Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
149,493 bytes removed ,  00:16, December 11, 2008
no edit summary
Line 1: Line 1: −
{{Controversial}}
+
HE
Archives:
  −
[[/archive1|1]]
  −
[[/archive2|2]]
  −
[[/archive3|3]]
  −
[[/archive4|4]]
  −
[[/archive5|5]]
  −
[[/archive6|6]]
  −
 
  −
 
  −
 
  −
 
  −
==Thou shall not bear false witness==
  −
I am a Conservative and proud of it, but there are many parts of this article which are unsavory in character, the falsies in just the introduction deeply sicken me, the thought that our next president was not born in this country is not something I wish to have posted on this website. Barack Obama is a perfectly good person and he will not destroy the country, please, I think this needs to be revised, because for a site that has a very long article about bias and deceit this seems to be teeming with those two things, whether from the left or the right,negative or positive, deceit is deceit. I would also like to say, the accusations of those who write this and those who enable the writing of this are no better than any liberals on wikipedia, come on, we have to set an example, we shouldn't stoop to their level. I am a Christian and we must remember "Thou Shall Not Bear False Witness" and that is what I see in this article, we must be Christians and set a Christian example.--[[user:Rpond|Rpond]]
  −
 
  −
== Jesusland at it's worst ==
  −
Every source on here is either extremly questionable or completly false. The writer gets aroundfact checks by using MAY and MIGHT to desplay the fact there is a chance Obama can save his mortal soul before he dies and goes to hell for being a muslim. He is a good christian, and while that is not my religion, I respect him greatly. {{unsigned|RCEN}}--20:30, 30 November 2008
  −
 
  −
== Lenin Poster ==
  −
 
  −
The statement about the Lenin-like poster is informative.  We don't censor informative information here.  Let the reader decide.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:22, 10 November 2008 (EST)
  −
:Andy, did you happen to take a look at the reference? The article claims that "Obama also ''revealed'' his ''deep Marxist/Leninist roots''" and that "clear parallels between the poster design and Lenin's earlier poster was ''obviously a deliberate yet hidden hint'' to his European, socialistic audience as to his political roots and beliefs" (emphasis mine). The citation, which was a blog, by the way, and not in any way a trustworthy source of informative information, gives no evidence to back up these statements. It shows a poster of Lenin and a poster of Obama, both of which show profiles of the figures. Assuming these pictures weren't entirely made up, do you really think that this slight similarity is Obama's way of confessing closet Marxism? Not to mention the fact that Obama likely didn't make the posters anyway -- maybe we should accuse his (very expensive!!) marketing designer of being a Marxist/Leninist. 15:45, 11 November 2008 (EST)
  −
 
  −
== Obama and beer ==
  −
 
  −
There are several stories (with photos) of Obama drinking beer, which as an intoxicant is banned by Muslim sharia. <ref> http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.mcclatchydc.com/smedia/2008/05/06/20/125-6web-Obama_Beer-minor.standalone.prod_affiliate.91.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.mcclatchydc.com/100/story/36055.html&h=325&w=485&sz=47&hl=en&start=28&um=1&usg=__ShpWdieNIwhr4Rp3jHtLe7U9MB8=&tbnid=Se90xFLBo6rNQM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=129&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Bdrinks%26start%3D18%26ndsp%3D18%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN </ref> <ref> http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nancarrow-webdesk.com/warehouse/storage2/2008-w18/img.211156_t.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.nancarrow-webdesk.com/warehouse/storage2/2008-w18/img.211156.html&h=332&w=400&sz=16&hl=en&start=15&um=1&usg=__Yubc0nmus36Cf4Rrf7BL7-33-0g=&tbnid=xuWGKQ1Sl8_bQM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Bbeer%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DG</ref> No rational person can say that a practicing Muslim wouldn't violate the law in such a blatant, repeated manner. Another strike against the goofy Muslim charge. And remember, we don't censor here. Godspeed. [[User:Thecount|Thecount]] 12:52, 11 November 2008 (EST)
  −
 
  −
: I think many American Muslims drink beer.  Nice try, though.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:57, 11 November 2008 (EST)
  −
 
  −
::And how many "dangerous" American Muslims are there that have loose enough morals to blatantly disrespect their own religious law, but are still a threat to Americans? (Of course this is all granted that he IS a secret Muslim, which I have given up trying to discuss) So I see nothing wrong if Obama turns out to be a secret Muslim. Nice try, though. [[User:anonymous123|anonymous123]] 23:54, 17 November 2008 (EST)
  −
 
  −
::He also smokes cigarettes, to complete his subterfuge. [[User:Human|Human]] 17:42, 11 November 2008 (EST)
  −
 
  −
== Hussein reference ==
  −
 
  −
It's factual and it's informative.  If there is reasoned basis for deleting it, let's see it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:03, 11 November 2008 (EST)
  −
 
  −
: Again, no reason has been given for deleting the Hussein reference, and there is none.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 07:49, 12 November 2008 (EST)
  −
:: Andy, this is false.  Reasons have been given on this talk page numerous times before.  I just had a quick look, and found reasons being given in all archives except the first, as well as other places on this talk page.  So you are wrong to say that no reason has been given, and wrong to say that there is no reason.  And, as I have pointed out in the edit comments, five senior administrators have said that they disagree with it being there.  Is your view on this somehow superior to those five put together?  Do you want this to be a collaborative encyclopaedia or your blog?  The former demands that you not impose your opinion regardless of who is disagreeing.  Imposing your opinion regardless suggests that this is
 
18

edits

Navigation menu