During the election campaign, Conservapedia speaks even more tosh than usual

Whilst point-scoring is common in election campaigns, I am even more appalled by Conservapedia’s attempts to disparage the Democratic candidates, in particular Hillary Clinton. While I’m no supporter of Ms Clinton (my support is behind Barack Obama) I would rather have her than a Republican, or Ron Paul. It’s worse than the last time I looked at Conservapedia: however, when the population of America is in a politically-charged mode, not much can stop them.

Here is a quote from the ‘News’ section of its main page:

“‘We had 300 people outside, literally freezing to death,’ Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton marveled on Tuesday before a crowd in Iowa City. (No deaths were reported, in fact.)”

And I think I’m picky… this takes pedantry for pedantry’s sake to a whole new level. What utter rubbish they are talking. Incidentally, the link they provide links to… wait for it… a blog. Yes, that’s right. A blog. In particular, a blog attacking the incorrect use of the word ‘literally’. Hardly a reputable news source, then. (In case you’re interested, here’s the original article.)

The good news for Mike Huckabee in New Hampshire is that his appearances with Chuck Norris are drawing crowds. The bad news is they are chanting “We want Chuck!”.

A non-story approaching Daily Mail standards. Anyway, I’d rather have Chuck Norris as president than Mike Huckleberry.

The amount of rubbish they’ve written, both about the election and almost everything else, is unbelievable. I can see so many factual errors and simple lies on the page that I can’t read it any more because of the red ink I’ve plastered onto my screen.