Xrlq Takes on Snopes.com
He focuses on their lies by omission.
They still haven’t fixed their error‘ about Obama’s pledge not to run for President, by the way.
He focuses on their lies by omission.
They still haven’t fixed their error‘ about Obama’s pledge not to run for President, by the way.
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
29 | 30 | 31 |
Powered by WordPress.
Snopes was good at one time, but has steadily degraded as the proprietors got swelled heads and allowed their biases to erode their objectivity. We don’t point to it much any longer at Debunkers.
SPQR (72771e) — 12/17/2008 @ 9:34 am[…] (Via Patterico) […]
Cold Fury » Required: largish grain of salt (6f4592) — 12/17/2008 @ 9:46 amAgreed – I too used to steer folks over there to disabuse them of certain notions. Now, I wouldn’t trust them with the time of day.
rhodeymark (1aaf2a) — 12/17/2008 @ 10:08 amSnopes lost discarded all credibility some time ago.
They are now just more of the bottom-feeders of the left.
And I think you /.’d Xlrq
Larry Sheldon (86b2e1) — 12/17/2008 @ 12:19 pmIf I’m not mistaken, Snopes has stealth-edited the ’50 Lies’ page.
It used to say:
That verbiage has now disappeared, to be replaced with:
This is really strange. How is this NOT a lie? Obama obviously is “one of them” because he DID “essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate”?
Snopes seems to imply that this means he wasn’t lying when he said he wouldn’t run in ’08. I don’t see how the above quote helps his case, though.
And obviously, still no mention of the very categorical denial on Meet the Press. Guess the Internet detectives over at Snopes still haven’t managed to track it down:)
CTD (7054d2) — 12/17/2008 @ 12:52 pm