Playing with words

Is the owner of Snopes.com a liberal?

Big lies die slowly - if at all - II

FWIW: Several years ago I wrote to Snopes, accusing them of slanting something or other way to the left.  I received an almost immediate first person reply, telling me to go f**k myself, more or less. I don't know if I'm blacklisted after that, but the several items I've submitted since have gone into the ether, evidently.  So this Renewing America piece interests me. “ [Abstract] Snopes.com has been accused of being run by a "flaming liberal." But now a defender of Snopes, about.com, has rushed to their aid, writing a story about how conservatives have attacked poor Snopes. They write, in part: Is it true that "Snopes.com is owned by a flaming liberal" and that "this man is in the tank for Obama"? Well, first off, Snopes.com is owned by two people, not one. They are husband and wife David and Barbara Mikkelson. [Oh, well, that makes a world of difference. Two people in a team could not possibly be leftists, now could they?] Second, the Mikkelsons' political views are between them and the ballot box. I don't know what they are; you don't know what they are; certainly the author of this email doesn't know what they are.   According to a boilerplate statement issued by the site, "Neither of the operators of Snopes.com has any affiliation with, has ever made a donation to, or has ever publicly expressed support for any political party or candidate." [The fact that the owners claim no affiliation and don't donate money proves what?] Anyone who has proof to the contrary should come out with it. Okay ....  there are little clues that stand out everywhere in the article appearing on Snopes itself and quoted at about.com. One of the biggest clues is the versions of the emails whose veracity Snopes doubts. For example, if you look up the stuff about Obama's nationality, you find that they print a version that accentuates the silliest claims in order to make the reasonable ones seem silly too. That is what we call a red herring. The Left is very adept at this tactic. For example: "...rumors swirling about that Barrack Obama was a Muslim with a middle name of Mohammed..." The following quote from about.com certainly does not comfort me: ... the Mikkelsons' political views are between them and the ballot box. I don't know what they are; you don't know what they are; certainly the author of this email doesn't know what they are." Not true. If Mikkelson were not politically aligned, he would not have endorsed only leftwing TV news channels as he did in an interview on CNN. ... Snopes' reasons for believing in Obama's credentials are not comforting either: "Judge Surrick ruled Berg's attempt to use certain laws to gain standing...were frivolous and not worthy of discussion." For real conservatives, the last people they trust are judges. They know our rights are being stripped one by one and that it is chiefly the judges who are doing the stripping. To hear a judge state that a US citizen has no right to know if a candidate for president is a US citizen and hence in compliance with the Constitution, is just more evidence of a thoroughly corrupt judiciary, not evidence that the lawsuit against Obama was not valid. The real fact of the matter is that the DNC and the electoral college should have delved into this matter a long time ago and it is clear that they did not. And we shouldn't care what the Mikkelsons — or their defenders at the very far-left pro-Obama New York Times — say about this. Conclusion: be wary of Snopes. I don't necessarily think they lie, but they present conservative emails in a very unfavorable light, so unfavorable that it is hard to call their presentation objective. You may wish to pass this article along to them — and more importantly, to your friends. Don Hanks ” * If anyone would like to tackle filling in the entire X-word - print, fill, e-mail.