Is biased?

Are we Republicans or Democrats? Conservatives or liberals?

Published Apr 17, 2015

Are we Republicans or Democrats? Conservatives or liberals? Administration supporters or a secretly-funded tool of the opposition? According to our readership, we're all those things — from what they tell us, we've performed the remarkable feat of being decidedly biased in every possible direction:

I used to read your site all the time. It soon became apparent that anything that was there political, you people would swing to the looney lieral view on everything. It is a shame but I cannot trust you on any of your information any more, as you are too left leaning so as to give false information.

You are all dumbass republicans that want to control everything. You couldn't win a fair fight if it was clear air. Pick on who you want but leave names out unless you actually talk to and that person agrees with you. Hide behind your shield as all cowards do. You all lost, accept it. I'm pretty confident some one will make your day soon.

how come you only review/submit/comment on subjects that show the liberal/socialist agenda as positive/ good. Never seen you say anything against the left. Isn't that biased reporting?

It's also obvious that your site is biased and is pro Republican which does not make you qualified to give the rest of us who aren't a satisfactory answer about anything especially regarding politics. You can not be BIASED but objective.

I will never trust your fact-checking site in the future. Your blatant liberal bias is and your disingenuous answers are a travesty to anyone looking for information about events. I will never recommend your site to anyone looking to find the truth about circulated information, and I will add an addendum to any e-mails that reference your site cautioning them against your bias and views.

Not that you would tell me, but I will ask any way. Are you anti-Obama or just another bias Republican? I read your crap about him and the First Lady surrendering their law licenses and was surprised at your insinuating their was some corruption.

I noticed you lean toward a liberal prespective on articles. You also seem to defend the useless president sitting in office.

It's always a great service when myths and misinformation are exposed. Truth and fact can be a rare commodity. However, your site are disappointing and lack credibility. You show a very right-wing bias which casts a shadow on any attempt at truth seeking. When one considers the current assualt on democracy, the constitution and freedom by the Bush Regime and their extreme right-wing supporters, it is truly a shame that your motives and choices are suspect.

You can print all the left wing spin you want for your Demo buddies but that will not change facts. Can we now believe anything you write on this site ??? I'll look elsewhere.

After spending several hours on your most excellent website, I am struck with the notion that you are extremely defensive on the matter of George Bush and tend to lay blame on Bill Clinton where possible. Now perhaps I am reading between the lines, or perhaps you are simply telling it like it is, but one must wonder how candidly you report the "facts."

I use your service to find out if mass emails are hoaxes, not to find if you think something will work. Please leave your personal comments out of your work and just stick to the facts. Your liberalism tends to show through; therefore, it is a detrement to your credibility.

Your page seems pretty pro Bush. Just because he kissed some babies and shook the hands of victims in front of a bunch of cameras does not make him the right man for any job. He is still a moron and a danger to the free world.

I find that almost all of your comments written about every story here is very left-wing, almost unamerican, and in some cases just absoultly wrong. If you can not report a story without putting your spin on it like the liberal media, maybe you should do something else for a living.

Hell, we had a wife cheating, pot smoking, draft dodging, womanizing asshole in the whitehouse for eight years, his name was Bill Clinton.

I dial in your site every day. But I do not go there for a patriotic pep talk thinly disguised as the answer to someone's question. I'm really tired of Bush lackeys telling me that they defend my right to disagree but that I must shut up because I'm not patriotic.

While I'm not a fan of the Dixie Chicks, I too am ashamed of our President. That doesn't mean that I want any harm to come to our service men. Any asshole who makes such a claim is a liar. It does mean that I am embarrassed by the Bush cowboy image, by his disregard for our former allies (thus making things harder for our military in any undertaking), for his corporation-first fiscal disaster, by his disdain for ordinary Americans, by his willingness to destroy our environment, and by his lies.

If you want to proclaim your fealty to Bush, open a new website. Please stop polluting this one.

Your site was mentioned in the local paper as a place to visit for "slanted" views of happenings in our country. The mention did not state which way you slanted but did state it wouldn't take long to figure out. This was a correct assumption on the writer's part. I guess anyone with a computer, an internet connection and a disregard for the truth can pretty much write whatever they want. My only question for you would be, did you ever meet a democrat or a liberal that you didn't love?

Well, I had thought I would read a true story about how the Congressmen do not pay into social security but instead I read a personal agenda against Hillary Clinton. I find that offensive. If you want to voice your personal opinions in politics then do it some other way than on a website that, supposedly, is not biased. I find it offensive that you take sides in political issues. If they are so important to you, I strongly suggest you use another forum to further your views and leave your excellent Snopes site to simply report the situations and not your personal opinions.

Even though, usually, I enjoy your site, I find that more and more you lean toward the Republican view and that is unfortunate because the world is not made up of conservative right-wingers.

Your absolute and obvious bias towards the left, against the right and towards atheism and against faith, have actually corrupted your views and made many of your observations totally wrong or invalid. I guess anyone can start a site like this and simply spout out their own opinions in a method that "appears" verifiable. The idea that your site is valid is the largest urban myth of all!

Fair and balanced are you part of Murdock's network? Everyone of your urban legends have been pro right and anti left. Please, indicate that you are a pro right organization and are not at any time going to have positive things to say about the democratic party.

It is not that your opinion should not be expressed, it's that you are decided slanted to one side and don't let the people reading your site know this in advance.

Please, correct this error.

Your site is sometimes usefull however it seems the bigger the site gets, the more left slanted and leaning it becomes. It might serve you well to just report on the facts and leave out some of the biased comments aimed at supporting your political views.


Are you connected in ANYWAY to the BUSH's re election ????????? Please tell the truth.

I don't know whether the "Picket Defenses" story is legitimate or not. But once again, you liberal idiots can't keep your slant subtle. You tout 6 examples of Kerry signs being defaced and as opposed to 2 Bush signs. Do you not think angry liberals are not more likely to trash somebody elses property? Us Republicans are to busy working and contributing to the economy to destroy other peop;es stuff. Liberals like you folks love freedom of speech unless, of course, you disagree.

Well I see you are a "FLAMMING LIBERAL"

I used to believe this was an honest and accurate web site for which people could get the truth about any subject. Now I see it as nothing but an extension of the other liberal news media. You should charge Kerry for your advertising for him.

Just curious, but I notice that you seem to be Bush supporters in the upcoming election. Is that correct?

I have always enjoyed your website and find it informative when I'm trying to track down the orgins/verification of "rumours".

Today I was viewing the new articles when I come across several items involving John Kerry. It's apparent to me that you are using your site to preach your political views against John Kerry. I realize that this is your website and you can certainly say whatever you like, unfortunately you have made me question the validity and choices behind your articles. I also realize I am just one person and It won't make a bit of difference whether or not I choose to ever access your site again, please be aware I WILL NOT. Let me say that you are only serving to remind me that Mr. Bush is the reason our country is so horribly divided, I'm also reminded that the he continually lies to us regarding Iraq and you are also reminding me that he is solely responsible for the deaths of over 1,ooo U.S. Troops. I guess I should thank you for reinforcing my choice for President in 2004...John Kerry...and by the way...Good Riddance.


Please would you keep the right wing stuff off of your sight. We get that your pro-bush.

To Whom It May Concern:

Quite obvious that this website is politically bias. Where is the background information for urban legends such as "President Bush flipping the bird" or "V.P. Dick Cheney using the F- word?"

And please don't give me your Christian response that you don't allow profanity on your website. Just look under Sen. John Kerry and you'll find an entry on your website for him using the term "son of a bitch to a secret service agent."

So, is Snopes .com bias......the answer would have to be noted with a green dot as "identifies a true statement. Will have to search elsewhere when I'm attempting to separate fact from fiction in the future.

Up until now, I have encouraged those who email me with stories to check their validity on your website. I am having second thoughts having noticed an anti-Bush/Republican undertone to some of your articles. Too bad you couldn't keep your political views/agenda out of them. I 'thought' you provided a useful service until now.

I do not trust you after researching a number of your items. I sense a tendency to a left leaning bias that is very well disguised, but I believe manifests itself in a less intense treatment of those subjects that are toward that side of the political spectrum.

Pretty cool site. Well constructed and very interesting... but your blind reverence for George W. Bush and everything to do with the Iraqi war really taints the validity of your site and your conclusions of validity on some of your posts. If you let your personal thoughts and beliefs lead you to believe that bush and friends are without flaw and people like Kerry and Fonda are nothing but flawed then how am i supposed to believe that your feelings did not influence your "proof" about other myths and legends? It's your site. I just thought it was a disappointing theme that grew to be a bit annoying.

