Changes

I'll admit it, i am a moderate on the conservative slanted site. Be as my politcal views span both sides, i am hoping for Obama to win the election. I'm sure that some people here have criticisms of him, some of which may even be valid. So have at it people: Why not Obama, the man sent to lead America to greatness?--[[User:Fpresjh|Fpresjh]] 20:10, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

I'll admit it, i am a moderate on the conservative slanted site. Be as my politcal views span both sides, i am hoping for Obama to win the election. I'm sure that some people here have criticisms of him, some of which may even be valid. So have at it people: Why not Obama, the man sent to lead America to greatness?--[[User:Fpresjh|Fpresjh]] 20:10, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

I must remind you, this is a conservative encyclopedia.  most conservatives can't handle the idea of a black man as superior to them!  [[User:GodlessLiberal|GodlessLiberal]] 21:09, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

I must remind you, this is a conservative encyclopedia.  most conservatives can't handle the idea of a Negro man as superior to them!  [[User:GodlessLiberal|GodlessLiberal]] 21:09, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

No right-thinking people could possible support having a black as President, let alone in their neighborhood. [[User:GodisGreat|GodisGreat]] 15:27, 21 March 2007 (PST).

No right-thinking people could possible support having a Negro as President, let alone in their neighborhood. [[User:GodisGreat|GodisGreat]] 15:27, 21 March 2007 (PST).

I think it would be great if he won, I can't stand Hilary...--[[User:Flax+|Flax+]] 21:32, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

I think it would be great if he won, I can't stand Hilary...--[[User:Flax+|Flax+]] 21:32, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

== Goofy Article ==

== Goofy Article ==

I understand that B.O. hits a lot of people's hot buttons, but this article is a mess.  "half-African, half-Caucasian"?  What's up with that?  Why not use the generally-accepted and perfectly accurate term "African-American"?  Or ditch it altogether, unless we're going to start classifying all politicos by race/ethnicity ("Irish-Caucasoid Ted Kennedy", or "Texan-American George Bush").  Better still, ignore the race issue until it is relevant to the article ("Obama is the the first African-American to...").   

I understand that B.O. hits a lot of people's hot buttons, but this article is a mess.  "half-Negro, half-Caucasian"?  What's up with that?  Why not use the generally-accepted and perfectly accurate term "Negro-American"?  Or ditch it altogether, unless we're going to start classifying all politicos by race/ethnicity ("Irish-Caucasoid Ted Kennedy", or "Texan-American George Bush").  Better still, ignore the race issue until it is relevant to the article ("Obama is the the first Negro-American to...").   

Too, do we really need three sentences establishing Obama's exact degree of liberlosity?  Can't we just say "liberal Democrat", or just describe his positions ("show, don't tell").--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] 11:36, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Too, do we really need three sentences establishing Obama's exact degree of liberlosity?  Can't we just say "liberal Democrat", or just describe his positions ("show, don't tell").--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] 11:36, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

*I took all that away once, have been overruled by another Sysop, evidently.  I changed it back once, to African-American, but some felt it important to note he was Mulatto.  An archaic term, if ever there was one.  Mixed-race would be acceptable today. --~ [[User:TK|Sysop-TerryK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 02:00, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

*I took all that away once, have been overruled by another Sysop, evidently.  I changed it back once, to Negro-American, but some felt it important to note he was Mulatto.  An archaic term, if ever there was one.  Mixed-race would be acceptable today. --~ [[User:TK|Sysop-TerryK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 02:00, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

== Michael Richards and Jimmy the Greek ==

== Michael Richards and Jimmy the Greek ==

Why are we discussing Michael Richards (not Kramer by the way) and Jimmy the Greek (real name Jimmy Snyder) on Barack Obama's page?  The Boston Globe criticized him, black leaders criticized him... that's relevant.  Imus' career and the issues surround Richards and Snyder are not. I would change this myself but it was protected again. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 13:02, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Why are we discussing Michael Richards (not Kramer by the way) and Jimmy the Greek (real name Jimmy Snyder) on Barack Obama's page?  The Boston Globe criticized him, Negro leaders criticized him... that's relevant.  Imus' career and the issues surround Richards and Snyder are not. I would change this myself but it was protected again. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 13:02, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:And while it's still off topic here, it might be pertinent for the [[Don Imus]] article to note that CBS Radio suspended him for two weeks, not a few affiliates. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 13:07, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:And while it's still off topic here, it might be pertinent for the [[Don Imus]] article to note that CBS Radio suspended him for two weeks, not a few affiliates. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 13:07, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Perhaps to you, perhaps to me, but not necessarily to readers.  Our "job" is to make things clear for them, not us. I think my change to old-guard makes it much clearer. Your additions were borderline denigration, to Hill's advantage, I would say. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 16:50, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Perhaps to you, perhaps to me, but not necessarily to readers.  Our "job" is to make things clear for them, not us. I think my change to old-guard makes it much clearer. Your additions were borderline denigration, to Hill's advantage, I would say. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 16:50, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

