Conservapedia Talk:What is going on at CP?

From RationalWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

What is going on?

(talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

As a point of etiquette, please use the [add section] tab above, or the "Add new section" link below, when adding a new topic, and the appropriate [edit] tab when commenting on existing topics. This will lessen the incidence of edit conflicts. Thank you.

When adding a link to Conservapedia that is not already on What is going on at CP? please place <capture></capture> around the link.

For non CP-related talk, please mosey on over to the saloon bar.

This page is automatically archived by Pibot
Archives for this talk page: Archive list

Obamageddon Meter

Contents

[edit] Andy Maths

Question what does 39 + 4 equal? Answer 44. Jack Hughes (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Not exactly out of step with the rest of his marking though. MaxAlex Swimming pool 14:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Also, 40 + 20 + 20 + 10 = 100. And how can listing four made-up numbers be "superb analysis"? Cantabrigian (talk) 14:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
What the hey, I've WIGOed it. My favourite bit is that students of the Assfly deem it acceptable to write drivel like "If, by some act of God, (Which, Ironically most liberals don't believe in) ..." in an assignment about government and economics. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 15:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Cue dreadful puns along the lines of con-sum-ed, con-sum-ation, con-sum-ate... — Unsigned, by: 82.44.143.26 / talk / contribs
From his vast class of 60 odd students, or however many he said he had, 4 homeworks seem rather a paltry haul. I guess the Assfly just isn't cut out for the internet. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 18:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
It's a clear as 2+2=4. Open your mind. Barikada (talk) 19:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

39 + 4 DOES equal 44, because that damn british, and therefore LIBERAL, Douglas Adams clearly invented the nummber 42 as a way to distract more people from god by thinking 42 is THE answer rather then GOD. If you opened your mind, you would know this --Thunderstruck (talk) 20:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually the result is correct; the error is in the extra credits, which should be 5. Compare the 40+20+20+10 student. (By the way, there's no reason why that sum should equal 100 - there may well be other factors influencing the election. Maybe the student should have made that explicit by adding "Other: 10%". Of course the superb analysis still consists of pulling numbers out of thin air.) I'm more surprised by another inaccuracy: Last time I checked, there were two independents in the Senate. I haven't seen any of the pupils mention them, yet all answers regarding the Senate were rated "correct" or "good". 77.176.76.230 (talk) 00:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
The question #2 addresses those nasty so-called independents by stating: "Include the Independents in the Senate in the Democratic totals because they vote for the Democratic leadership." I can only repeat Barikada's remarks. --Xyr (talk) 01:22, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
"There's no reason why that sum should equal 100" - well, apart from the instruction: Ponder how much "weight" or emphasis to give each consideration (with the totals adding up to 100%). There are no unknown factors! Cantabrigian (talk) 10:47, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Reading fail on my part concerning the independents. I'm so embarrassed. But the election factors are debatable: The student is asked to first list all the factors (adding up to 100%), but for question 1 he's only asked to list the top factors. 77.176.66.205 (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

First of all, it was a typo, not an addition error. Second, it wasn't even a typo in the final score but rather the number of extra credit points. Just spitting out "OMG!! He hit a wrong button!! AndyFAIL!!! Hahaha!" is pathetic. Make fun of the things he does that are actually idiotic. For example, he gave full credit for the final bonus question even though the answer had nothing to do with it: Q: What tactical change could one of the parties make? A: The economic stimulus could work. "Excellent point." Just throw in a reference about godless liberals and the rest doesn't matter. Kalliumtalk 19:12, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Conservapedia and Witchcraft

