Tweet
Originally posted by Couver
View Post
-
Also good point.I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool -
David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago. After a few years it began gaining popularity as people believed it to be unbiased and neutral. But over the past couple of years people started asking questions when Snopes was proven wrong in a number of their conclusions. There were also criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues, but rather asserting their beliefs in controversial issues.
In 2008, State Farm agent Bud Gregg hoisted a political sign in Mandeville, Louisiana referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the internet. The Mikkelson's were quick to "research" this issue and post their condemnation of it on Snopes.com. In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Mr. Gregg into taking down the sign. In fact, nothing of the sort ever took place. A friend of Mr. Gregg personally contacted David Mikkelson to alert him of the factual inacuracy, leaving him Mr. Gregg's contact phone numbers. Mr. Mikkelson was told that Mr. Gregg would give him the phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would inform them that they had never pressured Mr. Gregg to take down his sign.
But the Mikkelson's never called Mr. Gregg. In fact, Mr. Gregg found out that no one from Snopes.com had ever contacted any one with State Farm. Yet, Snopes.com has kept their false story of Mr. Gregg up to this day, as the "final factual word" on the issue.
What is behind Snopes' selfish motivation? A simple review of their "fact-checking" reveals a strong tendency to explain away criticisms towards liberal politicians and public figures while giving conservatives the hatchet job. Religious stories and issues are similarly shown no mercy. With the "main-stream" media quickly losing all credibility with their fawning treatment of President Obama, Snopes is being singled out, along with MSNBC and others, as being particularly biased and agenda-modivated.
So if you really want to know the truth about a story or a rumor you have heard, by all means do not go to Snopes.com! You could do just as well if you were a liberal with an internet connection. Don't go to wikipedia.com either as their team of amateur editors have also been caught in a number of bold-faced liberal-biased untruths. (Such as Wikigate and their religious treatment of Obama.) Take anything these sites say with a grain of salt and an understanding that they are written by people with a motive to criticize all things conservative. Use them only to lead you to solid references where you can read their sources for yourself.
Plus, you can always Google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems apparent that's all the Mikkelson's do.
I wear a Fez. Fez-es are coolComment
-
Screen shot of the Brady page showing at least one of them posted.
So, yes, they did post it.Comment
-
What I noticed about snopes - is I think they rely on people just using their true/false dot at the top. If you read what is researched what maybe labeled as "mostly false" is really "mostly true". A specific one I noticed this week was in regards to the NBC reporter asking Obama if he'd use Obamacare. Seemed mostly true to me, but they labeled it mostly false.Originally posted by MR EDDComment
-
Their twitter says they're working hard to have the fake ones removed. Apparently they don't know how the internet works. And they don't actually say which ones are fake.Originally posted by mikec View Post
.Comment
-
This is a great assault campaign to make fun of their stupid ass message."When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." -Benjamin Franklin
"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." -Alexander Fraser TytlerComment
-
The NRA said they were going to be responding to the BS anti-gun crap after Sandy HookOriginally posted by CJ View Post
if the libs and other assorted wackos (Westboro Baptist Church, for one) can spew complete crap and tell us it smells like potpourri, I find it quite awesome 
Originally posted by PGreenCobraOriginally posted by Trip McNeelyComment
-
Comment
-
fuckin 4chan, should have known.Originally posted by Strychnine View Post"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." -Benjamin Franklin
"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." -Alexander Fraser TytlerComment
-
anyone catch the "news" bit about a california law dating back to 1800's was upheld saying rape laws only protected Married women? I can't find it again but think it was on the front page of Yahoo this morning...
didn't read it, just the headline link.
Stupid is becoming a pandemic in this country. Right next to the link I saw was a poll to see which celebrity pregnancy you more excited about. WHO FUCKING CARES was not an option.Comment
-
Yeah that was a different kind of rape, girl fell asleep while her boyfriend was there. Boyfriend left and stalker came in the window and in the dark she thought it was the boyfriend. The ruling basically states something along the lines of a married woman is raped if someone pretends to be her husband. But it is not illegal to pretend to be her boyfriend.
http://news.yahoo.com/judge-law-wont...012941200.html
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A California appeals court overturned the rape conviction of a man who authorities say pretended to be a sleeping woman's boyfriend before initiating intercourse, ruling that an arcane law from 1872 doesn't protect unmarried women in such cases.
A panel of judges reversed the trial court's conviction of Julio Morales and remanded it for retrial, in a decision posted Wednesday from the Los Angeles-based court.
Morales had been sentenced to three years in state prison. He was accused of entering a woman's bedroom late one night after her boyfriend had gone home and initiating sexual intercourse while she was asleep, after a night of drinking.
The victim said her boyfriend was in the room when she fell asleep, and they'd decided against having sex that night because he didn't have a condom and he had to be somewhere early the next day.
Morales pretended to be her boyfriend in the darkened room, and it wasn't until a ray of light from outside the room flashed across his face that she realized he wasn't her boyfriend, according to prosecutors.
"Has the man committed rape? Because of historical anomalies in the law and the statutory definition of rape, the answer is no, even though, if the woman had been married and the man had impersonated her husband, the answer would be yes," Judge Thomas L. Willhite Jr. wrote in the court's decision.
The appeals court added that prosecutors argued two theories, and it was unclear if the jury convicted Morales because the defendant tricked the victim or because sex with a sleeping person is defined as rape by law.
The court said the case should be retried to ensure the jury's conviction is supported by the latter argument.
The decision also urges the Legislature to examine the law, which was first written in response to cases in England that concluded fraudulent impersonation to have sex wasn't rape because the victim would consent, even if they were being tricked into thinking the perpetrator was their husband.
Willhite noted that the law has been applied inconsistently over the years in California.
In 2010, a similar law in Idaho prevented an unmarried woman from pressing rape charges after being tricked into sex with a stranger by her then-boyfriend.
The judge called what happened "despicable" but said the state's law left the court with no choice. Idaho's law was amended to cover all women in 2011.
Morales' attorney Edward Schulman declined comment when reached by phone Thursday.
Prior to the conviction, Schulman had argued Morales believed the sex was consensual because the victim responded to his kisses and caresses, according to the decision.Comment
-
-
Originally posted by CJ View Post
Guess what? It's no longer there. Anyone can go there and say anything. Even someone from the Brady Campaign to CYA for stupidity.
Have gone to the Brady Campaign website or Facebook? The amount of outright lies are astounding! It wouldn't be out of character at all for them to make up more lies to cover other lies.
Brady Campaign co-founder Sarah Brady tweets fake anti-gun billboard Photoshop
Real pic
sigpicComment
-
Oh nice, piss 4chan off, that always works."When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." -Benjamin Franklin
"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." -Alexander Fraser TytlerComment
-
Comment