Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1,505: Line 1,505:     
::: I'm not a liberal, I was not trolling; I am just interested in seeing facts portrayed as facts, without opinions being added into the mix.  It is not "censorship" to suggest that in an encyclopedia, the facts can and should speak for themselves without editorializing.  I'm making a suggestion in good faith because I believe that including phrases such as the one I quoted make for a weaker article and less respectability for the project. [[User:ETuthill|ETuthill]] 20:43, 9 December 2008 (EST)
 
::: I'm not a liberal, I was not trolling; I am just interested in seeing facts portrayed as facts, without opinions being added into the mix.  It is not "censorship" to suggest that in an encyclopedia, the facts can and should speak for themselves without editorializing.  I'm making a suggestion in good faith because I believe that including phrases such as the one I quoted make for a weaker article and less respectability for the project. [[User:ETuthill|ETuthill]] 20:43, 9 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
::I agree that the point is best made by ''showing'' the reader that Obama is pandering as opposed to simply stating it. It's a matter of encyclopedic style, but character statements in nonfiction pieces won't affect a reader in the slightest. It may be a ''fact'' that Obama panders by wearing the flag pin now, but the connotation of the word "pander" converts the statement into an assessment as opposed to an account. If you state that he changed his behaviors and list the ways, your reader will be perfectly capable of coming up with the word "pander" independently. If you absolutely ''must'' use the word, you should quote a reputable pundit or journalist (people who we wish to make assessments) . --[[User:JKoliner|JKoliner]] 09:46, 10 December 2008 (EST)
    
==Obama and Blagojevich==
 
==Obama and Blagojevich==
    
I strongly suspect that this is going to wind up being a new section of the article as the story develops.  After all, when Blagojevich says that he's not willing to support Obama's pick because "they're not willing to give me anything except appreciation," that rather strongly implies that he ASKED them what they were willing to give.  If that's the case, the fact that they weren't willing to grease his palm is really irrelevant; they knew a serious crime was being committed and said nothing about it, which would make them party to said crime.  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 19:45, 9 December 2008 (EST)
 
I strongly suspect that this is going to wind up being a new section of the article as the story develops.  After all, when Blagojevich says that he's not willing to support Obama's pick because "they're not willing to give me anything except appreciation," that rather strongly implies that he ASKED them what they were willing to give.  If that's the case, the fact that they weren't willing to grease his palm is really irrelevant; they knew a serious crime was being committed and said nothing about it, which would make them party to said crime.  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 19:45, 9 December 2008 (EST)
10

edits

Navigation menu