SCAM ALERT: Walmart Is Not Giving Away Vouchers To Celebrate Going Plastic Bag-Free
A scam that circulated on Facebook in late March 2021 claimed that anyone who shared and commented on a post would receive a bag full of goodies and a $75 Walmart voucher after validating their entry at a link included in the post (archived here). here   The text in the post read: To celebrate the great news of Walmart becoming plastic bags free by the end of 2021, we are giving one of these Walmart gift-bags to everyone who has shared & commented by 7pm 24th March,.Each person who does this will receive one of these gift bag full of goodies and a $75 Walmart voucher. After that, Validate your entry @https://bit.ly/2Qq4gwy Snopes spoke with a representative from the chain supermarket, who confirmed that the post was fake. This page is not affiliated with or endorsed by Walmart. We take any fraud impacting our customers seriously and continue to implement and improve upon measures designed to help guard against various consumer scams, Walmart spokesperson Casey Staheli told Snopes. The scam may have been inspired by an announcement made by Walmart on Feb. 21 declaring it was reducing its use of plastic bags. As part of the Beyond the Bag Challenge, an international consortium of large-scale vendors, Walmart announced that stores in Mexico and Central America would go fully bagless  and nearly three-quarters of stores in Mexico had stopped providing plastic bags by December 2020. announcement fully bagless Walmart stores also launched a pilot program in Vermont by implementing a reusable bags only requirement after it banned the use of plastic shopping bags in all stores effective July 2020, reported Vermont Biz. Vermont Biz However, the retailer did not make a promise to ban plastic bags from all its stores, nor did it offer any sort of gift bag or store credit for those that shared and commented on a Facebook post. For help identifying other potential scams, Walmart encourages consumers to visit the Fraud Alerts section on its website. Fraud Alerts Correction [March 25, 2021]: Vermont's "paper bag only" requirement was updated to reflect its newly imposed reusable bag only policy.
Kim Simac, a Wisconsintea partyleader, took aim at state Sen.JimHolperinafter the Conover Democrat fled to Illinois in February 2011.Like 13 other Democratic senators, Holperin, who represents a North Woods district where Simac lives, spent three weeks in Illinois. The move delayed a vote on Republican Gov. Scott Walkers budget-repair bill, which curtails the collective bargaining power of most state and local government employees, although the bill eventually became law.Court challenges have kept the collective bargaining changes from taking effect. But the law, and the Democrats reaction to it, spurred a recall movement ofhistoric proportions. Campaigns were launched against all 16 state senators -- eight Democrats and eight Republicans  -- who were eligible to be recalled.Simac, vice-chairwoman of theVilas County RepublicanPartyand founder of Christian values group calledNorthwoods Patriots,headedthe signature-collectingcampaignto recall Holperin,a first-termsenatorwho previously served 10 years in the state Assembly.On April 21, 2011, Simac submitted some 23,000 signatures to the Government Accountability Board, which has not completed its review. She has announcedplans to run againstHolperinif a recall election is set.Eight days after the petitions were filed, Simac issued anewsreleasethat claimed petition signers, are being subjected to harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Lets see if thats what happened.When we asked Simac for evidence to back her claim, she asked people who received the calls to contact PolitiFact Wisconsin directly.We received calls from 17 people and e-mails from more than 30 others. We interviewed 10 of the people who called. Heres what we found: Those statements back the claim made by Simac.What did Holperin and the Democrats have to say about it?Holperin said he authorized the Wisconsin Democratic Party to call about 5,000 of the people who signed recall petitions against him.Graeme Zielinski, spokesman for the party, said the Minnesota telemarketing firm was hired to call people who signed petitions against Holperin and against two other Democrats who are facing possible recall elections.Holperin said he authorized the calls because, although petition circulators who worked under Simac were earnest, honest and friendly, more than a third of the 23,000 signatures were collected byKennedy Enterprises, a Colorado marketing and consulting firm hired by the Wisconsin Republican Party. Those petition circulators were often aggressive and misleading when they asked residents to sign petitions, Holperin said.According to Holperin, 534 petition signers -- about 10 percent of those who were called by the Minnesota telemarketing firm -- said they were given misleading information and that they asked to have their names removed from the petitions. He said that was the basis for acomplainthe filed with the Government Accountability Board challenging the petitions.Holperin provided ascriptthat he said the firm used in asking questions of people who signed recall petitions against him. The script shows that, among other things, callers were to: identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party; ask people whether they were aware their signatures appeared on a Holperin recall petition; and state that reports had been received that out-of-state paid circulators were misleading people about what they were being asked to sign.So, did we insinuate that foul play had occurred?, Holperin said. You bet we did, and we think we offered ample evidence that backs up our claim.Lets wrap up.Simac said people who signed Holperin recall petitions received harassing phone calls from out-of-state telemarketers claiming to represent the Democratic Party and insinuating foul play by petition circulators.Some people who received calls said they felt harassed even if they received just one call because they didnt expect to be questioned about signing a petition. The callers were employed by an out-of-state firm, they did identify themselves as representing the Wisconsin Democratic Party and did claim that petition circulators misled signers of the petitions.We rate Simacs claim as True. Claim:  Campbell's Soup will donate a can of soup to the hungry for every click received on a special web page.   . Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2000] Here is an easy way to make a difference this holiday season.  