Changes

::: Early on, Obama ran an anti-patriotic campaign that depended heavily on big donations from moveon.org anti-war types.  During that stage, Obama did not wear the flag lapel pin.  Later, Obama "changed" in what was obviously pandering to a broader electorate he was attempting to attract.  No one seriously disputes this, and a citation to a liberal newspaper that endorsed Obama is not necessary to support it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:09, 9 December 2008 (EST)

::: Early on, Obama ran an anti-patriotic campaign that depended heavily on big donations from moveon.org anti-war types.  During that stage, Obama did not wear the flag lapel pin.  Later, Obama "changed" in what was obviously pandering to a broader electorate he was attempting to attract.  No one seriously disputes this, and a citation to a liberal newspaper that endorsed Obama is not necessary to support it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:09, 9 December 2008 (EST)

:::: Aschlafly, up near the top of this page, you specifically said, "We provide the information and let the reader decide."  Yet in this case, you're perfectly willing to draw the conclusions when they suit you. How is this not inconsistent?  Speculative statements are unencyclopedic and belong in an opinion column, not a serious "Trustworthy Encyclopedia."[[User:ETuthill|ETuthill]] 19:23, 9 December 2008 (EST)

::::LowKey, you need to know we are used the the moniker of "parody" dished out by social liberals for anything they cannot even fathom. Like [[Faith]]. Andy Schlafly was right in saying Obama is a panderer, for beginning to wear the lapel pin, reversing his position on ''FISA'', ''No Child Left Behind'' and of course, who could forget his bald-faced lie about always supporting the right to buy firearms, after the SCOTUS ruled against the District of Columbia banning the possession and purchase?  I suppose the liberals here will now demand I "prove" he changed his positions on those issues as well...--[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]^{[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]]} 19:36, 9 December 2008 (EST)

::::: "ETuthill", the reader does decide.  We're not going to censor the information.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:31, 9 December 2008 (EST)

:::::Aschlafly, up near the top of this page, you specifically said, "We provide the information and let the reader decide."  Yet in this case, you're perfectly willing to draw the conclusions when they suit you. How is this not inconsistent?  Speculative statements are unencyclopedic and belong in an opinion column, not a serious "Trustworthy Encyclopedia."[[User:ETuthill|ETuthill]] 19:23, 9 December 2008 (EST)

::::::Aschlafly, I reverted this comment by "Etuthill" because I understood it to be trolling. I'm sorry if I was overzealous in that action.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 19:33, 9 December 2008 (EST)

 

"ETuthill", the reader does decide.  We're not going to censor the information.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:31, 9 December 2008 (EST)

 

:Aschlafly, I reverted this comment by "Etuthill" because I understood it to be trolling. I'm sorry if I was overzealous in that action.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 19:33, 9 December 2008 (EST)