Do they seriously believe in witchcraft? Quote from a Conservapedia page on Harry Potterimg: "The books also present witches and wizards as being both normal people and abundant. This deceit causes children to likewise accept magic and witchcraft as normal, and they identify with the children in the books, again furthering their acceptance and witchcraft. The reality about magic - that witches are evil and, thankfully, not common - is not presented." Are they really this crazy? It reminds me of Jesus Camp, which might make it worthy of a poll. --BradT (talk) 20:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Smells like poe to me. -- Oniontalk/edits 21:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
That TK guy and I think Jpatt have tried to make it sound like witchcraft is real and harmful by undoing to previous posts. Example of TK undoing.img Note how he says "Personal opinion, not supported by any citations" when he changes it back to what it was. I think it's clear where he stands on witchcraft. I know it's a poe, but it's still quite funny. --BradT (talk) 23:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Might be a Poe, but a lot of the Religious Right actually do believe in such things. I do recall the hysteria when the Potter books really took off, and I doubt a lot of them were kidding. --Kels (talk) 23:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
And that's why I think it's funny! TK pretty much did an undo and made it say that Harry Potter was harmful to children, taken seriously or not. I think TK (CP administrator) seriously believes in witchcraft. --BradT (talk) 23:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
No, he doesn't. He's a powerhungry troll. Reverting edits of the lowly unannointed at CP is part of his religion. Nutty Rouxnever mind 00:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
CP truly does attract the wackos doesn't it? Thanks for the info. What about Jpatt? I think I saw him undo the Harry Potter page to TK's last setup twice. Is he trolling too? I can't tell what the administrator's agendas are on this site (It's either supporting religious scripture or trolling). They and everything else on the CP site is complete poe to me! --BradT (talk) 01:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
They each have fairly comprehensive pages, if somewhat outdated, here on RW. In short, JPatt's likely not a parodist, just an arch-Catholic of middling intelligence. Karajou's a hillbilly moron. TK's a parodist. Ken's... Nutty Rouxnever mind 02:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I admit I haven't bothered to double check but I believe the Old Testement mentions witches - and even prescribes stoning for them. Bad look Hermione. StarFish (talk) 06:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Now I have checked. It's here and it's not stoning. You can kill them anyway you like. "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Whoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. He that sacrificeth unto any god, save to the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed." (Exodus 22:18-20) StarFish (talk) 06:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I would go back to the original text to really understand that verse because witch may not be the best translation. Don't forget that the KJV was translated when witches were a hot topic. The meaning of witch might have been different in the Middle East two millennia earlier. Image:redchuck.gif Генгисpillaging 10:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Science has saved us again. Don't worry, the spells in Harry Potter don't work! Experiments have proved it. X Stickman (talk) 15:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Not sure whether the comments in that article are serious or not, but some CP editors certainly have argued seriously that HP promotes real world Satanic witchcraft. See this debate (which I think has since been deleted from CP) in which StevenM, who I think is/was one of Andy's home-school students & apparently not a parodist, argued this point very earnestly. Fun times. €₳$£ΘĪÐMethinks it is a Weasel 17:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] FUCK YOU, ED POOR!!! FUCK YOU!

