Let's take another look at how the Washington Post's health care coverage, which Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz thinks is just fantastic, shall well?

First, a little background. A week or two ago, Republicans began claiming that the IRS will have to hire 16,500 new agents to implement health care reform. This is completely false. FactCheck.org determined that the “wildly inaccurate” claim came from “a partisan analysis based on guesswork and false assumptions, and compounded by outright misrepresentation.” Not much ambiguity there: the claim is simply false.

Now, take a look at how this “wildly inaccurate” claim has shown up in the Washington Post. First, a March 26 article:

Republicans are also encouraging members to highlight health care over the break. The packet of data and talking points the House GOP prepared for its members for the recess included a list of figures Republicans plan to use to attack the bill, such as 16,500 -- the number of additional auditors and other employees Republicans have said the IRS may need to implement the law, a number the agency has not verified and Democrats sharply dispute -- and $1.55 trillion, this year's projected federal budget deficit.

Well, that's certainly inadequate.

Next, an April 4 “Topic A” piece in which “The Post asked political experts whether the Republican Party would win in November with a negative strategy.” Among the responses was one from Newt Gingrich that included this line: “We should say no to 16,000 new IRS agents who would become 'health policemen.'”

Again, the 16,000 number is just made-up -- but Post readers weren't told that. Instead, the paper gave Gingrich an opportunity to simply lie to their readers.

And, to date, Post readers have never been told that the number that appeared twice in the Post is complete bunk.

Prediction: At some point, the Post will get around to noting that this claim is not true. At that point, Howard Kurtz will rush to praise the Post for doing so, failing to note the several times the Post spread the falsehood without debunking it.