Conservapedia

[mutantllama]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page

It's like Wikipedia, but with a conservative bias!

It can produce some pretty funny results.

 

[Burning In Hell]

Interesting.

 

[AchrisK]

Good stuff

 

[AchrisK]

I like this:

http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama#Charitable_Giving

Charitable Giving

In the years 2000 through 2004, before becoming a United States Senator and being in the public spotlight, Obama gave 1% of his earnings to charity even though he made $250,000 per year. Since becoming a national figure, that amount has jumped to 6%.[61]. Although Obama is a Muslim, his small donations are consistent with atheism and were perhaps influenced by his nonbelieving mother. According to a study by the Barna Group, atheists give less per capita in donations than religious Americans [62].

http://patterico.com/2008/10/31/obama-and-bidens-charitable-giving-they-dont-want-to-spread-their-own-wealth-around/

10/31/2008
Obama and Biden’s Charitable Giving: They Don’t Want to Spread Their Own Wealth Around
Filed under: 2008 Election, General — Patterico @ 7:37 am

They’re happy to spread yours around, mind you. Just not their own:

Looking at Obama’s charitable giving in since 2000 based on his tax returns, we find that Obama consistently refused to follow his own advice to “spread the wealth” when he had the opportunity to do so. This is especially true in years when he made nearly $250,000 or more. . . . [F]rom 2000-2004, Obama’s charitable giving was less than 1 percent.

His contributions increased after his book deal, to a maximum of 6.1% of income in 2006.

Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, was even stingier about spreading his wealth. When his tax records were released in September, they revealed that over the past decade he had only donated an average of $369 each year. In 2007, his charitable giving was only $995, or 0.3 percent of income in a year when his tax returns reported $319,853 in income.

By comparison, John McCain gave more than one-quarter of his income in 2006 and 2007 (28.6 and 27.3 percent respectively). And according to the New York Observer, since 1998, he has donated royalties on his books totaling more than $1.8 million.

Read it all.

IRONIC UPDATE: Obama today says of McCain and Palin: “I don’t know when they decided that they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness.”

 

[zabu of nΩd]

I've never understood these gimmick Wikipedia spinoffs. The amount of effort that people go through to make thousands of pages of unfunny jokes is pretty sad.

Unless they actually mean that as a source of legitimate information, in which case I truly pity anyone who uses it as such.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

he's not a muslim tbh

 

[AchrisK]

he's not a muslim tbh

I would not be surprised to find that he is a Muslim or an Atheist. There is nothing to ensure that he isn't either of those things, tbh.

I would much prefer he turn out to be an Atheist than a Muslim, though.

 

[AchrisK]

I've never understood these gimmick Wikipedia spinoffs. The amount of effort that people go through to make thousands of pages of unfunny jokes is pretty sad.

Unless they actually mean that as a source of legitimate information, in which case I truly pity anyone who uses it as such.

I think you gotta take them for what they are worth. If they accurately quote good sources, then what's the problem? But I already found what I think might be an inaccurate quote, possibly intended to make it seem worse than it is (though it may still be pretty bad). But regardless, things like that are just lame, from any ideological standpoint.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

I think you gotta take them for what they are worth. If they accurately quote good sources, then what's the problem?

That they only quote sources which fit their perspective? If they're actually posing as a legitimate information source, that's a pretty fucking big problem I'd say.

 

[AchrisK]

That they only quote sources which fit their perspective? If they're actually posing as a legitimate information source, that's a pretty fucking big problem I'd say.

What do you think they should do? It can't be any worse than some liberal site dedicated to its own ideals. Everyone is out there to make their own points, not to prove themselves wrong. As long as these sites stick to facts, and be clear when they they get into speculation, then it's all good (to use an annoying phrase).

 

[zabu of nΩd]

What do you think they should do? It can't be any worse than some liberal site dedicated to its own ideals. Everyone is out there to make their own points, not to prove themselves wrong. As long as these sites stick to facts, and be clear when they they get into speculation, then it's all good (to use an annoying phrase).

They don't have to do anything, but they're obviously not a neutral source of information. And I didn't say it's any better for liberal sites to quote only liberal sources. Any information source which is dictated by ideology and not by critical thinking is systematically misinforming anyone who reads it.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I would not be surprised to find that he is a Muslim or an Atheist. There is nothing to ensure that he isn't either of those things, tbh.

I would much prefer he turn out to be an Atheist than a Muslim, though.

wat

 

[AchrisK]

They don't have to do anything, but they're obviously not a neutral source of information. And I didn't say it's any better for liberal sites to quote only liberal sources. Any information source which is dictated by ideology and not by critical thinking is systematically misinforming anyone who reads it.

Well, there is a responsibility on the part of the reader to evaluate and verify information, and not just swallow it. So, for responsible readers, these type of sites can be helpful.

 

[mutantllama]

I've never understood these gimmick Wikipedia spinoffs. The amount of effort that people go through to make thousands of pages of unfunny jokes is pretty sad.

Unless they actually mean that as a source of legitimate information, in which case I truly pity anyone who uses it as such.

Uncyclopedia is probably the best one imo.

 

[AchrisK]

...like this line:

Obama recently referred to his "Muslim faith."[24]

Well you watch the video and he says "my Muslim faith", but he clarifies what he meant. To use this at all lowers my opinion of the place.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Well, there is a responsibility on the part of the reader to evaluate and verify information, and not just swallow it. So, for responsible readers, these type of sites can be helpful.

As long as we're talking about stupid sites like this one, sure, I agree with you. However, I don't think that's wise in the case of major news media (i.e. TV news), which people actually rely on for information. Most people are not very good at evaluating information sources.

Personally I wish major news outlets were held accountable for some standards of neutrality so we didn't have shit like FOX, MSNBC, etc. misinforming millions of people, and therefore damaging our democracy.

 

[AchrisK]

I agree with you there.

 

[The Ozzman]

I would much prefer he turn out to be an Atheist than a Muslim, though.

Why? We all have the right to worship whatever religion we want. What difference does it make if Obama is mormon or muslim or baptist?

Oh wait, it doesn't.

 

[AchrisK]

uh...no reason.

 

[The Ozzman]

You obviously had a reason for stating it