[SJackson]

But, as we have already established, the quote within the story is out of context (what a surprise from someone whom Google turns up as "CNN Political Editor"!), and that the full transcript, known to the poster paints a very different picture....The poster, therefore, used a bogus quote from a bogus story to prop up her bogus candidate by attempting to create a false equivalency....I don't know where you grew up, but from where I did, that's called "lying".

Then FR is populated by an awful lot of liars. Quotes are copied piecemeal all the time, though not in this case, the cut was the sources. Which is why many sources are banned here. Newsmax isn't, nor do I think it should be. You might disagree.

The issue is supressing critical opinions, which is perfectly legitimate in the context of controlling the flow of the discusssion. I don't think that's a secret.

Were that not the case, Newsmax would be banned.

[dirtboy]

Then FR is populated by an awful lot of liars.

Sorry, but most freepers, upon being notified that the article they are citing has lifted a quote out of context, will quit parroting the premise of the article.

[dirtboy]

The issue is supressing critical opinions

The issue is refusing to allow Rudy boosters to use FR as a means to falsely attack conservative candidates (which veronica was doing here).

[kevkrom]

The issue is supressing critical opinions, which is perfectly legitimate in the context of controlling the flow of the discusssion.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. They are not entitled to their own facts, however.

The case we had here is that a particular poster:

1. Took a quote of of context to misrepresent the position of a candidate in order to create a false equivalence to another candidate's position.

2. Used as a source reference a publication that performed the same false equivalence

3. Later admitted that she did know that her use of the quote was out of context

You can't just blame the "source" when the person using the source knows that it is bogus but uses it to bolster her argument anyway.

[rbmillerjr]

“The issue is supressing critical opinions, which is perfectly legitimate in the context of controlling the flow of the discusssion. I don’t think that’s a secret.”

Veronica, knowingly used a quote selectively, leaving out parts that clearly diverged from what Veronica was claiming about Thompson. A lie by omission is a lie. Smearing a conservative candidates’ position to prop up a liberal Giulani...Those are rules the owner made clear would result in zotting.