::::So this is a wiki.  We create a link for Civil Rights Era and then we make the article.  His disconnection from Civil Rights figures is well publicized, just google Sharpton AND Obama.  Or Obama AND black AND enough.  Never is his intellect brought up.  That's your opinion and is not sourced.  I have no reason to want to support Hillary Clinton.  Never been a fan. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 16:57, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

::::So this is a wiki.  We create a link for Civil Rights Era and then we make the article.  His disconnection from Civil Rights figures is well publicized, just google Sharpton AND Obama.  Or Obama AND Negro AND enough.  Never is his intellect brought up.  That's your opinion and is not sourced.  I have no reason to want to support Hillary Clinton.  Never been a fan. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 16:57, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

*Someone reading his curriculum vitae cannot escape his intellect, no?  Since we currently have in place a "Civil Rights" leadership, it isn't necessairly old, is it?  Jackson and Sharpton (both bigots, IMO) are from the old-guard civil rights era, and that is germain, is it not, since Obama's age was brought into the argument?  Are you really incensed at that one word addition, which is sourced by the rest of the page, or that it was me adding to it?  I will be happy to add a cite for what you consider an assumption, later today.  --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:02, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

*Someone reading his curriculum vitae cannot escape his intellect, no?  Since we currently have in place a "Civil Rights" leadership, it isn't necessairly old, is it?  Jackson and Sharpton (both bigots, IMO) are from the old-guard civil rights era, and that is germain, is it not, since Obama's age was brought into the argument?  Are you really incensed at that one word addition, which is sourced by the rest of the page, or that it was me adding to it?  I will be happy to add a cite for what you consider an assumption, later today.  --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:02, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

*Myk, the "proof" that Obama is "smarter" is in the public record, IMO.  Disconnect is a pejorative word, used by reporter and political scum to smear people without appearing to overtly do so. Did you not know that? --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

*Myk, the "proof" that Obama is "smarter" is in the public record, IMO.  Disconnect is a pejorative word, used by reporter and political scum to smear people without appearing to overtly do so. Did you not know that? --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

**I read the article to say Obama wants to be known as a "national leader", not a "Black leader", to paraphrase moreless.  Hence a sort of parting of the ways with traditional well known "Black civil rights leaders", so to speak. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:24, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

**I read the article to say Obama wants to be known as a "national leader", not a "Negro leader", to paraphrase moreless.  Hence a sort of parting of the ways with traditional well known "Negro civil rights leaders", so to speak. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:24, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Agreed. He views things, seemingly, unlike the older leaders, as not just black and white issues.  Obviously due to his age, upbringing in a multi-cultural society, and his education....--~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:29, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Agreed. He views things, seemingly, unlike the older leaders, as not just Negro and white issues.  Obviously due to his age, upbringing in a multi-cultural society, and his education....--~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:29, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Still, by referring to leadership in quotes, and comparing their intellect unfavorably to Obama's you are painting a whole bunch of folks with a wide pejorative brush.  Jackson and Sharpton are not representative of the whole of the CRE activists. And, of course, the Obama entry is not the appropriate place for a broadside against JJ, AS, and so forth.--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] 17:38, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Still, by referring to leadership in quotes, and comparing their intellect unfavorably to Obama's you are painting a whole bunch of folks with a wide pejorative brush.  Jackson and Sharpton are not representative of the whole of the CRE activists. And, of course, the Obama entry is not the appropriate place for a broadside against JJ, AS, and so forth.--[[User:WJThomas|WJThomas]] 17:38, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

*Agreed, WJT, however they are allowed/painted/claimed to be "the leaders" both in the press and educational circles. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:44, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

*Agreed, WJT, however they are allowed/painted/claimed to be "the leaders" both in the press and educational circles. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:44, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

