Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sam Brownback"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Apology)
Line 23: Line 23:
  
 
Fine.  I won't bring it up again.  Maybe that post was a joke.  I don't know.  I'll leave well enough alone.  Sorry to bring this up.  There's more important things to be done.  I didn't realize there was a consensus on this matter.  Now I know better.  Thanks for clarifying this.  --[[User:Bob Arctor|Bob Arctor]] 01:59, 13 July 2007 (EDT)
 
Fine.  I won't bring it up again.  Maybe that post was a joke.  I don't know.  I'll leave well enough alone.  Sorry to bring this up.  There's more important things to be done.  I didn't realize there was a consensus on this matter.  Now I know better.  Thanks for clarifying this.  --[[User:Bob Arctor|Bob Arctor]] 01:59, 13 July 2007 (EDT)
 +
:Its alright. No need to apologize [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 02:00, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 06:00, 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)
I'm pretty sure this guy himself is a parodist Bohdan 01:43, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

Me too. DanH 01:44, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

Fine. I won't bring it up again. Maybe that post was a joke. I don't know. I'll leave well enough alone. Sorry to bring this up. There's more important things to be done. I didn't realize there was a consensus on this matter. Now I know better. Thanks for clarifying this. --Bob Arctor 01:59, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

Its alright. No need to apologize Bohdan 02:00, 13 July 2007 (EDT)