Bio not provided
Question why you believe what you believe from time to time. From the link you may not have clicked:
"CLAIM: Snopes.com is 'owned by a flaming liberal' with a partisan bias.
First off, it's clear that whoever wrote this piece made it up as they went along. Anyone who has spent even a few minutes browsing Snopes.com knows that the website is owned by two people, not one. They are husband and wife David and Barbara Mikkelson of southern California. This is stated on the website and has been common knowledge for quite some time.
"Second, the charge of partisanship is laid without evidence. At no time have the Mikkelsons publicly stated a political preference or affiliation, or expressed support for any particular party or candidate.
Moreover, Barbara Mikkelson is a Canadian citizen, and as such cannot vote in U.S. elections or contribute to political campaigns. In a statement to FactCheck.org, David Mikkelson said his "sole involvement in politics" is voting on election day. In 2000 he registered as a Republican, documents provided to FactCheck.org show, and in 2008 Mikkelson didn't declare a party affiliation at all. Says Mikkelson: "I've never joined a party, worked for a campaign, or donated money to a candidate"
I have very little hope that presenting facts will get you off believing a lie, but I tried.
2 years, 2 months ago on Military Absentee Ballots Delivered One Day Late, Would Have Swung Election For Romney
No, you obviously read too much into my purposefully sparse post. The article does exposes Snopes for what it really is, a valid source for fact checking.
Well played, sir. You had me totally trolled until your over the top comment about The Washington Times being liberal. Should have quit while you were ahead. ;-P
You need to read this exposing Snopes for what it really is: http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/internet/a/snopes_exposed.htm
Thank you for your almost 3 decades teaching science to our children. Thank god you weren't teaching English. While you managing an ok definition of ignorance you really crapped out defining rational, stupidity, and insanity. Looks those up; your definitions are way off base.
"Those who claim that they are rational have a big problem with the truth. They stoop to the low level of hurling insults at other people who have different opinions and never present factual evidence to support their opinion."
^^This but really struck me as odd. See whenever I encounter someone claiming to be rational I think to myself, 'here is someone who is reasonable and open to be swayed by logic.' But hey, that's just me.
You seem like a smart person who is letting some deep-seated issues (maybe career related?) really cloud your thinking. I hope you find peace. Peace.
I understand your frustration, but do you honestly think that the country would be better off if we didn't pull together and come to compromises? No political ideology holds a majority in this country. You may think Obama is a complete failure and his policies are poison for this country, but you know what? I feel the exact opposite and feel the policies of the right are damaging. And about 50% of the people feel how you do and about 50% feel how I do. What should we do about it? Demand political purity in our elected officials, or try to meet in the middle?
There were only a handful of states that required photo voter ID. All those states were right-leaning and would never go for Obama. Your point there is not strong.
I would certainly count Mr. Woods as one who shares your politics and worldview, and surely he is not your only source of news and information. We are not in a great crisis. We will get out of this. We need to pull together and compromise like great Americans have done in the past.
I find your comment confusing. You are angry at me for being rational and you are angry at those who are duped by this site? Are you against both rational thought and irrational thought?
If you your news only from right-wing biased sources, and only have discourse with those who share your politics and worldview it will be pretty easy to convince yourself that the tough spot we're in right now is in fact an end of days type crisis.
Please do not make such broad and frankly ignorant characterizations about half the country. It is offensive and counter productive. That is not how a true liberal speaks. Now you know.
We're honestly not in a time of GREAT CRISIS. I know it may feel that way to you. Your whole worldview just got a kick in the nuts. When your candidate who you thought couldn't lose does just that it can be devastating. The reason so many on the right feel devastated is because they have convinced themselves that all news is biased and that only Fox and a few other right-wing sources tell the truth. They get all their news from this distorted echo chamber that lies to them. Lies to them by telling them Romney is ahead, when he never was. Lies to them by telling them a centrist democratic president is a communist trying to strip them of their rights. Lies to them about what the democrats really want for this country (spoiler: they want a positive future). We are not in great crisis. We are in a tough spot, but it is one we can get out of with smart ideas and political compromise. The right wing needs to stop punishing as a traitor any Republican that "dares reach across the aisle." Compromise is how you run a country that doesn't have complete political homogeneity.
Hard to take you seriously when you say check your facts in the same breath as this story is in fact true. Dems won senate, governors and pres, Repubs won house. What facts would you like me to check?
Um, so because The Boss tends goats then all satire news should be believed as fact? Ok, that makes a lot of sense.
You know why the right lost? Because you've gone so far off the deep end with your Fox News echo chamber crazy talk that people are embarrassed to be associated with you. Stop being so batsh*t nuts and you might actual win an election rather than alienating rational people.