**This is indeed an important point, Obama's greatest fear is being marginalized as just another "Black leader"; he's counting on what Republicans call the 'color blind society" to elevate him as an equal, respected national figure and leader.  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:48, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

**This is indeed an important point, Obama's greatest fear is being marginalized as just another "Negro leader"; he's counting on what Republicans call the 'color blind society" to elevate him as an equal, respected national figure and leader.  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:48, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

::Well he certainly has my attention and support in doing that, and ridding us at long last of the hobgoblins of the past, and wresting the power away from the merchants of fear and hate. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:50, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

::Well he certainly has my attention and support in doing that, and ridding us at long last of the hobgoblins of the past, and wresting the power away from the merchants of fear and hate. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] ^{[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]} 17:50, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

== Off Page Discussion ==

== Off Page Discussion ==

Regarding the published criticism of Barack Obama, don't you think the majority of that link would be better served in an article about Don Imus or about Racism in Broadcasting? It seems to me that the relevant bit is that the Boston Globe and some prominent black leaders question Obama's handling of the situation, not the digression towards Michael Richard and Jimmy the Greek. Myk 15:42, 11 April 2007 (EDT)  

Regarding the published criticism of Barack Obama, don't you think the majority of that link would be better served in an article about Don Imus or about Racism in Broadcasting? It seems to me that the relevant bit is that the Boston Globe and some prominent Negro leaders question Obama's handling of the situation, not the digression towards Michael Richard and Jimmy the Greek. Myk 15:42, 11 April 2007 (EDT)  

You convinced me. You wanna do it? RobS 15:43, 11 April 2007 (EDT)  

You convinced me. You wanna do it? RobS 15:43, 11 April 2007 (EDT)  

Good observations, and I agree with all of it. Hillary is the Newt Gingrich of the Democratic Party--42% will come out to vote for her, and 42% will come out to vote for whoever can beat her.  

Good observations, and I agree with all of it. Hillary is the Newt Gingrich of the Democratic Party--42% will come out to vote for her, and 42% will come out to vote for whoever can beat her.  

So as to the question of electability, Richardson & Obama got her beat. I just quickly reread Obama & Kerry's convention speeches, cause I recall at the time much of what Obama said was directly contradicted on successive nights by a host of successive speakers. Let's look at these two excisions:  

So as to the question of electability, Richardson & Obama got her beat. I just quickly reread Obama & Kerry's convention speeches, cause I recall at the time much of what Obama said was directly contradicted on successive nights by a host of successive speakers. Let's look at these two excisions:  

Obama:tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America -- there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America -- there’s the United States of America. [23]  

Obama:tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America -- there is the United States of America. There is not a Negro America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America -- there’s the United States of America. [23]  

Kerry:after September 11th all our people rallied to President Bush's call for unity to meet the danger. There were no Democrats. There were no Republicans. There were only Americans. And how we wish it had stayed that way. [24]  

Kerry:after September 11th all our people rallied to President Bush's call for unity to meet the danger. There were no Democrats. There were no Republicans. There were only Americans. And how we wish it had stayed that way. [24]  

Now, is this just meaningless election rhetoric on the part of both speakers, or is there some way to reconcile these divergent passages? RobS 17:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)  

Now, is this just meaningless election rhetoric on the part of both speakers, or is there some way to reconcile these divergent passages? RobS 17:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)  

I'm sorry about not discussing the recent change I made- I didn't see how it was major, as MexMax suggests, or even arguable.  Here's why I did it:

I'm sorry about not discussing the recent change I made- I didn't see how it was major, as MexMax suggests, or even arguable.  Here's why I did it:

The summary contains an anti-Obama statement claiming he is nothing more than a black man, who gained his status due to affirmative action.  I removed the section because this very article states that he not only graduated Harvard Law, but did so magna cum laude  ("with highest honors").  I can understand someone having issue with the possibility of his getting accepted due to his race, but graduating at the top of his class is far from proven to be race-based.

The summary contains an anti-Obama statement claiming he is nothing more than a Negro man, who gained his status due to affirmative action.  I removed the section because this very article states that he not only graduated Harvard Law, but did so magna cum laude  ("with highest honors").  I can understand someone having issue with the possibility of his getting accepted due to his race, but graduating at the top of his class is far from proven to be race-based.