Ed Poor, I've always suspected that you were a mindless, bigoted, piece of shit. But now you've finally gone on to show just what a pathetic cunt you really are.img Oh, so the media scared Americans to death did they?? Maybe they had good cause to? Or are the 10 million AIDS sufferers in Africa all homosexuals and druggies??? Or don't they matter, because they're not Americans? You fucking mindless piece of human trash. I honestly hope AIDS strikes close to you, then you'll have to decide if they were gay or druggies. You fucking cunt. I spit on your grave. --PsyGremlinRunāt! 07:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Ed is barely sentient enough to comprehend that. A total waste of perfectly good rage that was.--Brendiggg (talk) 10:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Take a look at the source. Uncle Ed is just on his NARTH/Reparative Therapy trip again, trying to cure those poor gays from their unwanted condition. --Sid (talk) 10:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
And I see from the APA WIGO that he's indeed on a NARTH binge again. Yes, NARTH is a reliable source to summarize APA. But notice how APA's position on NARTH is nowhere to be found in their NARTH article... hmmmmm... But then again, the American Psychological Association is just some small unscientific organization while NARTH is a much more reliable source, right? --Sid (talk) 10:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
It's only when reading your comment, Sid, that I realised that 'APA' stood for the American Psychological Association. It's already WIGO'd that Ed started the APA article with a period, and that's all, but even the current entryimg is merely a sentence basically denigrating them, without actually saying who 'they' are. Encyclopedic entry, indeed. 92.6.218.173 (talk) 11:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I like the "FUCK YOU!"'s in the header. It reminds me of Step Brothers when Will Ferrel is sitting at John C. Reilly's drum kit and shouting, "FUCK YOU, DALE! FUCK YOU!" Or John Travolta driving Uma Thurman around while she's OD'ing in Pulp Fiction, shouting into his phone, "fuck you, Lance, answer!"
Also, more to the point of the thread, yes, Ed Poo is despicable. SuperJosh may be an idiot, but if there's one thing he's not, it's an idiot 13:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Right now, Ed is top of the list of people that I want to pay Ace to flatten. He is scum - even more so for probably not having a clue why his moronic statements would make me angry. I'm waiting for him to jump on the "beetroot and garlic can cure HIV" and "AIDS is not a syndrome" bandwagons. And I still spit on your grave, you cunt. --PsyGremlinSermā! 13:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
As a teenager in the Eighties, I must have not gotten this memo of being scared to death and possibly dropping dead at anytime from the media, unless of course it didn't happen. :P As for Ed, I cannot take anything seriously from a guy who worships some old Korean shister as some sort of savior/messiah of the human race. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 14:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Reliable sources inform me that 95% of everyone ever associated with NARTH are, in fact, closeted homosexuals. Occasionaluse (talk) 14:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The ability to discount the suffering of "others" has always been a hallmark of religion and conservatism. Once it's "US" against "THEM", we can dehumanize anyone for any reason. By placing all HIV/AIDS sufferers into the "other" group [insert your own group at will], we needn't even think about them as people. Progressivism allows us to see the "others" as maybe just a little like "us", and allows the entry of human compassion. Shame on you Ed. Jimaginator (talk) 20:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not normally one to defend Ed because I've had private correspondence with him that shows just how much of an asshole he really is; but I have seen programs that showed just how insane the AIDS scare drove some people. If you can find it there was an Oprah show that was absolutely fascinating that was done in the 80's that was on the urban legends/discrimination surrounding people with AIDS. We've all heard this stuff, kids with AIDS not being allowed around other children, the whole "getting AIDS from the pool" thing. Perhaps this is what Ed is referring to? NetharianCubicles are prisons! 23:10, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Ironically Ed may be right

I'm a biologist, not a psychologist, but ev. psych does seem to be casting doubt on the disease model of mental illness in many cases, pointing out how it is often traits that are adaptive in different environments that lead to disharmony (and that a certain level of disharmony is to be expected, but that is more from the ev. theorists than the ev. psych people). The Irony part is that doubtlessly Ed feels that less disease and more sin is needed to explain the problem when the reality is that the problem with the disease model is that it is too closely based on the sin based medicine system of the past. --Opcn (talk) 07:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Psychology typically only recognizes a condition as "clinical" or a "disease" once it impairs or effects ones life or the lives of those around them. Simply being sad isn't a clinical condition. Being sad all the time is not a clinical condition. However, being so sad that you are unable to take care of yourself, most definitely is a clinical condition that requires medical intervention. Similarly, being an alcoholic doesn't automatically make it a problem. Once it is a problem, then you need the help to get out from it. In the same way, I suppose if we treated homosexuality along these lines, "come to us psychologists only if you're having issues with it," the APA wouldn't have a problem with reparative therapy.
However, it continues and remains to be that those practicing reparative therapy refuse to consider alternative treatments when the reparative therapy itself is not working. Forcing a patient into a specific course of treatment to the exclusion of all others as possibilities is the precise reason why reparative therapists have had ethics violations, and this thinking and pattern is so pervasive that the APA now asserts that any clinician practicing reparative therapy is violating ethical standards.
So, again, the problem with NARTH and reparative therapy is not actually in the actual theory, but in the practice... just like with any religion. --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 23:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Zen reflection on Kabuki

Once it looked like this
Now only a stub remainsimg
Concise, the site grows. --PsyGremlinParlez! 15:22, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