Campbell's is donating a can of soup to the needy for every person that goes to their site and votes for their favorite NFL team. Go to the site and it is right there, very easy to do. It will only take a few seconds of your time to fill some empty tummies with warm soup this winter. Please forward this message to everyone in your address book too. Thanks.  https://chunky.nfl.com/click_for_cans.html https://chunky.nfl.com/click_for_cans.html  Origins:  The above program to attract visitors to the Campbell's Soup web site through the promise of donating cans of soup to the hungry began in 2000. Akin to the Hunger Site's "click to donate" program, Campbell's Soup ties its beneficence to clicks made on a special page on chunky.com, its Campbell's Chunky web site (which is separate from its main site at campbellsoup.com).  Hunger Site chunky.com campbellsoup.com The   2000 promotion  target of 5 million cans was reached in mid-December 2000.  This on-again, off-again program was restarted in the fall of 2001 with a target of another 5 million cans of soup; it was wrapped up after Campbell's announced that the goal of 5 million cans had been met, then was relaunched with the goal of donating an additional 500,000 cans.  During the 2002 campaign Campbell's was just shy of the halfway mark on 23 October 2002 and had reached their target of 5 million cans by 7 November 2002.  Fall 2003 saw yet another interation of the program with the usual 5 million-can goal. As to what the promotion is about, chunky.com's page provides this information regarding the charity: Our Tackling Hunger campaign will result in donations of up to a total of 5 million cans of a variety of Campbell's soups on behalf of all 32 NFL teams. Click for Cans donations are made over the course of the year to a variety of hunger relief charities across the country, in NFL cities and in many other communities. However, Campbell's has been oddly reluctant to release information about the mechanics of their "Tackling Hunger" program. When we asked them back in 2000 for some details  such as whom the food went to  they refused to answer, claiming such information was "proprietary." Even when we reframed our question to remove any suggestion that we were seeking actual names of organizations or individuals (e.g., "Does it go to group homes, or hospitals, or directly to the homes of needy people?"), they stonewalled us again with a claim that such information was "proprietary."  We made additional inquiries to Campbell's Soups concerning these matters because we believe those who participate in donation programs should know whom they're donating to. Campbell's never answered them, not during the 2000 promotion nor during the year to follow.  The promotion ended with our having no better idea whose hunger was being relieved by this program than what we started out with. And that's disturbing. Perhaps what Campbell's is reluctant to disclose is that the promotion doesn't involve their shipping hundreds of thousands of cans of soup directly from their plant(s) to food pantries and homeless shelters in the represented NFL cities, nor does it allow those cities to determine who gets the soup: Campbell's handles the 'Tackling Hunger' payoff by collecting store returns of dented and otherwise unsaleable cans of soup and sending them to redistribution centers of their choosing.  The (store-returned) cans of soup do eventually reach the needy, but any food pantry or other charity group that doesn't work directly with a redistribution outlet can't claim them, and the NFL teams and cities have no say in where the cans end up.  An article in the newsletter for the Catholic Diocese of Green Bay, Wisconsin, chronicled the disappointment one team's fans experienced with the program's administration in 2001. Green Bay Barbara "this tomato is not too chicken to use her noodle" Mikkelson Last updated:  1 October 2007 In late February 2019, a misleading meme was circulated on Facebook that led viewers to ask whether U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky had mysteriously amassed vast wealth in yearly increments to the tune of $2.4 million while in office:   As Senate Majority Leader, McConnell received an annual salary of $193,400, but the Kentucky Republican reported an influx of family wealth between $5 million and $25 million in 2008, according to his financial disclosures. That influx was the result of an inheritance his wife received upon the death of her mother, and that  information has been part of public discourse since 2014, when it became campaign fodder for McConnell's Democratic opponent, Allison Lundergan Grimes: salary  Although the meme and the campaign ad upon which it was likely based were set up to make it seem as if McConnell's wealth increase were the result of his role in the Senate and thus involved unethical or illegal activities, most of his net worth actually derives from his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, who hails from a wealthy business family and married McConnell in 1993. Chao is the daughter of James S.C. and Ruth Mulan Chu Chao. Her father is the founder of the New York-based international shipping and trading company Foremost Group, an organization her sister, Angela, chairs. How wealthy is the Chao family? Wealthy enough to have bestowed Harvard Business School with a $40 million gift in 2012. chairs gift According to the non-profit government transparency organization Center for Responsive Politics, McConnell's net worth jumped from an estimated $7.8 million in 2007 to $17 million in 2008, owing entirely to a tax-exempt, money market fund in an account he held jointly with his wife: 2008   As the Washington Post reported in 2014, McConnell's increase in wealth reflected inheritance mone Chao received when her mother passed away in 2007: reported Thats almost a sevenfold increase in 10 years. McConnell has quadrupled his net worth since 2007, when it was $7.8 million. So what happened in 2008? His financial disclosure form tells the storysuddenly there appeared a tax-exempt money market fund, valued at between $5 million and $25 million, listed as a gift from a filers relative. (Look at Line 2 and then Line 3.)   Indeed, a McConnell spokesman confirms that this was an inheritance for McConnells wife, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, after her mother died in 2007. Chao, who married McConnell in 1993, earns significant income on her own, serving on corporate boards, and has at least $1 million in a Vanguard 500 Index Fund. (Since these shares are in her name, McConnell only needs to report they have a minimum value of $1 million.) The Center for Responsive Politics estimated McConnell's net worth in 2015, the most recent figure available, to be nearly $27 million. 2015 Kessler, Glenn.  "How Did Mitch McConnells Net Worth Soar?"