Regarding the paper he wrote, it's just fluff.  His lack of a background in physics is unrelated since he was not authoring a paper in physics.  He was writing about law, using physics as an analogy of legal matters.  If the editor who put this text here actually bothered to read the reference, they would have seen that the context of the quote was actually a compliment Tribe: "...he was certainly the most all-around impressive student I had seen in decades."  Again, where is affirmative action in this?

Regarding the paper he wrote, it's just fluff.  His lack of a background in physics is unrelated since he was not authoring a paper in physics.  He was writing about law, using physics as an analogy of legal matters.  If the editor who put this text here actually bothered to read the reference, they would have seen that the context of the quote was actually a compliment Tribe: "...he was certainly the most all-around impressive student I had seen in decades."  Again, where is affirmative action in this?

::::: Aschalfly- First, we can't change things without talking, now Matt gets slammed because he tried to discuss the issue.  You claim this is a meritocracy, but you push people around just because you don't know them.  Your action here is that of a tyrant- threatening someone who is only trying to help the encyclopedia.  I know you are concerned about liberals defacing the encyclopedia, but I don't think you've found one in this case.  I've checked his edits without malice, and he seems to deserve good standing.  You should be ashamed when you finish your witch hunt and apologize.  [[User:NepotisMonachus|NepotisMonachus]] 07:44, 31 January 2008 (EST)

::::: Aschalfly- First, we can't change things without talking, now Matt gets slammed because he tried to discuss the issue.  You claim this is a meritocracy, but you push people around just because you don't know them.  Your action here is that of a tyrant- threatening someone who is only trying to help the encyclopedia.  I know you are concerned about liberals defacing the encyclopedia, but I don't think you've found one in this case.  I've checked his edits without malice, and he seems to deserve good standing.  You should be ashamed when you finish your witch hunt and apologize.  [[User:NepotisMonachus|NepotisMonachus]] 07:44, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Mr. S, this is really weird.  I mean, Obama might be just left of Lenin, but I don't get the affirmative action thing.  Do we know his SATs, LSATs, etc?  Do we have any evidence that his "achievements" are based on AA?  If not, then this will look to any sane person like a racist piece of poo article.  I mean, c'mon, let's get this guy on the facts, not on bizarre assumptions.  Just cuz he's black doesn't mean he benefited from AA.  He may have, and if he did, where's the citation?  Otherwise, it's racist gossip.[[User:RobertK|RobertK]] 16:56, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Mr. S, this is really weird.  I mean, Obama might be just left of Lenin, but I don't get the affirmative action thing.  Do we know his SATs, LSATs, etc?  Do we have any evidence that his "achievements" are based on AA?  If not, then this will look to any sane person like a racist piece of poo article.  I mean, c'mon, let's get this guy on the facts, not on bizarre assumptions.  Just cuz he's Negro doesn't mean he benefited from AA.  He may have, and if he did, where's the citation?  Otherwise, it's racist gossip.[[User:RobertK|RobertK]] 16:56, 1 February 2008 (EST)

: Agreed- this nonsense makes the article looks more like a smear campaign that a fact-based biography.  Due to the absence of any evidence, I will be removing much of the AA material later this week.  I am halfway through reading the law review article, and there's nothing wrong with it.  You may have a different opinion, but the essay is solid- liberal in its views perhaps, but certainly not absurd.  There is none of this alleged analysis of physics, only a well cited collection of the physics issues described so that a layman can understand the importance of their discovery and their effects on modern scientific thought.  Note that these effects are the key point and they have more to do with the history of science than science itself, and do not require the absurd call for a background in physics.  The credits cite Barack for being the last of five persons providing "analytic and research assistance", but do not specify his contribution, which could have been anywhere from analytic to gofering to the law library to make photocopies.  It also mentions a Harvard physics professor as a source of technical comments, so the physics are probably sound.  If Obama was a major contributor to this essay, he should be commended for a job well done, but the current evidence doesn't allow for either congratulations or condemnation.  Please provide comments and present supporting evidence.  If you want to comment on the article, try reading it first: Harvard Law Review- Volume 103 November 1989, Number 1.  [[User:NepotisMonachus|NepotisMonachus]] 13:28, 4 February 2008 (EST)

