SNOPES.com Exposed: Left Wing Website Not Quite the Impartial Arbiter of Truth
.................................................................
April 5, 2010 by Johnny Alamo
jdlong.wordpress.com
If you’re like me, the first thing You did when you received an e-mail saying that the moon was full of UFOs or that President Obama was a Kenyan trained Ninja assasin, you went off to SNOPES.com to see what the deal was with those crazy e-mails. And for the most part, SNOPES has been a reliable informant on the truth about these Urban legends.
 Or . . . apparently not. I began to notice that Snopes was taking more of a Leftist tack with things I obviously knew to be true, and was unwilling to revise their opinion when things went more for the right-wing than the lefties. This message board post HERE agrees, especially when it comes to politics; and especially lefty politics.
(And just in case this Message Board post “disappears,” I’ve reprinted the post in toto so it will be archived. Should the author have any problems with that, they can contact me and we’ll fix it post-haste; but as of this printing they haven’t responded to my e-mails.)
For those of you that think snopes is god when it comes to knowing the truth or not. By the way you might want to check this out on snopes.
I present this for your own evaluation.
Who “Snopes” are was written up in READERS DIGEST and agrees with this account.
(no politcal bias was mentioned in the article).
SNOPES EXPOSED
For the past few years snopescom has positioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the ‘tell-all final word’ on any comment, claim and email. But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com. Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it – kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It 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. David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research. After a few years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral, but over the past couple of years people started asking questions who was behind it and did they have a selfish 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 issue when in fact they have been proven wrong. Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the ‘true’ bottom of various issues.
A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the Internet, ‘supposedly’ the Mikkelson’s 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 and I gave him Bud Gregg’s contact phone numbers – and Bud was going to give him phone numbers to the big exec’s at State Farm in Illinois who would have been willing to speak with him about it. He never 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!
Then it has been learned the Mikkelson’s are very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately over the Internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson’s liberalism revealing itself in their website findings.
Gee, what a shock?
So, I say this now to everyone who goes to snopes.com to get what they think to be the bottom line fact ‘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 all the Mikkelson’s do. After all, I can personally vouch from my own experience for their ‘not’ fully looking into things.
http://http//www.wikipedia.org/ or http://http//www.snopes.com/
I have found this to be true also! Many videos of Obama I tried to verify on Snopes and they said they were False. Then they gave their liberal slant! I have suspected some problems with Snopes for some time now, but I have only caught them in half-truths. If there is any subjectivity they do an immediate full left rudder.
Truth or Fiction, is a better source for verification, in my opinion.
TruthOrFiction.com-Is that forwarded email Truth or Fiction? Research into stories, scams, hoaxes, myths, and urban legends on the Internet
I have recently discovered that Snopes.com is owned by a flaming liberal and this man is in the tank for Obama. There are many things they have listed on their site as a hoax and yet you can go to You tube yourself and find the video of Obama actually saying these things. So you see, you cannot and should not trust Snopes.com, ever for anything that remotely resembles truth! I don’t even trust them to tell me if email chains are hoaxes anymore.
A few conservative speakers on MySpace told me aboutSnopes.com. A few months ago and I took it upon myself to do a little research to find out if it was true. Well, I found out for myself that it is true. Anyway just FYI please don’t use Snopes.com anymore for fact checking and make your friends aware of their political leanings as well. Many people still think Snopes.com is neutral and they can be trusted as factual. We need to make sure everyone is aware that that is a hoax in itself.
Thank you,
Alan Strong
Alan Strong CEO/Chairman
Commercial Programming Systems, Inc.
4400 Coldwater Canyon Ave. Suite
200 Studio City, CA. 91604-5039
By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7
Now mind you, Snopes is still a good resource for the weird chain mails and such. I just wouldn’t trust tem with anything political.
Anyone with differing opinions? Email me at alamocitypundit@hotmail.com or hit the Comments section.
~Johnny~
About these ads
Like this:
Posted in Nutroots & Extremist Leftoids, Obama | Tagged Leftoids, Nutroots, Obama | 16 Comments
16 Responses
on April 5, 2010 at 6:13 pm uberVU - social comments
19
7
Rate This
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by JD_Long: RT @acpundit -SNOPES Exposed: Leftie Website Not Quite the Impartial Arbiter~ wp.me #tcot #palin #p2 #nrsc @NaiveAbroad…
on November 23, 2010 at 12:24 pm Political Emails - Page 2 - CycloneFanatic
3
1
Rate This
[...] [...]
