6
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 21:
Line 21: + +
no edit summary
I did a quick search of the New York times website [http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=a&query=&srchst=nyt&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=sub&hdlquery=Pol+Pot&bylquery=&daterange=period&mon1=01&day1=01&year1=1981&mon2=03&day2=16&year2=2008], and it turns that they have 112 articles with "Pol Pot" in the headline written since 1980, 14 of them on the front page. [[User:Blinkadyblink|Blinkadyblink]] 13:14, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
I did a quick search of the New York times website [http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=a&query=&srchst=nyt&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=sub&hdlquery=Pol+Pot&bylquery=&daterange=period&mon1=01&day1=01&year1=1981&mon2=03&day2=16&year2=2008], and it turns that they have 112 articles with "Pol Pot" in the headline written since 1980, 14 of them on the front page. [[User:Blinkadyblink|Blinkadyblink]] 13:14, 16 March 2008 (EDT)
I feel this page itself is a double standard, as it implies that no conservatives anywhere have any double standards. There are some fringe conservatives that do the same thing (Remember that school that banned the showing of Obama's back to school speech, but was willing to bus it's students to see a speech given by bush?). This page is heavily biased, which is what Conservapedia was created to eliminate. While it may be true one party has more double standards than another, we should not try to present it as something only liberals do. It's double standards like this that reduce wikipedia's credibility, so why do we re-create them here?