Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 112:
Line 112: − − :So what I'm getting out of this is that some of the users here believe that their personal opinions and worldviews are the absolute truth. Does that sound like people who are open-minded and searching for truth, or people searching for a way to validate their Conservative beliefs, whether they be correct or not? I'm not saying that Liberals have it right; quite to the contrary, I believe that there is no single worldview containing no flaws whatsoever, whether you be Liberal, Conservative, or anything else! But this is Conservapedia, where people from all walks of life are accepted. We must consider potential truths from all sides of an argument; otherwise, we are kidding ourselves if we believe that we have thoroughly analyzed any empirical situation. Please, don't assert your personal ideology to be the absolute reality!--[[user:Confused|Confused]] Line 202:
Line 200: − − :Andy, please! His is a view I would have to admit to sharing. Perhaps Obama will lead our nation down a worse road than we are already headed; only time will tell. But he is an educated, dedicated man, and there's no need to one-sidedly tear him down for being Liberal. Please don't accuse people with a questioning opinion of "ranting;" it makes it difficult to say anything. Sorry, I don't want to sound mad; I'm new, and I just can't seem to understand the level of mindless Liberal-hatred around this site! I'm so confused...--[[user:Confused|Confused]]
Talk:Barack Hussein Obama (view source)
Revision as of 22:26, January 8, 2009
, 22:26, January 8, 2009Reverted edits by Confused (Talk) to last version by Karajou
Why don't we let each reader decide for himself how believable each source is? I'd hate to see a claim deleted simply because one party in a dispute doubts it. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 22:58, 27 November 2008 (EST)
Why don't we let each reader decide for himself how believable each source is? I'd hate to see a claim deleted simply because one party in a dispute doubts it. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 22:58, 27 November 2008 (EST)
==Debate On Obama's Religion==
==Debate On Obama's Religion==
: The odds are less than 1% that "Rpond's" posting is genuine, in light of his misspelling of "conservative" and his other rants. It is appropriate to delete insincere or deceptive postings.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:53, 13 November 2008 (EST)
: The odds are less than 1% that "Rpond's" posting is genuine, in light of his misspelling of "conservative" and his other rants. It is appropriate to delete insincere or deceptive postings.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:53, 13 November 2008 (EST)
:: It is an interesting experience living life each day getting verbally attacked for being a conservative then coming here and getting persecuted (justified edits to factual and encyclopedic wording) for being a liberal. You seem to be very fond of the less than 1% statistic, and have used it many times in many places, but I've never seen any solid reasoning or studies behind it (although in this case your gut instinct does seem to be credited implicitly) I think perhaps you live in a highly conservative eco chamber and aren't getting out enough to notice how little resonance this sort of thing has out in the real world. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 18:58, 13 November 2008 (EST)
:: It is an interesting experience living life each day getting verbally attacked for being a conservative then coming here and getting persecuted (justified edits to factual and encyclopedic wording) for being a liberal. You seem to be very fond of the less than 1% statistic, and have used it many times in many places, but I've never seen any solid reasoning or studies behind it (although in this case your gut instinct does seem to be credited implicitly) I think perhaps you live in a highly conservative eco chamber and aren't getting out enough to notice how little resonance this sort of thing has out in the real world. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 18:58, 13 November 2008 (EST)