  The Washington Post.  22 May 2014. Newmyer, Tory.  "The Secret to Mitch McConnell's Millions."
  Fortune.  20 March 2014. A reader forwarded anemailto us in which state Rep. Senfronia Thompson urged a boycott of Macys department stores on the day after Thanksgiving 2013. The fact that Macy's doesn't support equal pay for women should stop you from shopping there on Black Friday, the Houston Democrat wrote, saying that her equal-pay proposal cleared the Legislature earlier this year, but then Macy's sent a letter to Rick Perry urging him to veto the law, which he ultimately did. Thompsons House Bill950was among 24 bills PerryvetoedJune 14, 2013. It would have created state law similar to 2009s federal Lilly Ledbetter Act, which gave plaintiffs more time to sue over pay discrimination in federal courts. AnAug. 6, 2013,news storyin theHouston Chroniclereported that Texas Retailers Association members including Macys and Krogers had written Perry in May asking him to kill the legislation because, they said, it would lead to open-ended litigation and duplicate federal law. Thompson spokeswoman Milda Mora told us by phone that the representative learned of the letters from theHouston Chroniclereporter in August and checked with the governors office, which provided her with copies that Moraemailedto us. One written on Macys letterhead (clickhereor scroll down to view it) concluded, The federal requirements under Lilly Ledbetter are unnecessary and would be harmful to Texas employers. We urge you to veto this legislation. Macys spokeswoman Bethany Charlton confirmed that her company sent the May 31, 2013, letter, which was signed by a company vice president. By email, Charlton said the company absolutely supports equal pay for equal work among men and women but believes existing laws provide strong remedies for discrimination. Perrys logic was similar: House Bill 950 duplicates federal law, which already allows employees who feel they have been discriminated against through compensation to file a claim with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said his June 14, 2013,veto statement. Progress Texas, the pro-Democratic organization that distributed Thompsons email and is organizing theboycott,disputesPerrys statement that the bill would have duplicated federal law, saying that the Ledbetter protections need to be codified in state law for them to apply to cases in state courts. The groups executive director, Ed Espinoza, told us by email that his group launched a boycott of Macys and other retailers when the news broke in August. An Aug. 7, 2013,Chroniclenews blog postsaid Thompson took part in that boycott also, canceling a planned appearance at a Macys store to mark the states annual sales-tax holiday. Mora said that Thompson, who was quoted in an Aug. 9, 2013 Texas Public Radionews storyas saying she had previously been a card-packing member of Macys, but had not shopped there since the letters became public. Our ruling Thompson said Macy's sent a letter to Rick Perry urging him to veto her equal pay measure. As the Houston newspaper reported, Macys wrote the governor May 31, 2013, saying We urge you to veto this legislation. The claim is True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Driven by a thriving retail industry, a cultural penchant for obligatory gift-giving, and a fascination with the West, the Japanese adopted (and adapted) several traditional Western holiday celebrations after World War II.  Stripped of their meaning and bent to the whims of retailers, however, these holidays have taken some rather unusual forms in Japan over the years. The Mary Chocolate Co. is credited with bringing Valentine's Day to Japan in 1958, with the twist that it should be a day for girls to give gifts to guys.  Naturally, this led to the retail industry's creation of "White Day" on March 14, an occasion for the boys to reciprocate all those chocolates they'd been given a month earlier by buying white presents (such as white candy, handkerchiefs, or panties) for their gals.  Likewise, the Seibu department store recast St. Patrick's Day as "Green Day," a retail promotion featuring things green and Irish.  (It didn't work.)  The Japan Biscuit Association touted Halloween as an occasion that Americans celebrate by eating biscuits.  (When that failed to go over well, the custom melded into one of friends giving each other orange candy and cakes.) White Day Green Day However, the Western holiday that carries the most influence in Japan is, not surprisingly, the holiday that carries the most influence in the West as well: Christmas.  Although St. Francis Xavier, a Spanish Jesuit missionary, brought Christianity to Japan in 1549, the celebration of Christmas was mostly limited to churches and missionary schools until the 20th century.  (Indeed, Christianity was outlawed in Japan after a religious uprising in 1639 and henceforth practiced only clandestinely until 1854.) The exchanging of gifts at Christmastime by Japanese families began in a small way early this century, and Japanese stores began offering Christmas sales in the 1930s. Starting with the American occupation of Japan in 1945, Christianity enjoyed a brief surge in popularity, and Christmas took off in a big (and commercialized) way. As you'd expect in a country where less than 2% of the population is Christian, Christmas is a primarily a secular occasion in Japan, with shops and businesses remaining open for the day. The Japanese have adopted many of the traditional trappings of 'Kurisumasu,' such as stores with elaborate displays of Christmas decorations and piped-in Christmas music, and homes made festive with Christmas lights, Christmas trees, and poinsettias.  The elimination of the religious aspects of Christmas and its hyper-commercialization have led to some unique (and, to us, bizarre) ways of celebrating it, however.  