One of the downsides to being quoted in the press is that there is literally no misrepresentation of your statements so bizarre that someone will not make it and, with the internet, broadcast that falsehood to lots of people.

Here is a case in point.  Last week, I was quoted in the NYT saying that if the cherry-picked Judge Baird did go ahead with his kangaroo court and pronounce Cameron Willingham actually innocent, no one on our side of the aisle would regard that holding as having any credibility.

Well, a blogger by the name of Todd Krohn deigns to inform the world what I said "in other words," as distinguished from what I actually said. "What he's saying, in other words, is that even if it's true, that Texas did execute an innocent man, so what?"

By no stretch of logic could any reasonable person take a statement that Judge A has no credibility when he rules on Fact X and infer a statement that Fact X is unimportant.  But logic, like truth, is expendable when you are signed up for the anti-death-penalty crusade.