Like Snopes for Snopes
Xrlq, that is. Seems to be a trend.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 30th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
um..did you actually click through..the email in question is in fact false and properly debunked by Snopes. I have no idea what XRLQ is smoking.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Did you? they debunk one part of a series and imply the entirety is false. Usual for snopes, though.
October 30th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Sleight of Snopes…
October 30th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
At the bottom of the email that they debunked says:
Raines does not (and has not) worked for the Obama campaign as anything. There was a newspaper article that suggests he’s had a couple of telephone conversations with someone from the campaign and clearly not “Chief Economic Advisor” (which was covered in the Snopes article).
Howard has no connection to the campaign and clearly not “Chief Economic Advisor” (and how does a campaign have two Chief something or others).
Jim Johnson was never a “Senior Obama Finance Advisor” though did serve on the VP Search Committee.
So they got it wrong on Raines and Howard and half wrong on Johnson. This appears to me as False.
November 1st, 2008 at 7:42 am
Technically, of course it’s false, just as my counter-example would have been. However, it’s a bit disingenuous to quote a version of a mostly-true story that gets a few inconsequential details wrong, brand the whole thing as “false,” and bury at the bottom that the basic story was true. Unfortunately, Snopes has a long pattern of this behavior, cf. Al Gore’s internets, where again you have to read all the way to the bottom to find out that the only part that was false was the verb “invent.”
What they should have said is right on Johnson, disputed on Raines (recall WaPo having the chutzpah to award Pinocchios to the McCain campaign for having relied on a WaPo article), and who the hell is Tim Howard? Snopes routinely describes mostly-true rumors as partially true, or “not quite” rather than outright false. They just don’t when there’s an election to win.