The exchanging of kurisumasu cakes is not exactly a Western tradition, but it doesn't sound too unusual to us. What we do find unusual is reports of Japanese Christmas customs such as young couples exchanging presents of expensive jewelry, heading out to high-priced hotels, and being directed by scantily-clad female elves to rooms complete with Christmas trees, where the lovebirds spend their Christmas Eve in romantic bliss.  The co-optation of familiar Christmas figures, (both secular and religious) in the service of mass merchandising has also produced some rather curious blendings (real and imagined): Colonel Sanders dressed in a Santa suit (as KFC tried strenuously to promote fried chicken as the "traditional" Christmas meal), nuns singing advertising jingles to the tune of Christmas carols, Christmas cards featuring a ghoulish Santa in a graveyard accompanied by the Virgin Mary on broomstick, elves plastered on sake, and a Christmas revue featuring "stripping nuns and three lecherous Wise Men." And sometimes they just don't get it at all, such as when a Japanese TV station reportedly ran the movie Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence,  a disturbing film about English soldiers in a Japanese POW camp, as its festive holiday offering. By far the most well known of these Japanese/Western holiday blendings is the notorious story of a department store somewhere in Japan that one year supposedly erected a prominent Christmas display featuring as its centerpiece the smiling figure Santa Claus nailed to a cross.  It's a perfect expression of the clash between the holy and the profane, the secular and the religious, the East and the West.  It speaks to xenophobic fears (these foreigners can't be trusted with our religion and our traditions!), and it's a darn funny story. Examples:  A few Decembers ago a Japanese department store, desperate to appear westernised and with-it, mounted an extravagant Christmas display, featuring a life-sized Santa Claus, crucified upon a cross.1  The granddaddy of cultural faux pas [in Japan] occurred just after World War II, when a Ginza department store rolled out its elaborate Christmas promotion: a smiling Santa nailed to a crucifix.2  A Japanese department store reputedly once put up a big Christmas cartoon which had a Santa Claus prominently displayed on a crucifix. Whether or not this story, which has been doing the rounds in Tokyo for some years, is true or just another urban legend, is unclear.3  [An American Motorola executive] recounted a famous story of 1945, the first year of the U.S. occupation of Japan after World War II, when shopkeepers in Tokyo's Ginza district knew there was a big Western holiday coming and they wanted to capitalize on it.  "They knew there was this guy in a white beard and a red suit, and they knew there was a religious angle," [he] said. "And the result was little Santa Clauses on crucifixes."4  A few years ago, in Kyoto, one department store filled its center window with an enormous effigy of a crucified Santa Claus.5 However, despite all the people who assert that the tale of the crucified Santa is true and that they know someone who actually saw it, the literal truthfulness of this legend is suspect.  No one to our knowledge has produced evidence documenting that such a Christmas display was ever used commercially in Japan (other than as a knowing joke), such as a photograph of the scene or a contemporaneous news account that recorded its date and location.    As well, in true urban legend fashion the details of where, when, and how the crucified Santa Claus was displayed are vague and vary from telling to telling:  Santa appeared on a cross in Kyoto, Tokyo, the Ginza district, or a specific department store (such as Mitsukoshi); he was represented with a gigantic figure, a life-sized display, several small characters, a billboard, or a cartoon drawing; and Santa was nailed to a cross in Japan in 1945 or 1962 or 1990 or anywhere between "just after World War II" to  "a few years ago." As well, the mixing of Christian crucifixion iconography and Santa Claus is an unlikely pairing, even to non-Christians.  Nativity scenes, not crucifixes, are the religious displays featured at Christmastime, and anyone with the least bit of thoughtfulness would have to wonder why a smiling, happy, jolly figure would be depicted hanging from boards with nails driven through his hands and feet.  Santa Claus in a creche might be a plausible mistake (there are claims that figures such as the Seven Dwarfs have been spotted standing in for the Three Wise Men in various parts of the world), but a crucified Santa challenges credulity.  As parody it's believable; as an honest mistake we find it implausible. Perhaps the key to this legend is the timing.  Despite claims of crucified Santas in Japan that span the entire post-war era, the earliest reports of this legend we've found so far all stem from the early 1990s. Not coincidentally, up until that time Japan had been riding the economic high of their "bubble economy," and Americans watched in dismay as the Japanese business model was widely touted as superior to the American, dire predictions were made about the dominance of the American (and world economy) by Japan, and asset-rich Japanese began snapping up foreign (especially American) real estate such as New York's Rockefeller Center.  Should we be surprised that a xenophobic legend involving a clash between Japan and one of the most hallowed aspects of Western culture might arise from such circumstances? Alternatively, we can ignore all the foreign trappings and simply interpret this legend as a commentary on the commercialization of Christmas, a holiday in which Jesus Christ has now been replaced (symbolically and literally) by Santa Claus.  This was the point artist Robert Cenedella was trying to make when he drew the ire of religious groups over his painting of a crucified Santa Claus, which was displayed in the window of New York's Art Students League in December 1997:  Anderson, Walter Truett.  The Truth About the Truth.