: Agreed- this nonsense makes the article looks more like a smear campaign that a fact-based biography.  Due to the absence of any evidence, I will be removing much of the AA material later this week.  I am halfway through reading the law review article, and there's nothing wrong with it.  You may have a different opinion, but the essay is solid- liberal in its views perhaps, but certainly not absurd.  There is none of this alleged analysis of physics, only a well cited collection of the physics issues described so that a layman can understand the importance of their discovery and their effects on modern scientific thought.  Note that these effects are the key point and they have more to do with the history of science than science itself, and do not require the absurd call for a background in physics.  The credits cite Barack for being the last of five persons providing "analytic and research assistance", but do not specify his contribution, which could have been anywhere from analytic to gofering to the law library to make photocopies.  It also mentions a Harvard physics professor as a source of technical comments, so the physics are probably sound.  If Obama was a major contributor to this essay, he should be commended for a job well done, but the current evidence doesn't allow for either congratulations or condemnation.  Please provide comments and present supporting evidence.  If you want to comment on the article, try reading it first: Harvard Law Review- Volume 103 November 1989, Number 1.  [[User:NepotisMonachus|NepotisMonachus]] 13:28, 4 February 2008 (EST)

::  Some childish heavy-handed coward anonymously and secretly blocked my account instead of using discussion to come to a conclusion on this matter.  Whoever you are, you can't shut me up by clicking a check box.  Give me a fair trial for violating site policy or prove me wrong.  Keep blocking new accounts only proves your contempt for truth and free speech.  [[User:NepotisMonachusB|NepotisMonachusB]] 08:46, 14 February 2008 (EST)

::  Some childish heavy-handed coward anonymously and secretly blocked my account instead of using discussion to come to a conclusion on this matter.  Whoever you are, you can't shut me up by clicking a check box.  Give me a fair trial for violating site policy or prove me wrong.  Keep blocking new accounts only proves your contempt for truth and free speech.  [[User:NepotisMonachusB|NepotisMonachusB]] 08:46, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Im sorry but that AA thing is complete bigotry, you can be black and still achieve. This is very offencive , only a racist would be happy with it, no wonder only moderates and liberals will stand a chance of winning the election, be it McCain, clinton or obama, the conservative voice will never again take prominance in politics. Maybe after seeing this im quite releaved. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 12:02, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Im sorry but that AA thing is complete bigotry, you can be Negro and still achieve. This is very offencive , only a racist would be happy with it, no wonder only moderates and liberals will stand a chance of winning the election, be it McCain, clinton or obama, the conservative voice will never again take prominance in politics. Maybe after seeing this im quite releaved. --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 12:02, 15 February 2008 (EST)

== Reversion explained ==

== Reversion explained ==

::: Aschlafly- you've avoided the point with more anti-liberal statements.  While I'm happy to sling those around with you, bias is the question here.  I'll try to make Feebasfactor's point a little clearer for you:  Is there bias in the affirmative action statement, or is the accusation verifiable?  If proof cannot be provided, how are we better are than the liberals on Wikipedia, who we bash daily on their bias?  Do we even care anymore or have we abandoned Conservapedia's founding principles?  [[User:NepotisMonachus|NepotisMonachus]] 16:46, 1 February 2008 (EST)

::: Aschlafly- you've avoided the point with more anti-liberal statements.  While I'm happy to sling those around with you, bias is the question here.  I'll try to make Feebasfactor's point a little clearer for you:  Is there bias in the affirmative action statement, or is the accusation verifiable?  If proof cannot be provided, how are we better are than the liberals on Wikipedia, who we bash daily on their bias?  Do we even care anymore or have we abandoned Conservapedia's founding principles?  [[User:NepotisMonachus|NepotisMonachus]] 16:46, 1 February 2008 (EST)

:: Aschafly - If Republicans care about military experience, then why choose Reagan or G. W Bush, whose experience of warfare was minimal? And if I can point out something with my tongue firmly in my cheek, why are the current Republican candidates for the Oval Office all themselves from minorities - a Mormon, an Old Age Pensioner, an Evangelical, an African-American and a... a whatever the heck Ron Paul is? Isn't that affirmative action too? [[User:Darkmind1970|Darkmind1970]] 19:03, 1 February 2008 (EST)

:: Aschafly - If Republicans care about military experience, then why choose Reagan or G. W Bush, whose experience of warfare was minimal? And if I can point out something with my tongue firmly in my cheek, why are the current Republican candidates for the Oval Office all themselves from minorities - a Mormon, an Old Age Pensioner, an Evangelical, an Negro-American and a... a whatever the heck Ron Paul is? Isn't that affirmative action too? [[User:Darkmind1970|Darkmind1970]] 19:03, 1 February 2008 (EST)

:::Aschafly - Let's say all the Democratic candidates for President are black. (Bear with me here.) These are all people who graduated from a prestigious school with high honors, worked as a lawyer, and served as a Congressman, governor, or mayor. Would you then say that all of them got to where they were as a result of affirmative action and nothing else? That none of the things they accomplished came as a result of their talent, or perhaps their intelligence? That successful minorities must be viewed upon with suspicion?

