Talk:Barack Obama/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
imported>Martin Baldwin-Edwards No edit summary |
imported>Richard Jensen (rhetoric) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
::I don't have any problem with the new text of Richard, as it seems clear that Clinton is part of the old way of doing politics in the USA. What I do have a problem with, is that Richard removed the improvements made to other parts of the text by Stephen. Please reinsert them, Richard, because they are needed. [[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 23:56, 10 January 2008 (CST) | ::I don't have any problem with the new text of Richard, as it seems clear that Clinton is part of the old way of doing politics in the USA. What I do have a problem with, is that Richard removed the improvements made to other parts of the text by Stephen. Please reinsert them, Richard, because they are needed. [[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 23:56, 10 January 2008 (CST) | ||
:::I'm happy to restore Steve's innocuous changes. But let's get the rhetoric clear: elections are fought like wars and politicians attack each other, soi ''attack" is the correct term. see [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/05/obama_slams_cli.html] Obama did not use words like "alleged" and to insert them in a paraphrase distorts his position. The theme of "change" versus "old politics" is basic to Obama's ''"Many Iowa voters have responded to Obama's message that he is a fresh face who can unite a polarized electorate and move the country away from what he calls the "same old" politics.'' at [http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=ak8pQ7CYtaxw&refer=home] CZ is not endorsing Obama's attacks, it is explaining them. [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 00:12, 11 January 2008 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 01:12, 11 January 2008
This is an attempt to write an article on this candidate, Barack Obama. It attempts to be a biography, not a day to day account of his campaign, nor a campaign advertisement. Disclosure: I am a US citizen. I am not registered to either party as a voter. Larry Yount 21:58, 26 July 2007 (CDT)
Steve has complained (privately) that Richard reverted his edits without explanation. I agree that that is simply unacceptable, particularly in light of recent discussions. Well, as a very imperfect stopgap measure, here's what I've decided: Steve, feel free to redo your edits, if you want. Then, Richard may not touch them; others will have to do so, if they are flawed. If he does edit them, then tell me, and I will ban him from working on this article. --Larry Sanger 21:34, 10 January 2008 (CST)
- Steve was the one who changed my edits. with, as you can see, no explanation on the talk page.Richard Jensen 21:48, 10 January 2008 (CST)
The facts are here:
- http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Barack_Obama&diff=100246909&oldid=100246908
- http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Barack_Obama&diff=100246910&oldid=100246909
- http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Barack_Obama&diff=100248705&oldid=100246914
On what Larry stated I could do, what I'm choosing is, "sometimes the polite way is to let the other person undo his or her own work, once a mistake is pointed out."
Stephen Ewen 22:22, 10 January 2008 (CST)
How about:
- Obama, a charismatic speaker,[1] repeatedly criticized Clinton for her 2002 vote supporting war against Iraq, and for her alleged ties to lobbies and old-fashioned politics.
Warren Schudy 23:47, 10 January 2008 (CST)
- I don't have any problem with the new text of Richard, as it seems clear that Clinton is part of the old way of doing politics in the USA. What I do have a problem with, is that Richard removed the improvements made to other parts of the text by Stephen. Please reinsert them, Richard, because they are needed. Martin Baldwin-Edwards 23:56, 10 January 2008 (CST)
- I'm happy to restore Steve's innocuous changes. But let's get the rhetoric clear: elections are fought like wars and politicians attack each other, soi attack" is the correct term. see [1] Obama did not use words like "alleged" and to insert them in a paraphrase distorts his position. The theme of "change" versus "old politics" is basic to Obama's "Many Iowa voters have responded to Obama's message that he is a fresh face who can unite a polarized electorate and move the country away from what he calls the "same old" politics. at [2] CZ is not endorsing Obama's attacks, it is explaining them. Richard Jensen 00:12, 11 January 2008 (CST)
- I don't have any problem with the new text of Richard, as it seems clear that Clinton is part of the old way of doing politics in the USA. What I do have a problem with, is that Richard removed the improvements made to other parts of the text by Stephen. Please reinsert them, Richard, because they are needed. Martin Baldwin-Edwards 23:56, 10 January 2008 (CST)