  New York: J P Tarcher, 1995.  ISBN 0-874-77801-8. The Truth About the Truth Conry, Kieron.  "A Time Not to Forget the Suffering Figure on the Cross."
  The [London] Independent.  27 December 1994  (p. 15). Gaskell, John and Adam Hock.  "Our Memories of Christmas Past Lost to Japanese."
  The Sunday Telegraph.  6 January 1991  (p. 7). Healey, Phil and Rick Glanvill.  "Urban Myths #67: Santa Sleighed."
  The Guardian.  23 December 1993  (p. 43). McCarthy, Terry.  "Christmastime for Everyone."
  The [London] Independent.  19 December 1993  (p. 77). McKibben, Bill.  "Christmas Unplugged."
  Christianity Today.  9 December 1996  (p. 18). McQueen, Anjetta.  "Artist's Crucified Santa Draws Fire."
  Associated Press.  22 December 1997. Shweder, Richard.  "Why Do Men Barbeque?"
  Daedalus.  Winter 1993. Sullivan, Kevin.  "Dashing Through the Dough."
  The Washington Post.  22 December 1995  (p. A21). Watanabe, Teresa.  "Japanese Parade for St. Patrick, Whoever He Was."
  Los Angeles Times.  16 March 1993  (p. 6). Yates, Ronald E.  "Japanese Merrily Leave the Christ out of 'Kurisumasu.'"
  Chicago Tribune.  22 December 1985  (p. 16). The Buffalo News.  "Buffalo's Favorite Santa Stories."
  24 December 1995  (p. M8). The Economist.  "Santa Christ."
  25 December 1993  (p. 77). Financial Times.  "A Cultural Clash of Symbols."
  27 December 1984  (p. 8). Fortean Times.  "Strange Days."
  December 1994  (p. 5). The Hartford Courant.  "Santa on a Cross."
   23 December 1997  (p. F2). On 7 December 2016, conspiracy web site SuperStation95 published a post reporting that 86-year-old astronaut Buzz Aldrin (who had just been evacuated from the South Pole due to health concerns) had mysteriously and alarmingly tweeted a photograph of a mountain along with a chilling comment:  post evacuated His words: "We are all in danger. It is evil itself." and showed a photograph of a pyramid located at the South Pole as show here. Mr. Aldrin seems to be referring to this object, as seen in an serial photo from Google Earth ... As has been reported by worldwide media, US Secretary of State John Kerry recently traveled to the South Pole, allegedly to become better informed about "Climate Change." Kerry was the highest ranking US government official ever to visit the South Pole, and his visit struck many as unusual. Few saw any purpose whatsoever to sending America's top Diplomat to the farthest reaches of the earth to see ... ice. Now, with Buzz Aldrin's tweet, and its strange deletion, folks are wondering if sending America's top Diplomat to no-man's land, perhaps had something to do with Diplomacy after all. Is there some entity there with which we need Diplomatic contact? ... If so, why did Buzz Aldrin warn that we are all in danger? Why did he call it "Evil itself?" The blog post, which was a pparently inspired by a 6 December 2016 thread on the conspiracy forum  Before It's News, cited two tweets as a first and second source for the photograph. One included an embedded video which referenced the SuperStation95 post as its source, making it useless as supporting confirmation: forum  What did Buzz Aldrin mean and WHY did he delete this tweet? "We are all in danger. It is evil itself. pic.twitter.com/tYb9IFCfZk pic.twitter.com/tYb9IFCfZk  slone (@slone) December 7, 2016 December 7, 2016 Buzz Aldrin Warns "it is evil itself"https://t.co/i0mqoHnh5y https://t.co/i0mqoHnh5y  Christopher Horn (@NightHorn) December 9, 2016 December 9, 2016  Images of the purported tweet circulated widely after 7 December 2016, but there were a number of visual cues the graphic was altered:   For contrast, here's a screenshot taken of a then-recent tweet sent via Aldrin's @TheRealBuzz account:   The first tweet did not have a date, share count, number of replies, number of favorites, or number of retweets; all could be used to determine whether Twitter's archive backed the claims made by the sites. Additional irregularities existed in the background display of Aldrin's account: The suspect tweet didn't display in the same manner it did in our screenshot. Aldrin's account data was oddly arranged, and his blue verification checkmark was missing.  SuperStation95 did not provide a date, time, or sturdy source for the screenshot of the tweet. Using Twitter's "advanced search" tool, we were able to determine that no retweets or "modified tweets" (a form of copying and pasting a retweet) existed anywhere on Twitter. The first verbal mention of the purported tweet appeared on 8 December 2016, one day after the blog post linked above. no retweets It wasn't just skeptics questioning the authenticity of the claim. YouTube's SecureTeam (the self-described "number one source for breaking news and exposure of the alien phenomenon") examined the claim, quickly dismissing it as a forgery: questioning After appearing in late 2015, Superstation95 began using what were often legitimate tragedies or unfortunate events (such as Buzz Aldrin's evacuation from Antarctica in December 2016) with falsified and often frightening details. Among the most prominent were claims that a large group of Muslim men had fired randomly upon campers and hikers in California, Fukushima radiation caused severe mutations in ocean-dwelling creatures, cargo ships mysteriously ground to a halt signaling nothing short of an imminent global economic catastrophe, a deadly Las Vegas strip car crash involved a driver shouting "Allahu Akbar," the San Bernardino shooting was provoked by pork served at a holiday party shortly before the massacre, the Earth's "magnetosphere" inexplicably collapsed for two hours, a (nonexistent) suicide note left by a genuinely deceased ICE agent revealed impending FEMA camp implementation and mass enslavement, and that articles about the Orlando shooting appeared on Google News hours before the attack. Although the pieces sometimes contained details of real-life events, the claims were always willfully distorted to peddle a false and upsetting conclusion. Muslim men Fukushima cargo ships Allahu Akbar San