*applauds* Τerоиіαn the anti-anti-atheist 16:47, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Six thousand bytes
Reborn as seven hundred
Kotomi weeps.
(poetic, I'm NOT) 17:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
Haiku fail from the both of you... Occasionaluse (talk) 18:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Never claimed it was a Haiku. 18:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast
Just clumsily putting together an almost-haiku stanza with no rhyme or reason. I get it. In that case, good job!!!
too proud
to see fail
you own
Occasionaluse (talk) 18:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Andy: "We're concise!
And we're growing rapidly!"
Somewhere, logic cries.
-- Τerоиіαn recession-proof 17:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
A heavy rain falls:
Her name blackened by CP,
Truth weeps for the world.
SuspectedReplicant retire me 18:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Solution found to
the "perpetual September":
block the whole planet.
--wwwwolf (barks/growls) 21:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

His frenzied keyboard
Misquotes Darwin and Einstein
Explaining nothing
The Real James Brown (talk) 00:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Ed spanks TK... twice

Once for being cruel to n00bsimg.

And once for postingimg a shitimg story on Mainpagerightimg. Countdown to Terry Koeckritz revenge in 10... TerrenceKoeckring (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I was perplexed also. Who were the liberals supposed to be? The trespassers or the law-enforcing gun owner? The students or the teacher? Everyone? I know Andy could figure it out, but it's still pretty odd. The Truth(TM) is that TK (with nothing to add to the project, but desperate to justify his existence) just throws up news stories. If he can't find one that bolsters the CP agenda, then whatever. He simply feels he needs to do something, and it actually works. Occasionaluse (talk) 17:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Since it was a public school teachers, & public school students, either or both are clearly at fault. Presumably this was supposed to be posted as an example of public school values. €₳$£ΘĪÐMethinks it is a Weasel 17:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
"Ed, how dare you disagree with me in public?!?! Contact me behind the scenes, as is normal for a public wiki! Oh, and it's impossible to add a news item at a lower-than-top slot, duh!"img Didn't even bother with the cutesy "Professor Poor" crap - Ed is so screwed. ;) --Sid (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Man, never thought id feel bad for ed, or ANY CP sysop. That TK is going crazy, a little more each day. How long before TK stages a Coup d'état and overthrows Assfly? — Unsigned, by: Thunderstruck / talk / contribs
That'll never happen - TK is a puppetmaster, pulling strings behind the scenes. He will manipulate useful people in private chats, and anybody who somehow shows how much of a fool he is will be trampled down. At this point, challenging Andy would be a step down - he has reached the point where he can openly (and repeatedly) troll the entire community without any ill effects, so why would he want to stop? --Sid (talk) 22:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Another great example of Playing the Victim when Queried. "If you had bothered to read the story link" indeed. Terry Koeckritz, you're a lying toerag. I suggest you pray for forgiveness next time you're on your knees. TerrenceKoeckring (talk) 22:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't see Terry Koeckritz winning out here. Ed Poor is definitely higher-ranked than the Team Killer (he's a lot closer to Pope Andy). And honestly, TK isn't a "puppetmaster" - I don't even think he's that bright. The reason TK gets away with being an asshole isn't due to some genius manipulation, it's because Andy doesn't care about any part of the site other than what he's currently working on. Colonel of Squirrels禁止不是法西斯 23:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
He isn't a genius puppetmaster, but he is a very experienced internet troll. Being the unpleasant lietenaunt on odd websites is evidently is main hobby. I hope he goes for Ed, but we won't get to watch very much of it - at least until the next discussion group leak. Broccoli (talk) 00:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't say that Ed Poor "outranks" Terry Koeckritz -- Ed is harder working, better liked, and personally much closer to Andy, but TK is the one who can claim credit for making CP what it is today, and since Andy likes the status quo, he wants to let Terry Koeckritz think he is the genius. Anyway, one single loss for TK is a huge blow to his ego and his clout, while Ed has nothing big at stake unless he himself wants this to get bigger than it needs to be.--CentimeterINCHES 02:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I like Centimeter's analysis because it explains why TK acts like such a little bitch and makes things worse when his shenanigans get called. Nutty Rouxnever mind 02:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
TK is just a bully. Unfortunately (for him) bullies only succeed when they have the upper hand. In a one-to-one situation they can usually intimidate their target, that's why TK (Senior Admin) always want to take things behind the scenes. In a group situation, if TK is in the wrong, he is outnumbered so has to play the injured party. Really, the example of this are almost innumerable. Image:redchuck.gif Генгисpillaging 03:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Best analysis yet, which is regrettably true. ~SuperHamster Talk 03:26, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