on December 29, 2011 at 6:07 am  Judy Wilson
7
1
Rate This
Snopes used to have an article about the “1 million people infected by HIV”, which documented how since the late 1980's, every year AIDS activists claimed there were over 1 million Americans infected with HIV. The point of the article is that One Million was a nice round number, and was inflated far above the actual numbers. I think the article was called the Magical One Million. Even today, this is the line from the official US HIV&AIDS dept: “… the total number of people living with an HIV infection in the U.S. is thought to be more than one million.” Logic would tell you that if there were one million infected in 1990 (or 1991 or 92 or 93, etc), that an estimated 50,000 are infected each year and and only 617,025 have died of AIDS related illness over the last 30 years, then something doesn’t add up. It was removed a few years ago and I always wondered why.
on March 2, 2012 at 7:06 am  Phyllis Stegall Knapp
7
0
Rate This
Gee, what a shock?
on March 22, 2012 at 5:49 pm Something Scary Seems to be in the Works and the Press is Hiding It...
9
1
Rate This
[...] [...]
on April 4, 2012 at 9:26 am  Marty Rice
7
0
Rate This
Trust (if you must) but Verify…
on May 21, 2012 at 7:31 am  Deb Marston
14
1
Rate This
Glad I came across this. For anyone still skeptical that Snopes is not a Democrat shill, try researching the deaths connected to the Clintons. Snopes has a pat answer for every one.. pitiful. As the article says, you should do your own research on everything. The Library of Congress and us.gov will have much of what politicians deflect your attention from in their rhetoric (lies).
on June 9, 2012 at 2:05 pm  glendaleshyboy
13
3
Rate This
I agree that Snopes is suspect… Just check “Larry Sinclair” or “Obama Drug Use” on Snopes… Nada…. Now try ” Romney dog”… Pops right up. Now go to YOUTUBE and type in LARRY SINCLAIR and see the ( probably false) allegations against President Obama when he was in Illinois.
There is NO QUESTION that SNOPES is purposely ignoring this… I have emailed them several times asking “WHY IGNORED”… Never an answer… I have written a letter to their house… NO ANSWER… I have had friends write to them to verify my SNOPES ACCUSATION…. I am not annonymous… Peter po box 26 Montrose Ca, 91021
on August 27, 2012 at 9:42 pm  Keith Adams
9
4
Rate This
Copied from snopes, regarding Obama’s drug use:
Obama wrote at length in his two books about his experiences growing up as the child of mixed-race parents and the issues that accompanied that status, and he noted in his first book, Dreams From My Father that before entering politics he had used marijuana and cocaine. His drug use, he wrote, was “… something that could push questions of who I was out of my mind, something that could flatten out the landscape of my heart, blur the edges of my memory” and said in a 2006 interview that his drug use was “… reflective of the struggles and confusion of a teenage boy. Teenage boys are frequently confused.”
Read more at snopes.com
on September 22, 2012 at 1:21 pm Info About Snopes dot Com
3
1
Rate This
[...] [...]
on February 14, 2013 at 7:56 am  Tarry 'Bricks' Carapezza
2
5
Rate This
do your research
http://%28link deleted)
{{Next time, try reading the entire article, Obama-bot. Thanks for stopping by, fathead.}}
on February 23, 2013 at 6:05 am  Layni Shepherd
1
56
Rate This
LOL, Spoken like a true Republican from Texas, who still believes they never stole the Alamo,or stole Texas . . . What a twit.
{{BTW, you should correct your email. MILF stands for “Mom I’d LIKE to F***.” I certainly wouldn’t want to f*** you, lady (and I use that word loosely — you know what “Loose” means at your age, don’t you, grandma?}}
on March 10, 2013 at 10:30 am  Fred Boas
1
0
Rate This
Snopes exposed? Say it ain’t so…People have been using this TRASH site for years to “expose” the truth, with the attitude that Snopes is NEVER wrong. Well guess what gang, they are….FREQUENTLY, and I have been saying this publicly for years. No one has ALL the answers ALL the time. Most posts on the internet are best checked at the source, and NOT through a website.
on March 10, 2013 at 2:17 pm  Jay C. Tully
1
0
Rate This
Stole the Alamo? Elaborate…actually don’t because it is irrelevant considering we stole the entire U.S. and the Spanish,French, English, and Portuguese stole North and South America initially…
on March 10, 2013 at 2:27 pm Jay C. Tully
1
0
Rate This
But the sources used by snopes alone are enough for me to discredit the site, you use 12 different newspapers to legitimize an article, really? I wish I could have done so on my political science papers in college, I would have had it made!!
on March 20, 2013 at 9:12 pm  Gladys Crump
1
0
Rate This
LOL glad I’m not the only person who thinks Snopes.com is in the tank for Obama, it is and always has been but for awhile they were finding it easy to convince a lot of folks…..might as well go to the Huffington Post as Snopes, sameo sameo.
|