Bernardino magnetosphere ICE agent Orlando shooting Superstation95's opportunistic leveraging of tragedy has never borne out as the real thing, despite the innumerable grandiose claims made since the site's inception. However, despite them, no one has yet gone to FEMA camp, the global economy has not melted down, the magnetosphere caused no space-based catastrophes, and no hikers were reported injured or dead as a result of roving Muslim shooters. An ad goes after Sen. John McCain for being just like President George W. Bush, hitting McCain onIraq, oil companies and health care.It also criticizes him on tax policy. A millionaire who's for tax cuts for millionaires. McSame as Bush, the ad states. It's true that Bush and McCain are both millionaires, with McCain being somewhat wealthier. Bush's net worth in 2006 was between $7.6-million and $20.1-million, based on his personal financial disclosures required by law and analyzed by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. McCain, meanwhile, is worth somewhere between $27.8-million and $45-million. (Sen. Hillary Clinton's net worth is between $10.4-million and $51-million, while Sen. Barack Obama's is between $456,012 and $1.1-million.) So McCain and Bush are both millionaires, and that part of the statement is correct. We couldn't find any proposals John McCain supports that offer new tax cuts for millionaires, so we suspect this is a reference to McCain's support of the Bush tax cuts. Bush's tax cuts lowered rates across the board for those who pay federal income taxes, so they benefited both millionaire and nonmillionaire taxpayers. But data compiled from the Congressional Budget Office indicate that millionaires saw the most sizable drops to their tax rates measured as a share of income. Those tax cuts will expire during the next presidential administration unless Congress acts to keep them in place. McCain actually opposed the Bush tax cuts before changing his mind and supporting them now. He said the reason for his change of heart is that rescinding the tax cuts would be the equivalent of a tax increase after they had been in effect for so long. (Both Obama and Clinton want to roll back the Bush tax cuts for higher incomes.) If you're trying to identify the candidate who supports the Bush tax cuts, McCain is your man. But we're concerned that the ad leaves the impression that McCain advocates new, additional tax cuts for millionaires rather than keeping the present situation in place. For that reason, we knock this claim down one peg on the Truth-O-Meter and find it Mostly True. Ohio Board of Regents Chancellor Jim Petro was firing up the troops.During a speech Aug. 11, 2011, at Ohio State University to announce a new enterprise university plan aimed at cutting red tape for public universities, Petro preached to his audience of higher education types why pushing up the college graduation rate in Ohio is so important.Only 26 percent of Ohioans hold a bachelors degree, Petro told his audience. Raising that figure toward the national average of 31 percent would give Ohios economy a tremendous boost.While Petro told the crowd hes seen various estimates of the economic impact of a rising bachelors degree rate, he said he had a solid and good estimate. Every 1 percent increase in the number of Ohioans with bachelors degrees, Petro said, would mean multiple billions a year in sustained economic growth.For every percent we move up, it means economic activity growing the next year and for each year thereafter (by) $2.5 billion dollars, he said.While the correlation between education levels and higher wages for individuals is fairly well-established, we were struck by the specific price tag Petro was able to put on Ohioans getting their sheepskins. So PolitiFact Ohio checked it out.Spencer Waugh, a policy liaison for the Ohio Board of Regents, sent us three documents to corroborate Petros claim. In an e-mail, Waugh said Petros estimate of $2.5 billion is fair and conservative given that some studies show less and at least one study shows more.The first document was a memo from Waugh to Petro which claimed that a 1 percent jump in Ohioans with bachelors degrees would net an income increase of $1.09 billion. Waughs memo multiples the number of new Ohioans with bachelors degrees by $19,000 a year  a figure he says represents the annual gain for those going from holding a high school diploma to a bachelors degree.Waughs figures were based on a data from the National Center for Education Statistics as well as 2007 census data, according to Kim Norris, Petros communications director.The 2007 census data states that the gap is $20,000 per year for adults. The National Center for Education Statistics data shows the gap at $18,000 for males but only $15,000 for females in the age group of 25-34. So $19,000 is in the ballpark.Using the $19,000 multiplier assumes that everyone who went back to school and got the bachelors degree had only achieved a high school education. Presumably some in that group would be people who already have associates degrees or some college and didnt have far to go to get a bachelors degree. People who have some college or an associates degree generally make more than those with just a high school diploma, and that would have an impact on net benefit to Ohios economy.Regardless, the figure is well below Petros estimate of $2.5 billion.The second document is a memo from Board of Regents staffer Patrick Maloney to Petro which outlines a 2008 Arizona State University study which found that a 1 percent jump would add $1.5 billion to that states economy.The ASU study focuses solely on Arizona and relies on a 2004 Journal of Econometrics paper that estimated the effects on the earnings of all working adults from increasing the proportion of the workforce with a university degree. It used data from the 1980 and 1990 census.However, the papers author, Enrico Moretti, didnt specify how he defined adults nor how he calculated hourly wages. And Moretti finds a spillover effect