Talk:Jim Gilchrist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Vietnam
I beleive the main page should show confirmable information regarding his service in Vietnam. I do not wish to question him more then anyone else. Trust is becoming evermore precious in these rescent political controvercies; radical lies and accusations made by most if not all of America's elected officials. Because of this we the people will only be able to hold such people accountable if we do our own homework and trust those who prove that they will not lie for political gain. Wikipedia has shown a great devotion to only post in their articles what they can confirm. Please let us have short biographies of these political candidates to include such things as what he did in vietnam, his rank, and how he received his purple heart. -The Youngidealist
[edit] Links
What is up with those links at the end of the "See also" section? Anybody want to clean that up, or does anybody even know what the hell that's about? Looks pretty helter-skelter.
[edit] Sodomy
The article linked on the Gilchrist political views section includes his support for sodomy laws but shows that he has some hesitation. He does not openly advocate mandatory prison time, so I removed that part of the article.Jcmiller 04:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 2008 Campaign
Gilchrist is quoted on politics1.com as saying he's going to run for prez 'if' John McCain is the GOP nominee. That's not an absolute.Jcmiller 04:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Controversy
I added the controversy part because from what I've read there has been a lot of controversy surrounding some of his supporters. Someone deleted it with the justification that the minutemen are not a hate group. This does not claim that they are a hate group only that hate group members were drawn to Gilchrist because of his positions on immigration. Also, why would they delete the part about the volunteers form the stromfront.org. Please do not delete my valid contribution because you have a soft spot for a certain group or person. There is a more controversy but I do not have the time to research so if someone wants to take on that task, that would be great.
- Shouldn't the section you proposed go in the Minutemen article, not Gilchrist's article? --Tim4christ17 17:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
The section on the October 11 Columbia speech is clearly biased and at points untrue. The October 12 New York Times makes no mention of Gilchrist supporters "attacking" protesters, and uses videotape evidence to state that protesters hopped on to the stage and started shouting slogans at Gilchrist. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]).
- Given that the only citation is to a POV source, and I can't find an NPOV source making this point, this portion is being removed. Zz414 15:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
The current description in the article, which says that questionable people helped with Gilchrist's "Senate" run (Gilchrist ran for the House), does not match the source referenced, which alleges that these people helped with that Minuteman Project. This section needs revision. I'm not sure what's correct, just that this section as it stands is not. Qqqqqq 03:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)