Rightwing liars attempting to pin liberal bias on Snopes

[Lasher]

This smear is debunked at other fact checking websites.

TruthOrFiction.com:

Snopes.com is a secret tool of the Democratic Party to promote Barack Obama- Fiction!

Summary of the eRumor:
An eRumor about Snopes.com accusing them being owned by a flaming liberal and this man is in the tank for Obama.

The Truth:
In October, 2008, stories began circulating via forwarded emails that the popular urban legends site Snopes.com was owned by liberals and was "in the tank" for presidential candidate Barack Obama.

As with many forwarded emails, the criticism did not include any example of what the writer of the email claimed was the difference between what Snopes.com reported and what Barack Obama had actually said.

Snopes.com is an excellent site that has become an authoritative source for information about urban legends and forwarded emails. We regard David and Barbara Mikkelson, the founders and operators of Snopes.com, as colleagues and professional researchers who have earned a good reputation for what they do.

We can give a unique perspective on this story because we do the same kind of work as Snopes.com and have sometimes been the target of similar criticism.

We've got a collection of emails that have come to TruthOrFiction.com accusing us of being "right wing whackos" as well as "liberals" and "communists." We've been suspected of being owned and operated by both Republicans and Democrats. We've been called "Christian propagandists" as well as "atheists pretending to be neutral." We occasionally receive emails that have elaborate theories about who "really" owns us and what our "real" motives are.

The bottom line is that if you try to report the truth, there will be those who don't like the truth you've reported and who will develop suspicions about why you did.

That, in our view, is what is happening with Snopes.

The 2008 presidential campaign has been one of the most intense and unique in our nation's history and has prompted more political eRumors than any presidential campaign in our experience, especially about Barack Obama.

These anti-Snopes emails have probably been prompted by someone who does not like Barack Obama and does not like the fact that Snopes (or TruthOrFiction.com for that matter) has debunked some of the emails that are not true about him.

One of the versions of the eRumor mentions TruthOrFiction.com and recommends our site. We appreciate that, but we want to say for the record that we've had nothing to do with this eRumor about Snopes.com and we condemn it.

Full TruthOrFiction.com article here

About.com:

Summary: Forwarded email alleges that the urban legend debunking site Snopes.com is 'owned by a flaming liberal' who is 'in the tank for Obama' and cannot be trusted to provide reliable information.

(Example of bogus email)

Comments: Apparently it never occurred to this anonymous emailer to cite even one alleged instance of Snopes.com promulgating "half-truths" or "lies" under the guise of valid information. So much for the email's credibility.

That such a scurrilous attack should be mounted against the oldest and most popular fact-checking site on the Web in the waning days of an election year characterized from beginning to end by baseless Internet smears is doubly ironic.

Let's examine the unsupported accusations.

Is the owner of Snopes.com a liberal?

Is it true that "Snopes.com is owned by a flaming liberal" and that "this man is in the tank for Obama"?

Well, first off, Snopes.com is owned by two people, not one. They are husband and wife David and Barbara Mikkelson.

Second, the Mikkelsons' political views are between them and the ballot box. I don't know what they are; you don't know what they are; certainly the author of this email doesn't know what they are. According to a boilerplate statement issued by the site, "Neither of the operators of Snopes.com has any affiliation with, has ever made a donation to, or has ever publicly expressed support for any political party or candidate."

Anyone who has proof to the contrary should come out with it.

More here

[The Wielding Truth]

1. The truth should always be given a little liberal bias,because

many viewpoints should be considered as well as historical reference and character traits. That is how media should process stories and provide the closest thing to the truth as possible. Fabricating stories to try and support your views as done by the right is propaganda and shows a bias that is corrupt. the RW has little concept of ferreting out the truth and therefore should not be trusted as a source of any story.IMHO