which pushes up wages for all workers on every education level as the share of workers with a bachelors degree increases.Because Morettis spillover effect requires different calculations over each level of educational attainment, its virtually impossible to compare Arizona to Ohio as the states have different profiles. Additionally, Arizonas labor market is much smaller than Ohios with only 1.82 million workers year-round versus 5.11 million in Ohio  nearly three times as many.If the gains projected in Arizona would come true in Ohio, then you could probably assume an economic benefit of nearly three times what was projected for Arizona -- about $4 billion a year.The third study cited by Waugh comes from a CEO for Cities study, which concludes that an improvement of 1 percentage point in each of the 51 largest metropolitan areas in the United State would increase aggregate personal income by $124 billion nationwide.In the report, the authors explain that each additional percentage point in aggregate adult four-year college attainment was associated with a $763 increase in annual regional per capita income.Per capita income refers to the income of each man, women and child. If we apply the increase to Ohios  11.5 million population, we get an additional $8.8 billion a year in income.So where does all this leave Petros claim?As chancellor of the Board of Regents, Petro wanted to show the importance of more adults getting their college degrees.To underscore this point, Petro claimed that a good and solid estimate showed that increasing the number of bachelors degree holders in Ohio by 1 percent would increase economic activity in the state by $2.5 billion a year.Asked for studies to prove this point, Petros staffers muster a pair of memos which assert Ohios income would rise by $1.09 billion a year and another which estimates that Arizonas would rise by $1.5 billion a year. The Arizona estimate would extrapolate to about $4 billion in Ohio given the larger labor market here.Lastly, they cite a study done on the nations biggest urban areas, which if applied to Ohios population would mean $8.8 billion in additional income.The underlying point in Petros statement is accurate -- that raising the percentage of Ohioans who have a bachelors degree would benefit Ohios economy.What is less clear is how great that benefit would be. Petros estimate was $2.5 billion. But the supporting documentation his staff provided shows that estimates very wildly.Is it $1 billion? $4 billion? $8.8 billion? Something in between?Thats a point that needs clarification.On the Truth-O-Meter the claim rates as Mostly True. The item reproduced below originated as an e-mail sent to radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh in July 2010 by Dr. Sebastian J. Ciancio, a urologist practicing in Danville, Illinois. In that e-mail, the doctor encouraged the radio host to "share this story with your listeners so that they know how the ruling class spends their tax dollars." In this example collected from the Snopes inbox in August 2010: I was speaking to an emergency room physician this morning. He told me that a woman in her 20's came to the ER with her 8th pregnancy. She stated "my momma told me that I am the breadwinner for the family." He asked her to explain. She said that she can make babies and babies get money for the family. The scam goes like this: The grandma calls the Department of Children and Family Services and states that the unemployed daughter is not capable of caring for these children. DCFS agrees and states that the child or children will need to go to foster care. The grandma then volunteers to be the foster parent, and thus receives a check for $1500 per child per month in Illinois. Total yearly income: $144,000 tax-free, not to mention free healthcare (Medicaid) plus a monthly "Link" card entitling her to free groceries, etc, and a voucher for 250 free cell phone minutes per month. This does not even include WIC and other welfare programs. Indeed, grandma was correct in that her fertile daughter is the "breadwinner" in the family. Variations: In December 2010 the following photograph was added to circulating versions of this item, even though the pictured family has no connection to the story and no mention of race appeared in the original text:  In 2014, the setting was moved from Illinois to Florida. The gist of this "story" is the claim that an Illinois woman who was pregnant with her eighth child (while still in her 20's) admitted to an emergency room physician that she was deliberately having children and giving them up to foster care in order to earn money for her family, with her grandmother volunteering to raise the children and collecting $1,500 per month from the state for each child, for an annual tax-free income of $144,000 (plus additional benefits). Is the story true? It's a second-hand account, and Dr. Ciancio declined to identify the physician who supposedly told it to him, which makes verification of that aspect of the tale difficult. Nonetheless, whatever a pregnant patient may have told an unnamed emergency room physician, the scenario described simply isn't possible. According to payment rates published by the State of Illinois' Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), monthly payments for licensed relative home care range from $384 to $471 per child, depending upon the age of the child: payment rates  The maximum monthly payment (for a child age 12 and over) is $471 per month, not $1,500 per month, so the largest amount of money a foster parent caring for eight children would receive in a month (assuming all of those children were at least 12 years old) would be $3,768, for an annual total of $45,216  a far cry from the $144,000 yearly income claimed above. (And even the $45,216 figure is a generous projection, given that it's an obvious impossibility for a woman who is pregnant with her eighth child to already have eight children all over the age of twelve.) Pickel, Mary Lou.  "Tea Party at the Capitol."
