Talk:Boom and bust

Typical Obama sycophants, they can dish it, but they can't take it. ConservapediaEditor (talk) 23:29, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't be an ass. I was actually about to suggest we take both the conservative and liberal snipe out, because neither are particularly accurate.  Corry (talk) 23:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * What Corry said. -  π    23:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Then take them both out, or leave them both in. Don't just revert one.  ConservapediaEditor (talk) 23:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I like your version, Pi. Corry (talk) 23:38, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Still overly Keynesian in its out looks, but it is a very Keynesian idea. -  π    23:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Who the fuck said we were supposed to be impartial? 23:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC) TerrySmall.png [[Image:Toast s.png|alt=Toast|text-bottom|20px|link=User talk:SusanG]]
 * Either everybody can snipe, no matter how much spin, or no one can snipe and we all must be dispassionate and rational. I prefer the former where no one reverts unless it's a personal attack or "explicitly factually incorrect" (but spin and insinuations are OK) because that leads to some fun reading.  However, some here want to put in their snipes and not let others respond, and that just makes RationalWiki like Conservapedia.  ConservapediaEditor (talk) 03:40, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Um, that makes RW nothing like CP, if you stop to "think" about it. Drop the silly CP-like accusations anytime you want to be taken seriously.  Articles built out of snipe-wars rarely read well, but ones (especially political) that allow good explication of various perspectives usually do.  05:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)