:::Aschafly - Let's say all the Democratic candidates for President are Negro. (Bear with me here.) These are all people who graduated from a prestigious school with high honors, worked as a lawyer, and served as a Congressman, governor, or mayor. Would you then say that all of them got to where they were as a result of affirmative action and nothing else? That none of the things they accomplished came as a result of their talent, or perhaps their intelligence? That successful minorities must be viewed upon with suspicion?

:::Kinda stupid hypothetical situation, I know, but I hope it gets my point across, however stupid you think that point may be. [[User:Gillespie|Gillespie]] 20:29, 1 February 2008 (EST)

:::Kinda stupid hypothetical situation, I know, but I hope it gets my point across, however stupid you think that point may be. [[User:Gillespie|Gillespie]] 20:29, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Peggy Noonan, that well-known leftist, in the well-known leftist publication The Wall Street Journal:

Peggy Noonan, that well-known leftist, in the well-known leftist publication The Wall Street Journal:

"He is the brilliant young black man as American dream. No consultant, no matter how opportunistic and hungry, will think it easy--or professionally desirable--to take him down in a low manner. If anything, they've learned from the Clintons in South Carolina what that gets you.

"He is the brilliant young Negro man as American dream. No consultant, no matter how opportunistic and hungry, will think it easy--or professionally desirable--to take him down in a low manner. If anything, they've learned from the Clintons in South Carolina what that gets you.

(I add that yes, there are always freelance mental cases, who exist on both sides and are empowered by modern technology. They'll make their YouTubes. But the mad are ever with us, and this year their work will likely stay subterranean.)"  

(I add that yes, there are always freelance mental cases, who exist on both sides and are empowered by modern technology. They'll make their YouTubes. But the mad are ever with us, and this year their work will likely stay subterranean.)"  

I'm removing that line until a citation of some kind is given. If there was an affirmative action program for congress in place I am sure that its Conservapedia entry would be even more popular than the one on Homosexuality. [[User:NoraReed|NoraReed]] 23:49, 26 February 2008 (EST)

I'm removing that line until a citation of some kind is given. If there was an affirmative action program for congress in place I am sure that its Conservapedia entry would be even more popular than the one on Homosexuality. [[User:NoraReed|NoraReed]] 23:49, 26 February 2008 (EST)

== African american ==

== Negro american ==

In this article is says that:"He is, as of 2007, the only African American serving in the United States Senate"

In this article is says that:"He is, as of 2007, the only Negro American serving in the United States Senate"

but

but

"Obama was born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii"

"Obama was born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii"

He is most certainly not african american.

He is most certainly not Negro american.

He is not African American because he was born in Hawaii? You MUST be joking. O__O I mean, I have heard "He is not the descendant of African slaves, so he isn't really African American." and I have heard "Living all over the world, he surely isn't in touch with African American life." but I think you have taken the petty distinctions to a new low.[[User:ProserpinaFC|ProserpinaFC]] 12:31, 1 February 2008 (EST)

He is not Negro American because he was born in Hawaii? You MUST be joking. O__O I mean, I have heard "He is not the descendant of Negro slaves, so he isn't really Negro American." and I have heard "Living all over the world, he surely isn't in touch with Negro American life." but I think you have taken the petty distinctions to a new low.[[User:ProserpinaFC|ProserpinaFC]] 12:31, 1 February 2008 (EST)

== Foreign Policy Experience ==

== Foreign Policy Experience ==

Why is that astounding? That is an incredibly SMALL number. Congresspersons vote on thousands of issues each TERM. And for Barack Obama to have been a Senator for EIGHT YEARS and to only not vote 130 times... lol.[[User:ProserpinaFC|ProserpinaFC]]

