Is Conservapedia's entry on Obama balanced?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 06:59:13 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Is Conservapedia's entry on Obama balanced?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: Is Conservapedia's entry on Obama balanced?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
#3
No, but it is hilarious
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 39

Author Topic: Is Conservapedia's entry on Obama balanced?  (Read 2438 times)
Edu
Ufokart
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,898
Argentina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: May 27, 2009, 09:18:21 AM »


Fail
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: May 27, 2009, 09:35:30 AM »

States was joking.
Logged
Devilman88
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,498


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: May 27, 2009, 10:45:02 AM »

What about this: Mr. Obama
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,010
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: May 27, 2009, 11:08:09 AM »

Actually, the conservapedia article is probably nearer the mark than "official" articles because they actually mention some of these controversies.  On wikipedia, the birthplace controversy is not even mentioned, not even as a refuted urban legend, which should show you what wikipedia's agenda is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: May 27, 2009, 11:14:29 AM »

Actually, the conservapedia article is probably nearer the mark than "official" articles because they actually mention some of these controversies.  On wikipedia, the birthplace controversy is not even mentioned, not even as a refuted urban legend, which should show you what wikipedia's agenda is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

Loved this comment:

Michael Medved, a prominent conservative talk show host, has attacked birth certificate theorists as "crazy, nutburger, demagogue, money-hungry, exploitative, irresponsible, filthy conservative imposters" who are "the worst enemy of the conservative movement" and "make us look sick, troubled and not suitable for civilized company."[57]

Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: May 27, 2009, 01:05:43 PM »

Christ you people have a stick up your ass. At least Lewis gets my sense of humor. And that's why he is far and above a much greater FF then 95% of the posters here.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.221 seconds with 12 queries.