Skip to main content

YourNation.org is to news what gas problems are to first dates

Over the past week, I've noticed a right-wing acquaintance of mine posting a multitude of "articles" from a site I didn't recognize, which goes by the name of, yournation.org. Noticing the trend of absurd article titles, I decided to research this site for myself, and have concluded that it appears to be a bigger joke than Anna Kournikova and Ryan Leaf's careers in the professional world of sports combined.

Currently, on yournation.org's homepage, the "about us" section has this written: "Coming soon..." All of the articles are written by "admin." Yes, it only gets better from there.

On the homepage, here is a list of the "fair and balanced" articles:

- "Fox Hosts Explode On Liberal Co-Host As Things Get Heated"

- "GOP Finally Starts to Push Back on Obama Executive Order Abuse"

- "Fox News: How Does Al Sharpton Still Have a Job?"

- "White House Chef Quits Job Due To Michelle Obama"

- "Phil Robertson Does Something Amazing For Fan Who Drove 20 Hours To See Him"

- "Study Proves Income Inequality Is Worse In Blue States"

- "Obama Says He Won't Deport Illegals Who Sign Up For Obamacare"

- "Man Stuck With $407,000 Medical Bill After Obamacare Breakdown"

- "Fox News Contributor Explains How Obamacare Is a Ponzi Scheme"

When looking through such articles, the content relies more on hearsay and speculation than on actual research and human testimony.

First off, let's look at Obama's alleged "executive order abuse."

To this point in his tenure, President Obama has signed 168 executive orders (over 5.25 years). George W. Bush signed 291 executive orders and Ronald Reagan signed 381. In other words, Obama has averaged to sign 32 executive orders per year, while Bush averaged to sign slightly over 36 per year and Reagan averaged to sign close to 48 per year. So, if President Obama is committing "executive order abuse," then what about Reagan during his eight years in office, who averaged to sign approximately 16 more executive orders per year than Obama?

I then read an article, entitled, "Obama Goes After Sarah Palin's Family." That sounds like serious stuff, doesn't it? Supposedly, Sarah Palin's older brother posted on Facebook that his father has been harassed by the IRS. This apparently means, in the demented world of yournation.org, that President Obama literally "went after" Sarah Palin's family. Only in their minds...

Then I read an article, titled, "29 Members Of Congress Support Impeachment Of Barak Obama." Yes, they spelled the president's first name incorrectly. It would have been like if I called Ronald Reagan by the name of Ronad Reagan...

The author of this "piece" closed the article with this:

"Tom Rice and his 28 supporters still have a long road ahead of them before an actual impeachment were to take place, but there hasn’t been this much support to move forward since the clinton scandal."

Psst... Clinton should be capitalized... Also, it should be known that 2/3 of the United States Senate would need to approve of the president's impeachment, and even if the Republican Party wins control of the Senate this coming November, they won't have the required votes to impeach "Barak" Obama.

I didn't think it was possible, but I think I've found a media outlet which is more ridiculous than Rush Limbaugh. Congratulations, yournation.org! Keep it up with the fallacies, nonexistent research, and misspellings of the president's name! Like I said in the title of the post, yournation.org is to news what gas problems are to first dates...

http://www.yournation.org/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/waynecrews/2014/03/18/15177-u-s-executive-orders-president-barack-obamas-not-the-only-one-with-a-pen-and-phone/

http://yournation.org/obama-goes-after-sarah-palins-family/

http://yournation.org/congress-moves-to-impeach-barak-obama/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"