It couldn't last. Ed bends overimg and tries to relaximg. TerrenceKoeckring (talk) 13:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Ed Poor begs TK for his "indulgence". What does that even mean? ONE / TALK 14:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
It means a guy with a 95 IQ is patronizing a guy with a 90 IQ. Nutty Rouxnever mind 15:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Or possibly an acknowledgement that TK is pope of CP. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 16:00, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
That's world class obsequiousness. Andy must have turkey slapped Ed after TK did some behind the scenes penile engorgement on Herr Schlafly.--Brendiggg (talk) 16:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Ed's contribs of that time are telling: "Yes, TK, I'm so terribly sorryimg for not asking you for permission, please forgive me! God what an effing asshole gonna kill the bas- OH GOOD, SOMEBODY DISLIKED MY NARTH QUOTE?img DIE, DIE, DIE!img Man, that felt good!" --Sid (talk) 16:48, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Yeah that's what happens. When Ed gets slapped about, he has a tantrum and throws all the toys out of the pram (or all the editors out of CP... in either case, shit and vomit are recurring features) ONE / TALK 18:24, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Rangeblocks. ...

Is this actually a /16? Nutty Rouxnever mind 02:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Er. Yes. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 03:26, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
How so? Nutty Rouxnever mind 04:45, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Speaking of blocks... 8 September 2010 (Block log) TK (Talk | contribs | block) (check) changed block settings for BenHur (Talk | contribs | block) (check) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked) (Unused account with no edits for several months).
"Unused account"?? This user came on board August 2007 and made several hundred edits. His last edit was in November 2008. Why block him now? In other news, due to editing/account creation being mysteriously shut off at odd times, Andy has limited access to this function to a "security" group of 3 trusted Sysops now headed by... wait for it... TK. LOL! Fred4T (talk)
The Class B address space was from 128.0.0.0/16 - 192.255.0.0/16, however an individual Class A (usually a /8 address space) can be sliced up into further networks. For example, The Class A address range 94.0.0.0/8 can be sliced up into 255 subnetworks from 94.0.0.0/16 - 94.255.0.0/16 Update: To be more clear... he blocked any address within the range 94.0.0.0 and 94.0.255.255, so thus by plain definition, it must be a /16 I mean... it's a tautological statement. It's like asking "Is 2 actually a 2?" Corrected --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 07:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
What are you getting at Nutster? Have we missed something here? It looks like a bog-standard Terry Koeckritz 64k block. That'll show'em! DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 08:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
94.0.0.0/24 is a "class C", and is the range 94.0.0.0 to 94.0.0.255. 94.0.0.0/8 is the "class A", just to be clear. (Talking about classes is a bit 1990s too; they don't really exist any more either). MaxAlex Swimming pool 08:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Good call, corrected. As well, this is why I said "Class B was". --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 08:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I think Nutty is confused by the three zeros. -- Nx / talk 08:46, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, Nx. I was. Why isn't it effectively an /8 if you don't tell Mediawiki what the second octet is? Nutty Rouxnever mind 13:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
You are telling MW what it is - in this case it just happens to be 0. It's no different to it being 74 or 1 or 193. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 13:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

While CIDR avoids the traps pedants love, it seems /16s are indeed "beloved of TK" http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3A94.&pattern=1&year=&month=-1 suggests that about 16/256 =1/16 of the 94. /8 range is blocked, if that's typical then 1/16 of the internet is blocked from editing.