Why is that astounding? That is an incredibly SMALL number. Congresspersons vote on thousands of issues each TERM. And for Barack Obama to have been a Senator for EIGHT YEARS and to only not vote 130 times... lol.[[User:ProserpinaFC|ProserpinaFC]]

:"As for his voting performance, Obama liked sitting on the fence. He is recalled for taking full advantage of an Illinois rule that lets you vote "present" if you don't want to commit yourself. Illinois State Senator Bill Brady recalled: "I learned very quickly that the 'present' vote, where the button you press is very appropriately coloured yellow, is the chicken's way out." ([http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=511901&in_page_id=1811 ''The Black Kennedy: But does anyone know the real Barack Obama?''])[[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:14, 20 February 2008 (EST)

:"As for his voting performance, Obama liked sitting on the fence. He is recalled for taking full advantage of an Illinois rule that lets you vote "present" if you don't want to commit yourself. Illinois State Senator Bill Brady recalled: "I learned very quickly that the 'present' vote, where the button you press is very appropriately coloured yellow, is the chicken's way out." ([http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=511901&in_page_id=1811 ''The Negro Kennedy: But does anyone know the real Barack Obama?''])[[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:14, 20 February 2008 (EST)

: Voting "present" 130 times is NOT a small number.  It is an astounding large number of times to duck important issues, so large that even [[Hillary Clinton]] has ridiculed it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:02, 23 February 2008 (EST)

: Voting "present" 130 times is NOT a small number.  It is an astounding large number of times to duck important issues, so large that even [[Hillary Clinton]] has ridiculed it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:02, 23 February 2008 (EST)

: What's the problem?  No [[liberals]] have any problems in complaining about alleged special preferences for [[conservatives]].  When someone gets special treatment and then seeks to become president on that basis, it's fair game to criticize the special treatment.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:32, 26 February 2008 (EST)

: What's the problem?  No [[liberals]] have any problems in complaining about alleged special preferences for [[conservatives]].  When someone gets special treatment and then seeks to become president on that basis, it's fair game to criticize the special treatment.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:32, 26 February 2008 (EST)

:: Maybe he DID get SOME special treatment , but the article suggests that everything he`s achieved in life is a result of AA. Maybe it needs a little tinkering with, it comes across too strongly , there is no problem saying that AA helped him but to say thats the only reason he got anywhere in life is a big jump. If he becomes president (trust me there is a good chance of it) are you going to say he only became president as a result of AA? Thats just not possible, people voted for him because they liked him and his ideas not because they felt sorry for him for past racism towards black people.--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 06:58, 27 February 2008 (EST)

:: Maybe he DID get SOME special treatment , but the article suggests that everything he`s achieved in life is a result of AA. Maybe it needs a little tinkering with, it comes across too strongly , there is no problem saying that AA helped him but to say thats the only reason he got anywhere in life is a big jump. If he becomes president (trust me there is a good chance of it) are you going to say he only became president as a result of AA? Thats just not possible, people voted for him because they liked him and his ideas not because they felt sorry for him for past racism towards Negro people.--[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 06:58, 27 February 2008 (EST)

:: To be fair, "no clear personal achievement that cannot be explained ... [by] affirmative action" is a much stronger statement than, say, "he could not have achieved the heights he has in the absence of affirmative action." The former claims he has _no_ achievements of his own, which seems so exaggerated that I'd believe it was written by a troll if you weren't defending it yourself. I would never consider entering politics, and even I have what might reasonably called "personal achievements." I'm sure Obama has some too. The latter statement merely (rightly!) observes that his achievements would never have elevated him to the status he's achieved, if it were not for liberal affirmative action; isn't that more like what you mean? [[User:Coas|Coas]] 16:31, 27 February 2008 (EST)

:: To be fair, "no clear personal achievement that cannot be explained ... [by] affirmative action" is a much stronger statement than, say, "he could not have achieved the heights he has in the absence of affirmative action." The former claims he has _no_ achievements of his own, which seems so exaggerated that I'd believe it was written by a troll if you weren't defending it yourself. I would never consider entering politics, and even I have what might reasonably called "personal achievements." I'm sure Obama has some too. The latter statement merely (rightly!) observes that his achievements would never have elevated him to the status he's achieved, if it were not for liberal affirmative action; isn't that more like what you mean? [[User:Coas|Coas]] 16:31, 27 February 2008 (EST)