Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Someone sent me this, true or false, really don't know but it is food for thought.
'Snopes
For the past few years www.snopes.com has positioned itself, or others have labeled it as the 'tell-all, final word' on any comment, claim and e-mail.
Snopes is run by a husband and wife team - that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers – it’s just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby and surreptitiously became a spreader of Leftist Propaganda..
Left Wing Progressives, David and Barbara Mikkelson, started the web site about 13 years ago in California’s San Fernando Valley - and have no formal background or experience in investigative research. After a few years it gained popularity as Americans, believing it to be unbiased and neutral, accepted it as cetain truth. But over the past couple of years people started wondering who was behind it and what was their motivation? The reason for the questions - or skepticisms - is a result of snopes.com claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain questions or issues when in fact, they have been proven wrong so often. There were criticisms that the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues but, instead, use it to promulgate their Leftist Agenda.
When I discovered that Snopes falsely claimed that Obama's Birth Certificate had been properly validated – which it has not – it was then that I realized something was askew with their research and/or their credibility – or both. It seems something is seriously wrong. Could Snopes be lying?
Then, a few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama’s birth certificate it made a big splash across the Internet. Supposedly the Mikkelsons claim to have researched this issue before posting their findings on snopes.com. In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort ever took place.
I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me). Thinking he would want to get to the bottom of this, I gave him Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers. Bud was going to give him phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who were willing to speak with him about it. Mikkelson lied, neither he nor his wife ever called Bud.
In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg that no one from snopes.com ever contacted anyone with State Farm. Yet snopes.com issued a statement as the 'final factual word' on the issue, as if they did all their homework and got to the bottom of things. Not! They are typical of the Left, passing off bogus opinions as "fact". The truth is that they are liars hoping we do not research their lies, etc…
It has been disclosed that the Mikkelsons are hard core Democrats and are extremely liberal. As we all now know, from this presidential election, liberals have a calculated, insidious agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately over the Internet with people pointing out the Mikkelsons liberalism revealing itself in their web site findings. Gee, what a shock!
So, I say this now to everyone who goes to www.snopes.com to get what they think to be the bottom line facts: Proceed with caution. Take what it says at face value and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus, you can always Google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems apparent that's exactly what the Mikkelsons do. After all, I can personally vouch from my own experience for their 'not' fully looking into things.
For those of you that are fond of referring to Snopes as a verifier of the truth, please stop the practice. They are bold face liars promoting their own Leftist Agenda.
You are 100% correct here. I also did alot of research about snopes and found out everything you mention here. They are liberally biased. I always wondered how a mom and pop site with no professionals working for them had access to such privileged information more so than professional journalists do. After I started wondering, I started researching, I then found their glaring bias. Same thing with Factcheck.org. Factcheck was started by the Clintons and still funded by them. Connect the dots.
I did, and while he did throw the terms the dealer in there. He also talks about YOUR CLUNKER, he tried to make his viewers believe that if they went to turn in their clunker that the Federal Government would have access to all of their computer files.
That's not at all what he meant, nor sounded like. This is old news anyway.
That's not at all what he meant, nor sounded like. This is old news anyway.
It is EXACTLY what he meant, if he meant to have it be about the dealer, he would have talked about the dealer aspect more than just a small snippet, instead of going on if about if YOU were trying to do something right and get rid of YOUR clunker
It is EXACTLY what he meant, if he meant to have it be about the dealer, he would have talked about the dealer aspect more than just a small snippet, instead of going on if about if YOU were trying to do something right and get rid of YOUR clunker
You are 100% correct here. I also did alot of research about snopes and found out everything you mention here. They are liberally biased. I always wondered how a mom and pop site with no professionals working for them had access to such privileged information more so than professional journalists do. After I started wondering, I started researching, I then found their glaring bias. Same thing with Factcheck.org. Factcheck was started by the Clintons and still funded by them. Connect the dots.
Kind of reminds me of how one of the first things the Republicans did after getting control of Congress in 1995 was to defund the Office of Technology Assessment so that they would be free to lie about scientific stuff without being called out on it all the time.
Kind of reminds me of how one of the first things the Republicans did after getting control of Congress in 1995 was to defund the Office of Technology Assessment so that they would be free to lie about scientific stuff without being called out on it all the time.
Yeah maybe, but it is 2009 and soon to be 2010. Did you have a point?
Yeah maybe, but it is 2009 and soon to be 2010. Did you have a point?
Yeah, but maybe it was a little too subtle for some. You want to break the rules, you've got to get the referees off the field. That's how the right-wing plays. And by the way, Beck and the Guilefoyle chick were lying through their bloody teeth. The whole bit was pure whackjob schlock...
Yeah, but maybe it was a little too subtle for some. You want to break the rules, you've got to get the referees off the field. That's how the right-wing plays. And by the way, Beck and the Guilefoyle chick were lying through their bloody teeth. The whole bit was pure whackjob schlock...
It was extremely poorly worded, that is why they changed it.
It was extremely poorly worded, that is why they changed it.
Not as poorly worded as the five minutes of tripe from Glenn, Kim, and Noah...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