It is hard for Americans to hide their political meaning, quite obvious by your comments on political rumors.So could you guys just stick to the rumors instead of giving "opinions" and demonstrating your right leaning culpability? SHHESH

Be careful, your politics are showing! Your conservative bent on John Kerry, the war and Bush is evident and in turn, makes anything on this site questionable at best... Needless to say, i will never be back and will advise others not to do the same.

Your 'Questionable Quotes' page has blatantly omitted many of the ignorant and silly quotes correctly attributed to George Bush, Jr. The ultimate collection of these stupid quotes can be found in the 3 books titles Bushisms (1, 2, and 3). As your site tends to have a right wing slant, I can only assume this omission was conscious. You lose credibility when you simply choose two minor statements attributed to Bush to debunk, while hundreds more legitimately exist and were indeed uttered by the alcoholic, C-grade level, AWOL, hypocritical 'president'.

I have found your site useful for some of the basic urban legends, but I find your site to be very partisan slanted when it comes to dealing with anything political. It disturbs me how you protect the crap of the left and validate the crap about the Republican party in general, but appear to try and explain and protect anything the Democrats say or do even when you are identifying a truth or a lie, you seem to have to disclaimer it to explain it away.

Every party has ugly truths and spins the facts to their advantage. You can't be partisan here, you shouldn't be.

I am disappointed.

I wish there was some truely independent source out there to compare some of the political garbage being slung out there. Our politicians and press seem to encourage the spread of garbage rather than sticking to facts.

Facts are what should be here and ALL OF THEM, not just ones you choose to chase down...mostly against conservatives and in support of liberals.

While I have found the information presented to be correct 99% of the time, it appears to me to spin ever so slightly to the right. A small problem perhaps in your view. However, when one claims to be a purveyor of the truth, a dispeller of myths, even a slight bend to one direction or another is shameful.

I just read your account titled "Slain Wounded Iraqi Insurgent". I have read other accounts you have published on your site and thinking I saw a leftest slant on the story. However, in "Slain Wounded Iraqi Insurgent" you left no doubt concerning your political views. It is your web site and you can publish any viewpoint/beliefs you like but I feel because of the content and intended use of your site you have a responsibility to make precise accounts without any concealed slants. I like your site in general but I was very disappointed in the perspective this story was presented.

Why is this website slanted so far to the left?

You are realy part of the ACLU or what?

Wow. You guys aren't partisan with your politics at all, are you?
Let me guess - Republicans?

I'm noticing more and more, as I try to check out news items concerning the war on terror, that you guys tend to skew everything to the left. Your ant-Bush bias is showing more and more, and it's getting a little old. Either depict the letter/item "True" or "False" and leave your political bias out of it - nobody wants to hear it! I can get that out out of the liberal media anytime.

I come to your site a lot to check out the validity of certain statement, but lately I am starting to doubt your truthfulness because of the left leaning bias which is obvious in your commentaries.

As the years have gone by I've always turned to Snopes to get the lowdown. More and more it's looked like you've lost your objectivity. More and more you sound like the fox news network.

You're not even Republicans, you're out and out Bushlicans and you wouldn't know objectivity if it jumped up and bit you in the ass.

I have read your website and decided that you guys have to be fat redneck, republicans and religious idiots. I know you don't care that you will lose one site visitor but you did. Your obvious racism and slanted views for the right is obvious in the stories you are posting.


Are those of you at Snopes or the business as a whole a liberal leaning organization ?

I cant help but notice that at every opportunity, you seem to take a left turn in your dialogue. is a low class organization. I will not use your website. It was uncalled for to address Senator Obama as a LIAR. Where are McCain's 50 Lies!!!

I am curious if you KNOW that your politics is obvious on your site?

I can site multiple articles or lack of articles that proves that you are liberal Democrat(s).

Snopes is often used for truth...why are you so pro-republican? I don't even look at this's like watching Fox news...cut out to your convenience and liking! Wise up...there's rumors going around about this site, LOL.

Your site appears to be a politically motivated, liberal, left-wing propaganda source. What gives you the authority to assert that you are the arch experts on what is or is not true or false or to comment on the accuracy of a quote attributed to a particular public figure or an email currently in circulation? Sounds pretty arrogant, self-serving and self-aggrandizing to me!

What you've conveniently left out of the story on Obama's plane is that McCain's plane doesn't have an American flag on it either. But then, that doesn't accord well with your agenda does it. Better remove the picture of McCain's plane before the truth gets out.

David Mikkelson founded the site now known as back in 1994.