Indeed, CIDR is the rule now, so talk of "class this" and "class that" is not helpful. All of 94.0.0.0/12 is used by "Sky Broadband", probably mostly for dynamic IP to homes. For non-British folk, Sky is the UK's commercial satellite TV broadcaster, run by one of the Murdochs and part owned by the Murdoch News Corp. Sky Broadband is an ISP focused on home users, bought wholesale and renamed because News Corp rightly fears that high speed Internet connectivity renders its TV companies like Sky almost as redundant as newspapers. So, in short, Conservapedia blocked tens of thousands of unrelated British people from contributing. The very definition of "overbroad" 82.69.171.91 (talk) 14:46, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, strap me to a Dawkins, and roll me in the mud! What did you expect? They're british (sic) afterall. Jimaginator (talk) 20:14, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Mainpage: All Obama All The Time

The only reason I go to Conservapedia anymore is to find out what the wingnut talking points are, but I may just stop altogether. It's so boring. How many ways can they write the same thing about Obama and Obamageddon over and over? Here's the word usage on the Mainpage right now:

  1. Obama - used 36 times
  2. Liberal - 24 times
  3. Conservapedia - 23 naval gazings
  4. Conservative - 22 times
  5. Abortion - 9 times
  6. Christian- 7 times
  7. Atheist - 6 times
  8. shockofgod - 3 times

Many of the words above are from their mainpage linkfarm, whereas most of the Obama usage is their mainpage content. Do wingnut conservatives care about anything else going on in the political world? --Leotardo (talk) 01:26, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Main Page word cloud
"Does Andy care about anything else going on in the political world?" Fixed that for you. And the answer is no. Τerоиіαn what's a tetronian? 02:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I think all the extreme conservatives think about is their Christian beliefs getting into politics somehow. You can slap the word atheist or Muslim on anything they don't like and they'll applaud. Because they are also what I consider radical Americans, you can do the same with the word communism or communist. You can see this kind of stuff on Fox News.
  1. Muslim - Over 37 times?
  2. Communist - Over 17 times?
I just did a quick CTRL+F through the "Barack Hussein Obama" page to see how many times they use those words for my own curiosity. I don't know if the words are directly related to him or what he supports, but I still found it amusing to see the amount of times these words were used. --BradT 02:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Wordle is quite good for this sort of thing. See image right. Image:redchuck.gif Генгисpillaging 05:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Nobody uses the word "communist" as a self-descriptor in the U.S. these days, except for a few Leninist cranks, probably because they produce all their rhetoric by rote. Actual Reds call themselves "progressives" or "social-justice activists" or something similar. ListenerXTalkerX 05:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] How will Andy deal with this?

Big conservative win: even Castro admits communism doesn't work. Only one problem...Castro's dead. Surely the Assfly will find some way to have his cake and eat it too. Can't wait to see what it is. DickTurpis (talk) 02:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

My prediction: The real Castro would never admit he was wrong (being a dirty liberal commie athiest and all), so therefore it's obviously an imposter/body double, further proof of Castro's demise. Checkmate. JoeFerguson (talk) 03:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Yeah. The problem is then he can't take the "even the biggest proponents of communism are fleeing it!" angle, which is actually the only story here. But, of course, he's already firmly committed himself to the Castro is dead angle. I suppose Castro will remain dead, but the impostor is carrying out Castro's posthumous wish to denounce communism as a failure. DickTurpis (talk) 03:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
It is obviously some kind of commie ruse...Se7enEight 04:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
CIA plot to discredit communism via a Haitian Vodou preistess. ? Hamster (talk) 04:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Please, please. I need attention....

TK's latest additions to Main Page Right seem to be designed to get our (or anyone's) attention. Not working out at the moment though so they get increasingly desperate. Remember the thing where Andy blabbed on pathetically about how Obama never danced therefore he must be a Muslim? So TK posts this http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&diff=next&oldid=817496 along with a photo entitled Obama Dancing. A few edits later there is this gem which sounds like a Ken paranoia special when he's low on meds http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&diff=next&oldid=817503 StarFish (talk) 11:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Personal tools
support