Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Analysis of Claims: no smears, half truths, or gossip.
Line 537: Line 537:     
: The broader point is this: Wikipedia's biased smear of Conservapedia is unsupported by the citations and contrary to logic, yet you now defend it primarily because another editor at Wikipedia wants it to stay.  Alas, that is the essence of liberal bias on Wikipedia.  Wikipedia bias is not a conspiracy; it's bullying by liberals until others simply give in because they don't care to oppose it.  Needless to say, Conservapedia editors are cut from a different cloth: we do care about the truth and we don't allow here the smears, half-truths, and gossip that plague Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:06, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
 
: The broader point is this: Wikipedia's biased smear of Conservapedia is unsupported by the citations and contrary to logic, yet you now defend it primarily because another editor at Wikipedia wants it to stay.  Alas, that is the essence of liberal bias on Wikipedia.  Wikipedia bias is not a conspiracy; it's bullying by liberals until others simply give in because they don't care to oppose it.  Needless to say, Conservapedia editors are cut from a different cloth: we do care about the truth and we don't allow here the smears, half-truths, and gossip that plague Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:06, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
:: If I may ask, the page on Barack Obama starts off with the claim that he wasn't born in Hawaii (http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert is a scan of his birth certificate), claims that he is islamic and makes use of a number of smears, half truths, and repeating of gossip.  If it is as important as you say that these things are not allowed on Conservapedia, who should we see about getting the page unlocked and rewritten in an honest and truthful manner? --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 22:33, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
    
(moved due to edit conflict)
 
(moved due to edit conflict)
181

edits

Navigation menu