• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

President May be in Trouble

I just say question all sources. My example was a little extreme. However aren't we just a bunch of people sitting on a corn snake forum discussing American politics with others from different countries with our own opinions.
 
Okay, two of those articles are in support of Snopes (Including the one you marked as 'left') and the other two specifically question Snopes because the authors of the articles are birthers.

The two in support of Snopes quote Factcheck.org:

FactCheck reviewed a sample of Snopes’ responses to political rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, and found them to be free from bias in all cases. FactCheck noted that Barbara Mikkelson was a Canadian citizen (and thus unable to vote in American elections) and David Mikkelson was an independent who was once registered as a Republican. "You’d be hard-pressed to find two more apolitical people," David Mikkelson told them.

Not sure exactly what you're trying to say.
 
Ah, you said in a follow up. Missed that.

And yes, I agree that you shouldn't rely on any one site. I generally follow up on Snopes with their cites if I'm that interested. I like to use Snopes and Wikipedia because they source their articles and you can investigate their sources. No single body of information is free from error, but I got the impression you were challenging the claim that the cell phone program was started before Obama was elected by posting a thread of anonymous people disparaging Snopes as part of some great Liberal Agenda as proof that the claim was false.
 
Wait, the cell phones were added before he was elected. How exactly is he responsible for this? The video is typical cherry picking ignorance on both sides.
You are technically correct. It started under Clinton. It was perpetuated and became wide spread with Safelink during the start of BHO and his super majority in 2008. It now costs $1.5 billion and rising. A welfare program that is not needed.
 
I already linked Snopes, so here is Factcheck.org:

FactCheck Obamaphone Article

The SafeLink program has actually been offering cell phones to low-income households in some states since 2008, not beginning "earlier this year," as the e-mail claims. But the program is rooted in a deeper history.

Also:

SafeLink is run by a subsidiary of América Móvil, the world’s fourth largest wireless company in terms of subscribers, but it is not paid for directly by the company. Nor is it paid for with "tax payer money," as the e-mail claims. Rather, it is funded through the Universal Service Fund, which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company, an independent, not-for-profit corporation set up by the Federal Communications Commission. The USF is sustained by contributions from telecommunications companies such as "long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers." The companies often charge customers to fund their contributions in the form of a universal service fee you might see on your monthly phone bill.

So I have cited two common and reliable sources for the 2008 date.

I have yet to see a source on your Clinton claim, tsst.
 
Ahh, I see. The Act that overhauls telecommunication in the US was passed in '96.

I'm still looking for the origins of the Lifeline program and the actual date that cell phones were included, but I'm done at work and have to go.
 
You know it's sad when this woman is starting to look like she would make a good choice for president.

0.jpg




Her platform.
 
Four of her five platform points are pretty solid, but shutting down all military bases in foreign countries? Best of luck.
 
American politics is gotta b tough on snake breeders. One one hand they want the freedom to breed, buy, sell, trade, and transport. Which comes with a small conservative government. On the other hand they want the absolute immoral freedom that comes with a large centralized liberal government. Delima what to do?
 
American politics is gotta b tough on snake breeders. One one hand they want the freedom to breed, buy, sell, trade, and transport. Which comes with a small conservative government. On the other hand they want the absolute immoral freedom that comes with a large centralized liberal government. Delima what to do?

HUH??????????
 
You know I get so tired of being so quick to call people trolls. It is rather irritating.

I would consider a thread where people agree to certain main stream news being a disreputable source of information, then using news postings from an obviously biased news sources as a from of trolling.
 
Back
Top