  The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  28 February 2009. One of President Barack Obamas signature issues at the moment is a push to raise the minimum wage from $7.25 per hour to $10.10 per hour. Its such a popular policy, he said in aspeechon March 5, 2014, that even Republicans have little quarrel with it. When I talk about (raising the) minimum wage, Obama said, not only is it good policy, but the majority of the country, including half of Republicans, agree with it. We wondered whether polling data backed up this claim. So we looked at independent polls taken recently that asked about the minimum wage. A review of the polling data suggests a more nuanced situation than Obamas claim suggests. Our first look at the data showed that a minimum-wage hike is popular among Americans broadly. For instance, when theCBS News-New York Timespollasked, Do you favor or oppose raising the minimum wage to $10.10? in February 2014, the poll found 65 percent support. And that was actually down a bit from the 72 percent support registered in the January edition of the poll. Similarly, aPew Research Center/USA Todaypoll from January asked whether respondents supported an increase in the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 an hour and found 73 percent support. But what about Republicans specifically? More than half of Republicans favor a minimum-wage increase, polls found, but in most of these polls, less than half of Republicans supported raising the wage to $10.10, the amount Obama is seeking. One poll that did not specify a target amount for the minimum-wage hike was conducted byQuinnipiac University. It asked, Would you support or oppose raising the national minimum wage, which is now $7.25 an hour? Among Republicans, 52 percent expressed support, while 45 percent said they opposed it. That provides some support to Obamas claim. But once respondents were asked by other pollsters about the $10.10 figure -- a roughly 40 percent increase from todays federal minimum wage -- Republican support sagged. The clearest example is aCBS-New York Timespollfrom February that asked, As you may know, the federal minimum wage is currently $7.25 an hour. Do you favor or oppose raising the minimum wage to $10.10? Republicans expressed 42 percent support, 54 percent opposition. Another clear example was anABC News-Washington Postpollfrom December, 2013 that asked, The minimum wage in this country is now $7.25 an hour. What do you think it should be? Among Republicans, only 21 percent favored keeping it the same or lowering it, but even fewer respondents -- 7 percent -- favored a minimum wage in excess of $10. Two other polls showed Republican support close to 50 percent, but falling just short. However, the differences were within the margin of sampling error -- it's possible that more than half of Republicans were in support of a $10.10 wage, though also possible that the actual support level was even lower than the official result. ACBS-New York Timespollfrom January that asked the same question as the February poll found that Republicans expressed 48 percent support, 51 percent opposition to a $10.10 wage. And anNBC News-Wall Street Journalpollfrom December 2013asked, I'm going to mention a number of different amounts and for each one, please tell me if you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose raising the hourly minimum wage to that amount. When presented with the $10.10 rate, 47 percent of Republicans expressed support. One poll clearly supported Obamas position. The JanuaryPew Research Center/USA Todaypoll found 53 percent of Republicans backing a $10.10 minimum wage, with 43 percent opposed. The significance of the $10.10 figure is not academic. According to a March 6accountin theWashington Post, early last year, White House strategists rejected (the $10.10 figure), worried that it could destroy jobs and anger the business community just as the regulation-heavy Affordable Care Act was about to take effect. Instead, former officials say, the White House settled on a more cautious path,unveiling a $9-an-hour minimum wageproposal  a target even lower than Obamahad proposedduring the 2008 campaign. However, thePostreported, the lower amount disappointed advocates for the working poor, as well as congressional Democrats, who were already pushing to set the $7.25 wage closer to $10 an hour. Over the past year, Obama reconsidered, casting off initial concerns in favor of unifying his party ahead of this falls midterm elections. In other words, White House officials had long realized there was a difference in the degree of public support for a $10.10 minimum wage and a smaller hike, so it would be misleading for Obama to now imply that majority Republican support for an unspecified minimum-wage hike means that Republicans automatically support the presidents proposal to raise the wage to $10.10. Our ruling Obama said, When I talk about (raising the) minimum wage ... half of Republicans agree with it. Republicans do support a minimum-wage hike if you don't specify a dollar figure. But once you mention the $10.10 target Obama wants, his case gets shakier. We rate the claim Mostly True.