Changes

: Barack Obama has not been known as "Barry" for at least 20 years, and perhaps never.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:42, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

: Barack Obama has not been known as "Barry" for at least 20 years, and perhaps never.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:42, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

:: [http://www.xmlgrrl.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/Barry-Obama-sm.jpg] Here's an image from his yearbook. Regardless, even if you believe this image is doctored, liberal propaganda, or a product of the Minitrue, why the double standard? Why is it okay for one man not to ''legally'' change his name (which is the precise accusation leveled against Obama on his article), while another gets blasted for it? While the job Obama's seeking surely requires much more serious scrutiny of the candidates running, why is it that a man must be condemned because his name sounds kinda' sorta' reminiscent of something familiar to people we're engaged in conflicts with? Is it only Muslim names that ensure the candidate is a sleeper agent of terrorists? I do not seek any kind of politically-motivated changes to these articles, only consistency-promoting ones. If we're going to do this to Obama and not others, then why not do it to Asian senators? Following the logic employed here, shouldn't ''they'' have known to change their names after Pearl Harbor, or the Boxer Rebellions? Why doesn't this site embrace the individualism of a man who didn't hide behind a safe, sunshiny name like "John Smith" merely to get elected? Shouldn't that be rewarded in America? I know you're a reasonably man, and I know you'll give me a reasonable answer. Thank you.[[User:OtherSide|OtherSide]] 18:28, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

:: [http://www.xmlgrrl.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/Barry-Obama-sm.jpg] Here's an image from his yearbook. Regardless, even if you believe this image is doctored, liberal propaganda, or a product of the Minitrue, why the double standard? Why is it okay for one man not to ''legally'' change his name (which is the precise accusation leveled against Obama on his article), while another gets blasted for it? While the job Obama's seeking surely requires much more serious scrutiny of the candidates running, why is it that a man must be condemned because his name sounds kinda' sorta' reminiscent of something familiar to people we're engaged in conflicts with? Is it only Muslim names that ensure the candidate is a sleeper agent of terrorists? I do not seek any kind of politically-motivated changes to these articles, only consistency-promoting ones. If we're going to do this to Obama and not others, then why not do it to Asian senators? Following the logic employed here, shouldn't ''they'' have known to change their names after Pearl Harbor, or the Boxer Rebellions? Why doesn't this site embrace the individualism of a man who didn't hide behind a safe, sunshiny name like "John Smith" merely to get elected? Shouldn't that be rewarded in America? I know you're a reasonable man, and I know you'll give me a reasonable answer. Thank you.[[User:OtherSide|OtherSide]] 18:28, 31 August 2008 (EDT)

 

::: Wow. I guess that fortune cookie of easily-disproven garbage is all I get from a coward. Great. [[User:OtherSide|OtherSide]] 01:14, 10 September 2008 (EDT)