Bio not provided
It's published on a website that is entirely dedicated to satire. The biography of the author clearly states that he is a stand up comic. Look at all the other article titles. Look at the "about us" section where it clearly says that nothing on the site is factual. How much do you need to have your hand held to figure this stuff out? For every satirical piece does the author need to start the article with a disclaimer stating that the piece is not real? That sort of ruins what satire is about. It's not the fault of the publisher that some ignoramus didn't have enough sense to decipher a very obvious joke and decided to disseminate it as truth. My goodness. If you can't figure out that this is satire, God help you. I can't imagine what it is like for you to try and navigate the very complex media landscape out there. Why don't you just realize you've been had and have a laugh? It might do you some good.
1 year, 1 month ago on Military Absentee Ballots Delivered One Day Late, Would Have Swung Election For Romney
No man, you're not getting it. This site is not real. It is a joke site. There may very well be real honest to God examples of military votes being discounted, but this isn't one of them. You are defending the authenticity of a story that the publishers go out of their way to tell you is not based on truth. Jeez - if you will believe a story that is published on a joke site and that the publishers are clearly telling you is not based on any facts at all, what won't you believe? Think about that. And since when is the stock market the sane arbiter in the room? Get real.
It's not "the same story." It's a different story based on loosely the same topic. The difference is that the Examiner story is actually a news story, while the Duffel Bag story is a joke. When you respond to a joke story as if it were a news story, you sort of make yourself look like a fool.
Not a malcontent - this is a website dedicated to satire regarding the military. It is for people in the military to laugh at. Grow a sense of humor. Trying times require it.
Did you even bother to read the article? It's clearly a joke. It doesn't say anything about Obama attempting to suppress the military vote, it talks about the incompetency of the military mail system. It talks about the soldiers being completely used to this kind of bureaucratic bumbling. This is insider humor for people in the military. I'm thinking you just saw the headline and ran with it, instead of bothering to investigate the source, or even to read the very brief, obviously intended to be taken as humor, article. My goodness. There are real articles about votes being lost, etc. But this is not one of them.
Okay, I sort of get your point about Chris Matthews - but on the other hand, if you do believe a website that clearly states nothing they publish is based on truth, then I think you've got some serious problems.
I asked a Navy SEAL and he looked over the site, then told me: "This site's satire idiot." He pointed me to the "about us" section, and then pointed out that all the other articles on the site were obviously jokes too.
Whether or not Snopes is "in Obama's pocket" has nothing to do with this site being entirely 100% satirical. It's not a news site. It's, for lack of a better word, a joke site. Look up "satire." It's like Stephen Colbert, who FYI is not really a conservative pundit, in case you thought he was. Sorry.
Did you know that gullible isn't in the dictionary?
You know where she got that shit about the red states and blue states? Stephen Colbert. He ran a joke about that last night. I swear these people don't understand what satire is. They believe everything they read. They think Colbert is a real right-winger and not someone making fun of right-wingers. It's insane.