From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The "ketchup is a vegetable" factoid is documented, but isn't it really an underhanded way of reminding people of a criticism that was made of Reagan? So in one sense it's just a fact, but in another sense it's real purpose here seems to be some veiled criticism without any counter-balancing of that criticism. Read the link cited, and you'll see things like "antiregulatory zealot" and " unsuccessful effort by the right to pursue its agenda at the expense of the nation's kids". I didn't change it because I wasn't sure if the mere fact that a link was attached meant that it had to be allowed. Certainly a more balanced link could be found. Bwilliston 23:04, 9 March 2007 (EST)

In response to your first statement, that the factiod has an underlying message criticising Reagan... Well, whether or not it's criticising him, it is the truth. On the page on Abortion, for instance, we have the "truth" about abortion without any counterbalancing arguments, and no one seems concerned about that. GofG 17:23, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

I actually added the link having only added the last sentence of the article. (I didn't write this.) I didn't seek to find a link with an ideological agenda, I just put a link up for the sake of documenting sources. MountainDew 23:05, 9 March 2007 (EST)

It's hard to find a more balanced link!! But I found one and edited that part, leaving the previous link as an example of how this minor incident was politicized and became widely repeated. Does that work? For the record the quote I was looking at from the new article says: "Although catsup was not mentioned by name, the regulations did state that a catsup-like concentrate would qualify as a vegetable—so long as it was served with a healthy portion of another real vegetable, a point that got lost in the general handwringing." Bwilliston 02:35, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Sorry about the "USDA passed a law" mistake. I should have said something like "the USDA proposed a set of regulations that were passed into law". I still object that as it's stated it is a half-truth, and happens to be a half-truth that is popular among Reagan bashers. But it's your site, and a minor point. I'm just trying to figure out how things work around here. Bwilliston 13:42, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Sugar Content

I added the cite request for this, not because I doubt it, but I feel it should be supported. DrSandstone 14:42, 28 March 2007 (EDT)


I suggest that the information on Heinz be merged to a specific article on the company. DanH 22:19, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

Somebody wished to politicize this page so it simply needs balance. RobS 22:22, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
I do remember the original flap over the page a few months ago. It was obviously politically motivated then. DanH 22:28, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
The fact that the Reagan incident was brought to life after 25 years means we can't let the balancing material go so easy. RobS 22:31, 13 May 2007 (EDT)