So then, you are saying Wikipedia would support my removing anything negative about a person, regardless of its factual basis?  So the fact that George Bush started a false war over WOMD, I could remove all reference to that on his page?  Because it is the same scenario here.  There is factual, well-sourced basis for historical criticism of Barack Obama that can be stated objectively in a reasonable manner.  Just because the Republicans use mudslinging all the time against him, doesn't mean there are no criticisms of Obama.  It's just that so much of their junk is flying around that their stuff gets discredited and when they actually find something that is valid, it's like the boy that cries wolf, and nobody listens.  Anyway, I just don't like it that Obama's being treated specially here and anything negative of him can't be written.  I hardly think Wikipedia intends to allow a policy where anything written negative about anyone can be deleted for no other reason than making everything positive about everyone.  And no, I'm not saying I want to remove all negative stuff about everyone, just pointing out that it seems ridiculous such a standard is being applied here.