Talk:Human Events

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is supposed to be meant by "patriotic conservative magazine"? SterlingNorth 23:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

You know, the flag-waving, in your face, my-country-right-or-wrong variety; how dare you ask such a question, you liberal PC demagogue! I jest, I think...but you're right, the term isn't neutral. I think their tagline is "America's conservative weekly since 1944," which should suffice.
This article still needs expansion. Any details available on circulation? Layout? (I believe it's currently broadsheet.) Criticism? Relation to the so-called mainstream media? (Of course the Left sees it as a cog in the VRWC, but surely there are specific critiques out there.) All the same, best to watch POV when categorizing HE and not just take the magazine's word for it.
Pastricide! Non-absorbing 16:45, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Amanda Carpenter deserves her own page. She is a noteworthy writer.

This page says little to nothing about the magazine, the editors, the contributors, history, or political flavor. It comes off liberally biased, and is worthless as far as information is concerned, needs to be expanded and and re-worked.

[edit] What's up with the top ten list?

To me, the top list just seems like a way to take a stab at certain books. Why is there this big a** top ten list when the article itself doesn't have much content.--M4bwav 15:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Other articles, such as Rachel Carson, refer to books being on the list. I think that it makes sense to have the list here as a way to show gormless readers (e.g., me) what the list is made up of.--Hjal 19:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I personally think it's perfect. If insane neo-cons who have absolutely no respect for human life and would gladly murder children, and they do, to fulfill their agenda don't like theese books... that means theese books are a must read for anyone sane.

Thanks crazy neo-cons :) 10 great books to read this weekend. Jokes aside, I doubt I will get much insight from Mein Kampf, but I do understand why neocons would put it together with Marx on a list. Gives idiots with association ability wrong ideas.

213.141.89.53 (talk) 13:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering there are 14 books "honorably mentioned" above Silent Spring on the list, I think it's quite misleading to have that listed without the others. 24.184.97.102 (talk) 04:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The longer list was previously there--see the history or click this: [1]. Some people didn't like it and the list was cut back and then, I think, expanded a bit. This is a little POV or OR, but I think that the list is opposed by some people who don't like seeing things they like dissed (this could inlcude Old Reds, Nazis, us moonbats, and God knows who else), and by others (some of whom identify themselves as conservatives or libertarians) who might think that the list makes people anywhere near HE on the political spectrum look like wingnuts. I think that the whole list should be there, but it would unbalance the article even more.--Hjal (talk) 04:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)