Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 60: Line 60:     
:Yes, but in admitting that, you are admitting to the aforementioned lie of omission, which is essentially the entire basis for the site. Not something to brag on. So if there's going to be an argument about how terrible a thing liberal bias is, it would by hypocritical not to acknowledge that you are doing the exact same thing with the other end of the political spectrum and thus are, by your own definitions, equally wrong.
 
:Yes, but in admitting that, you are admitting to the aforementioned lie of omission, which is essentially the entire basis for the site. Not something to brag on. So if there's going to be an argument about how terrible a thing liberal bias is, it would by hypocritical not to acknowledge that you are doing the exact same thing with the other end of the political spectrum and thus are, by your own definitions, equally wrong.
 +
 +
Not really.  Wikipedia claims to have a neutral point of view; Conservapedia can hardly be accused of the same thing.  But before you accuse us of being one-sided, I encourage you to be a little more open-minded and read some of our articles.  You'll be surprised how often a straightforward and honest presentation of facts will come off as conservative - there's a good reason for this.  Conservative thought is based on facts and reason, so it's no surprise that in being honest and accurate, we're accused of having a strong bias by people who don't realize this.
 +
Also, please sign your comments with 4 tildes. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 01:17, 9 December 2009 (EST)
3,552

edits

Navigation menu