Apparently, I am now subscribed to their daily newsletter that is chock full o' conservative goodness, regardless of whether I asked for it.
So let's play.
Here are two of the stories they recommended I post;
E-mail smear campaign against Nancy Pelosi is untrue: A widely circulated e-mail accusing Nancy Pelosi of granting minimum wage exemptions to a company that her husband owned stock in is incorrect on two fronts: (1) the company in question was not granted a wage exemption and (2) her husband has never owned stock in that company.
E-mail smear campaign against Barack Obama is untrue: A widely circulated e-mail claimed that Barack Obama filed a class-action suit that required banks to loan money to poor people who could not repay the loans, and thus he personally caused the current economic crisis. In fact, the suit in question only charged that one particular bank had discriminated in its lending practices (rejecting applications from black people but approving loans to white people with equal income and economic status). As an attorney, Obama worked on the case for about three hours but was not in charge of it.
Okay, I'm lying. They do not recommend these stories at all. Really, their top stories today involve Barack Obama's "identity crisis" (he used to be called "Barry," but not anymore, so what's up with that?) and a video of Fred Thompson talking about the economy. Pretty innocuous and petty stuff, actually.
But as long as they feel free to sign me up for their "conservative hot topics" newsletter without my approval, and as long as they misrepresent me as being a "conservative blogger," then I'll feel free to misrepresent what they stand for. It only seems fair.
The difference is that I will tell you when I'm lying.
On the road with America's post-homed nomads
42 minutes ago