Talk:Progressives and choice

Jaw, meet table.

“

Progressives who support the right of third worlders to strap on a backpack of TNT and explode themselves in the public market

”

Okay, nothing at all against Ed here, but... bwuh? Are we now saying that liberals progressives support terrorism? Did I miss a memo? The "article" made me smack my forehead more than once.

Also, could somebody tell me how the "Coyote Blog", the blog of "Warren Meyer, a small business owner in Phoenix, Arizona" with "the same attention span as an 8-year-old boy mainlining Hershey Bars" qualifies as any more authoritative than my LJ? (Hint: "Sources should be authoritative works, not merely published opinions by others.") --DHayes 20:00, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

He seems to know what he's talking about. Why are you impugning his character, instead of trying to rebut even one thing he says? (Must I write an article on Liberal cheating?) --Ed Poor ^Talk 20:05, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

Must I write an article on Conservatives breaking the rules they created? I'm not "impugning his character", I'm questioning his qualification and authority to comment on politics (and now Global Warming, as I recently noticed). It's a blog. By a small business owner whose political involvement amounts to... "running recreation facilities on government lands". Whoop-dee-do! He's an expert!

Here's a thought: I seem to know what I'm talking about. If I create a blog and write my opinion on it, can I quote myself here on Conservapedia, too?

Seriously, you broke the commandment. I don't have to rebut his "point" about terror-supporting liberals who realized that dumb people won't fasten their seat belts unless it's written in some law. (But since I'm around: Being "pro-choice" does not equate being pro-"lawless society in which everybody can choose to do whatever he likes") That guy is not authority. It's just his opinion. If his opinion really is so terribly true (oh noes) then you surely can find an authoritative source and actually write an article instead of just copy-pasting a paragraph and calling it a day.

Here's a good "Before I hit "Save page" check for you: Next time you "write an article" like that, ask yourself this: "If DHayes did the same for the other end of the political spectrum, would I slap him?"

On second thought, maybe I'll just write Conservatives and life where I'll briefly rant about how conservatives are inconsistent because they are pro-life and pro-death-sentence. Should I write a first draft on LJ first? ;)

(Disclaimer: Harsher tone than usual because I don't react well to implied potential accusations of hypocrisy and cheating.) --DHayes 20:30, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

Shouldn't this be in an essay page or something, rather than the main namespace? Its presence here implies it is an encyclopedia article, when it is a quoted opinion piece.--TomMoore 20:15, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

A single quote. Maybe it is... a work in progress? To be completed in more detail later (or, if after some time that seems unlikely to occur, just moved to a more appropriate space). I'll offer the benefit of the doubt and assume so. Feebasfactor 20:46, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

I asked if you disagreed with what he said, not whether you liked him. I'm no more authoritative than the Coyote blogger, and no one disputes my authority to contribute to this encyclopedia.

Are you concerned with truth, or is everything a struggle for power between rival doctrines with you? --Ed Poor ^Talk 22:00, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

I assume you meant me with that reply to nobody-in-particular? I didn't say whether I like him. I merely keep pointing at the Commandment that says that we shouldn't use posted opinions by sources with no authority. That guy has no authority in the fields of politics or global warming. Period.

You can argue day and night about whether his opinion is right or wrong, but that's not the issue here. The issue is that his opinion has no place in an encyclopedia. Are we going to quote every random guy with a blog now? (I know, I know, the answer most likely will be "No, we will only quote every random guy with a blog who supports the conservative position.")

Nobody disputes your authority. You're a sysop, and you have the power to block anybody who disputes your authority. Kinda like few people argue with the guy who is waving around a loaded shotgun. Don't mistake the absence of protest with an absence of dispute.

But even though I hop on thin ice now, I have to point out that you created a few ridiculously useless articles. I'm sorry, but somebody has to say it.

This is one of them: The entire thing consists of a quote from a blog that is in no way authoritative. Another one would be "two meters". I think that if any non-sysop had created that one, they would have received a warning or a block, and the article would have been deleted. You being a senior sysop gives you a level of protection and authority that others don't have, and you apparently take this power for granted.

I'm concerned about factual accuracy and about the rules of this site (because unlike you, I will get warned/blocked for breaking them). Stop making it look as if I keep trying to mess with your ideology. I would have made the same complaint if you had quoted a blog saying "Liberals are great! Screw conservatives!". Is it that bad or unusual that somebody openly wonders about the quality of sources? --DHayes 22:33, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

For the third time, do you disagree with what he says, or are you simply trying to censor it? --Ed Poor ^Talk 22:39, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm aware of no liberal, in my 26 years of life, who has supported terrorists. This is a disgusting display of partisanship and unscholarly drivel. For shame.-PhoenixWright 22:45, 12 March 2008 (EDT)