"Two Sets of Books" not a big deal?

Mike at het2blog talks about the "two sets of books" controversy, and says it's not the scandal some people want it to be.

. . . non-accountants may conclude that fraud is being perpetrated, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. Consider that most publicly traded companies keep what would be considered several sets of books that include Financial Accounting Books, Tax Accounting Books and Statutory Books for foreign countries, if the company operates internationally. These different sets of books are nothing more than different views of the same information, developed for different legitimate reporting purposes. Similarly, the Annual Fiscal Report and the Comprehensive Annual Fiscal Report are legitimate different views of the same information.

Go here for the whole thing. I'm no accountant, so I will defer to those better versed in the magical numbers game, but regardless of whether two sets of books is standard operating procedure, or an attempt to hide something, the state still has an enormous deficit, and Gov. Doyle's budget seems to me like so much fiddling while Rome burns.