Snopes falsely says, “The Obama administration didn’t sue on behalf of Muslim truck drivers who refused to transport alcohol.”

In May 2013, the EEOC reported:

EEOC Sues Star Transport, Inc. for Religious Discrimination

Agency Charges Trucking Company Failed to Accommodate and Wrongfully Terminated Two Muslim Employees For Refusal to Deliver Alcohol Due to Religious Beliefs

Afterward, snopes reported:

The Obama administration didn’t sue on behalf of Muslim truck drivers who refused to transport alcohol.



November 5, 2015. Tags: , , . Media bias.


  1. Rose replied:

    I glad to see that you are exposing Snopes, the definitely have an agenda. However, I do agree that employees have very different rights than elected officials , who are in fact employers ( of a sort) and take an oath to uphold the law. You know how difficult it is in certain states ( say Pennsylvania) where it’s usually left to the constituents. Who often remind one of the villagers in an old Frankenstine movie!

    • poetopoet replied:

      Yes, Obama revered or referred them to be “Shovel Ready” loyal subjects.

      So what’s your point or subject about?

      • Rose replied:

        Haha, after what feels like a lifetime of the OBAMA administration ,I am practically incoherent!
        I do believe that more people are becoming aware of media biases. It exists on both the right and the more dominant left. I prefer news that’s not editorialized and Editorials that are clearly that.I appreciate blogs like this where lies are exposed.
        Poet, I hope you don’t mind but I pasted the portion of your post about the OBAMA’s debt comparison to my Facebook page as a reminder to his loyal minions of what the have done…twice!

      • poetopoet replied:

        A Rose is a Rose without thorns or horns of course you can spread Obama’s Bull-Shit around as reminders of his double talk babble, the left-idiots still believe in.

  2. poetopoet replied:

    Although the national debt under President Barack Obama has increased $4 trillion since he took office in 2009, as a presidential candidate in 2008 Obama criticized then-President George W. Bush for adding $4 trillion to the national debt, saying it was “unpatriotic” and also “irresponsible” to saddle future generations with such a large national debt.

    Smoke and mirrors have lost their Shoe Shine to Obama’s Black Muslim Boot and out of control power and corruption at the highest levels and lowest levels of government that is no longer respected, for “We the People” now fear these high paid Civil Servants, with grandiose benefits.

    The liberal infantile paralysis of unnatural and irrational demands of democrat voters has a high tax price to pay and should be taxed as such on them only; when they preach and state falsely what is irresponsible and what is unpatriotic about others they want to pay for.

    Obama said this on July 3, 2008, at a campaign event in Fargo, N.D.:

    ”The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents — number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child,”

    “That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic,” claimed then candidate Obama in 2008, but when Obama leaves office the National Debt will be $20,000,000,000. Twenty Trillion Dollars and counting, all by his lonesome (loathe) self! Now “We the People” are going to have to pay back $125,000 for every man, woman and child with interest paid to foreign governments!

    Who are the democrats going to do blame, Bush, generation after generation that Obama just saddled them with, a Plague of a Huge National Debt?

    Democrats dare not take credit or pride in, for they offer no cure or solution, but Hillary. You know as the dead broke democrat old wind bag with a $2,000,000,000; Billion Dollar Clinton Foundation Trust Fund, which does make a difference to sum it up, even in Benghazi.

    Move a long “Children of the Debt,” nothing to see or read here, move a long, you are going to forfeit and pay an extra $125,000., with interest, and yes, mommy and daddy have to pay also. Say thanks to President Obama!

  3. HMichaelH replied:

    I’m not sure I understand what was false about the reporting done by SNOPES. Is the issue the EEOC is not a part of the Ohbongo Administration? Clearly, the EEOC is within the Executive Branch of the government, and, therefore, a part of the Ohbongo Administration. The question should be, “How involved was Ohbongo, personally, in bringing this suit?” Probably not at all, although the policies and attitudes of Ohbongo probably influence decisions made by all Executive branch organizations. In that regard, it is possible to see the EEOC acting to comply with their interpretation of Ohbongo’s personal desires in this matter.

    The problem for the next Administration, if the President is a Republican, will be dealing with an Executive Branch of the government that is greatly sympathetic to Liberal beliefs. Liberalism will be most notable within the Dept of State, and how they resist a change in Foreign Policy by the new Administration. The lowly (but very well paid) government employee who may be responsible for executing a new policy can subtly resist actions in support of the new policy, causing it to fail.

    It has been my experience “True or False” internet services such as SNOPES have a definite Liberal bias in what they find to be accurate. I was expecting a more obvious bias in this case than has been presented here against SNOPES. It seems to be difficult to find a good, unbiased analysis of the veracity of any issue. Years ago, the media mostly used to do that, but they are now so blatantly opinionated I question everything written on almost any subject. SNOPES is one of the worst.

    • danfromsquirrelhill replied:

      The EEOC says it sued the company, but snopes says it did not sue the company. One of them must be lying.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trackback URI

%d bloggers like this: