Reply #18: Does your view extend to posting the likes of Limbaugh,

[hlthe2b]

Horowitz, noted holocaust-deniers, Drudge, and the like? No, I agree (with my subscription $$, no less, that Salon is not a r/w rag), but for us to disseminate talking points from known RWers, who have a vested interest in defeating liberal progressives, is nuts.

We see (all too frequently) a propagation of obvious lies--that have been since discounted-- when some of this crap is posted without explanation or qualification on the source. Obviously some of our newbies, or more casual readers may not automatically know the background issues with a given poster. I know you've been around to see the "circle jerk" of disseminated postings that can dominate DU as a result. I don't want DUers to become the source of this propaganda and outright lies when we go out as activists into the community. Thus, we have a responsibility to call out some of these sources or --as per DU rules and regs-- to ban their posting as a source at all. I agree that Paglia is more intermediate in that definition, given her columns appear in Salon, far from a RW rag. Nonetheless, we certainly should call the source for what it is and make sure readers understand the historical issues with that particular writer and their well-documented biases and agendas.