing definition is broad, then it's equally true that Kerry's takes hikes will also have a broad impact, which was precisely Bush and Cheney's point.

Finally, FactCheck.org should similarly dispute the statistic that about 70% of the economy comes from small businesses, a statistic which undoubtedly was based on the legal definition of a small business, the same basis for Cheney's and Bush's number of 900,000. Of course, they can't, which just goes to show that the Cheney/Bush number, based on the same definition, is equally valid.

I know FactCheck.org is usually reasonably accurate and nonpartisan, or so people tell me, but in this case and others it seems when they err, they tend to err left.