Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sam Brownback"
Bob Arctor (talk | contribs) |
(→Blogs 4 Brownback: oh please) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
Why was this page locked right after you deleted the link? What happened to the discussion? Or are you the sole arbiter of truth here? Personally, I think the only one who can dictate truth is my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I think you are being unfair. I will back off, but I don't understand why there was no discussion of this. If there was, I respectfully request you point me to it. Thank you. --[[User:Bob Arctor|Bob Arctor]] 01:26, 13 July 2007 (EDT) | Why was this page locked right after you deleted the link? What happened to the discussion? Or are you the sole arbiter of truth here? Personally, I think the only one who can dictate truth is my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I think you are being unfair. I will back off, but I don't understand why there was no discussion of this. If there was, I respectfully request you point me to it. Thank you. --[[User:Bob Arctor|Bob Arctor]] 01:26, 13 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Oh please. The statement that "heliocentrism-is-an-atheist-doctrine" is obviously a parody, and not a particularly good parody either. Rest assured that DanH is not the only one who observed that.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:37, 13 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 05:37, July 13, 2007
HarryPalms
I suspect that HarryPalms [contribs] is a vandal. The name is an obvious reference to "hairy palms". Disgusting. Here's what he inserted into this article:
- He cites former Senator Jesse Helms as a model.[1]
I vote to remove this as it is a link to an unreliable and obviously biased source. Actually I'm not even going to wait for a vote. This assertion isn't even cited in the article. Wikipedia also makes such an unsupported assertion. This is an obvious (though subtle) attempt to smear a wonderful principled conservative. -- Bob Arctor 16:24, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
- All sources are biased, just some more so than others. MountainDew 17:32, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
Blogs 4 Brownback
Blogs 4 Brownback was removed from the list of blogs because it's supposedly a "parody." What is the proof of this? It looks legit to me. I don't think arbitrarily removing it was the right thing to do. I'm adding it back and would appreciate a discussion before such actions are taken. --Bob Arctor 01:15, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
http://blogs4brownback.wordpress.com/2007/05/18/heliocentrism-is-an-atheist-doctrine/
You can't convince me that's not a parody. DanH 01:54, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
Why was this page locked right after you deleted the link? What happened to the discussion? Or are you the sole arbiter of truth here? Personally, I think the only one who can dictate truth is my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I think you are being unfair. I will back off, but I don't understand why there was no discussion of this. If there was, I respectfully request you point me to it. Thank you. --Bob Arctor 01:26, 13 July 2007 (EDT)
- Oh please. The statement that "heliocentrism-is-an-atheist-doctrine" is obviously a parody, and not a particularly good parody either. Rest assured that DanH is not the only one who observed that.--Aschlafly 01:37, 13 July 2007 (EDT)