Snopes has had a busy year

[Modbert]

Rumors and Partisan Politics Sociological Images

J.L. Bell at Oz and Ends counted the number of rumors about President G.W. Bush and President Obama that were identified and determined by rumor-validation site, snopes.com, to be true, false, a mixture of true and false, or uncertain. It turns out, there are a lot more rumors and a lot more false rumors about Obama than there were about Bush:

In less than two years, Obama rumor-mongers have had nearly twice the output that their Bush counterparts managed in eight years – 87 to 47. And while the Bush rumors split almost evenly true-false, false Obama rumors dwarfed the true ones. The false rumors about Obama outnumbered the total number of rumors about Bush. And while the lies about Obama are almost all negative, some of the false rumors about Bush are quite flattering, along the lines of the George Washington cheery tree rumor – like the rumor that had Bush paying for the funeral of a boy who had drowned near the Crawford ranch.

For Obama, in most cases the truth is innocuous while the lie reflects poorly on the President, particularly photographs that are misrepresented or show behavior that produced no complaints when his predecessors did the same. In contrast, in this mixture of truth and falsehood about George W. Bush praying with an injured soldier, the lie reflected well on that President

What a huge surprise!

 

[Avatar4321]

And I care what snopes says because?

 

[rightwinger]

Rumors and Partisan Politics Sociological Images

J.L. Bell at Oz and Ends counted the number of rumors about President G.W. Bush and President Obama that were identified and determined by rumor-validation site, snopes.com, to be true, false, a mixture of true and false, or uncertain. It turns out, there are a lot more rumors and a lot more false rumors about Obama than there were about Bush:

In less than two years, Obama rumor-mongers have had nearly twice the output that their Bush counterparts managed in eight years – 87 to 47. And while the Bush rumors split almost evenly true-false, false Obama rumors dwarfed the true ones. The false rumors about Obama outnumbered the total number of rumors about Bush. And while the lies about Obama are almost all negative, some of the false rumors about Bush are quite flattering, along the lines of the George Washington cheery tree rumor – like the rumor that had Bush paying for the funeral of a boy who had drowned near the Crawford ranch.

For Obama, in most cases the truth is innocuous while the lie reflects poorly on the President, particularly photographs that are misrepresented or show behavior that produced no complaints when his predecessors did the same. In contrast, in this mixture of truth and falsehood about George W. Bush praying with an injured soldier, the lie reflected well on that President

What a huge surprise!

And they show up on this board every day

 

[CMike]

I am sure that extreme left wing organizations are usually busy promoting the left wing agenda.

Online Rumor Mill Spins Its Own Myth(Snopes.com's leftwing bias undercuts its credibility)

 

[Modbert]

And I care what snopes says because?

Snopes is one of the most non-partisan myth busters on the internet. I think it says something about each side when Obama has more than double the false rumors being spread about in less than two years then Bush in eight years.

 

[Modbert]

I am sure that extreme left wing organizations are usually busy promoting the left wing agenda.

Online Rumor Mill Spins Its Own Myth(Snopes.com's leftwing bias undercuts its credibility)

Nice job finding a article seven years old.

And Free Republic too?

 

[Alpha1]

Quote:

J.L. Bell at Oz and Ends counted the number of rumors about President G.W. Bush and President Obama that were identified and determined by rumor-validation site, snopes.com, to be true, false, a mixture of true and false, or uncertain. It turns out, there are a lot more rumors and a lot more false rumors about Obama than there were about Bush:

Well, think about it....I can see that more rumors about Obama would be false....only because most of the disgusting accusations of Marxism and Socialism and un-Americanism, are not rumors but the truth....

 

[CMike]

I am sure that extreme left wing organizations are usually busy promoting the left wing agenda.

Online Rumor Mill Spins Its Own Myth(Snopes.com's leftwing bias undercuts its credibility)

Nice job finding a article seven years old.

And Free Republic too?

Still a left-wing organization.

 

[Modbert]

Still a left-wing organization.

Why am I suppose to trust Free Republic? Last I checked, nobody at Snopes had murdered a man in cold blood. Free Republic can't say the same.

 

[CMike]

If we have to argue about whether an outfit is unbiased, it's not.

 

[Modbert]

If we have to argue about whether an outfit is unbiased, it's not.

Free Republic is a hardcore right wing forum. It's not even a news website, but nice try.

 

[Avatar4321]

And I care what snopes says because?

Snopes is one of the most non-partisan myth busters on the internet. I think it says something about each side when Obama has more than double the false rumors being spread about in less than two years then Bush in eight years.

Non-partisan? Why? because they say so? And what makes you think they aren't reinforcing myths? I have no reason to find them credible. I've thought that even when they do get things right.

 

[random3434]

I'd like to hear what sites you DO think are credible CMike and Avatar. (since so far you two are the only ones commenting on this saying it's not credible.)

 

[VaYank5150]

I'd like to hear what sites you DO think are credible CMike and Avatar. (since so far you two are the only ones commenting on this saying it's not credible.)

THIS should be fun...

 

[rightwinger]

And I care what snopes says because?

Snopes is one of the most non-partisan myth busters on the internet. I think it says something about each side when Obama has more than double the false rumors being spread about in less than two years then Bush in eight years.

The problem for the right is that not only are they false but they are simplistic and juvenile.

Doesn't reflect well on the right

 

[paperview]

Still a left-wing organization.

Why am I suppose to trust Free Republic? Last I checked, nobody at Snopes had murdered a man in cold blood. Free Republic can't say the same.

*ouch*


Yikes.

 

[paperview]

I'd like to hear what sites you DO think are credible CMike and Avatar. (since so far you two are the only ones commenting on this saying it's not credible.)

THIS should be fun...

Grabs the popcorn with ya.

 

[paperview]

If we have to argue about whether an outfit is unbiased, it's not.

Hot damn what a funny post!

 

[rightwinger]

The problem with Snopes is that day in, day out, they prove that the Conservatives are full of shit.

They do it simply by providing facts. How leftist

 

[Gadawg73]

And I care what snopes says because?

Snopes is one of the most non-partisan myth busters on the internet. I think it says something about each side when Obama has more than double the false rumors being spread about in less than two years then Bush in eight years.

As someone that has held an investigative agency license for 30 years and investigated over 5000 cases, over 750 for trial, I second this post.

Some of you still believe Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya. Jesus could come again and tell you otherwise and you would still believe wnd.