Talk:Black church-burning hoax

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shall we mention which liberal group was responsible for the hoax, or is the L word enough? Should we even mention what the hoax was, or is it sufficient to say 'it was a liberal hoax'? Maestro 16:53, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

Yes to both. Please do this. --Ed Poor Talk 16:56, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
I hadn't heard about this before. I'll look forward to the final entry! Graham 16:59, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
We should say which group, by name, and back it up with references. If it's the group I'm thinking of they also deserve a Conservapedia article about them - a sleazy multimillion dollar fundraising outfit pretending to be a "civil rights" group. Parrothead 17:06, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

Trend

Did Fumento say there was a trend? That is, an annual increase in church burnings? I thought he said just the opposite: that church burnings had decreased over the same period USA Today and that liberal group said there had been an increase. --Ed Poor Talk 17:19, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

'That liberal group'...does it have a name? Maestro 22:33, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
If you keep refusing to tar an entire group of people with the same brush, we'll make a conservative out of you yet! :-) The group is CDR, as currently stated in the article. --Ed Poor Talk 10:13, 28 September 2007 (EDT)
Thanks. It wasn't immediately clear to me. Maestro 10:40, 28 September 2007 (EDT)