User talk:Kels/Schlaflyisms

Note
I'm putting this at the top to get your attention. It's a word of advice. If you are working hard on a complex format, do not edit the content. It makes your versions confusing. Alternatively, if you are busy adding content, don't work on a format overhaul.

Here is sort of why: I took the last "pre-table" version of this file and have been copying the text into a table format to submit for your approval. However, I notice that since then, more content has been added.

So, I suggest that while you are formatting, you put a tag at the top of the file asking people to not add content until you are done formatting. Just my, hopefully useful, 0.02 human be in 13:50, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

general
The most telling quote is the most boring one: "". It's used in response to many many difficult questions. I'm not sure how to show that in a list of quotes, though. --jtl talk 13:12, 23 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Very clever. =^_^=  --Kels 13:15, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

"Wikipedia is apparently not liberal and anti-American enough, and wants to shift even more to the left, per systemic bias. Note how Wikipedia decries that its average editor is "from a predominantly Christian country," without adding that often that editor is atheistic and/or anti-Christian himself. So Wikipedia, which is quite anti-Christian, is accused of being pro-Christian based merely on the geographic location of its average editor rather than his views."

Kels - do you remember when Andy wrote the quote above? I remember seeing a discussion he created a couple days ago, where he decided to label a public school teacher as liberal solely because he thought that most public school teachers were left of center. When called out on rolling with an inadequate evidentiary standard, he claimed that just assuming that the teacher in question was liberal was probably reliable, given the presumption of liberal-ness inherent in associating with a predominant liberal majority. How convenient, eh? --Huey gunna getcha 13:59, 23 May 2007 (CDT)


 * I don't remember that one specifically, but I remember the conversation. Absolutely warped mindset that guy's got.  Combine that with a general inability to admit fault and intolerance of dissenting views, and you've got a rock-solid mindset.  Chilling.  --Kels 14:18, 23 May 2007 (CDT)


 * The "most teachers are liberal, therefore this teacher is liberal" bit wasn't Aschlafly. It was Karajou and Geo.plrd; see the conversation around (both preceeding and following) this comment.

Excellent work, Kels! Quite an impressive collection. --AKjeldsen 17:45, 23 May 2007 (CDT)


 * I skipped a lot, and I haven't covered the Wikipedia-related articles, but I think I have what I need. Hopefully other folks might find it useful if they're looking for a choice Andy quote. --Kels 17:46, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

"footnotes"
Gawd, that must have been hard work. I'm here to make it harder. Do you know how to make nice little footnotey things that ref the page you mined for the quote? Grab the url, however long, and put it inside single brackets like this: and it will look like this:

Only if you noted where you copied from would I expect this ;) Otherwise maybe one of us will have to do it! human be in 19:43, 23 May 2007 (CDT)


 * I wasn't actually aware of how to do that, and was actually considering doing looking it up earlier. Should have done it along the way, of course, but oh well.  The subheadings help a little, but I should do as you say sometime, once I get this particular project done.  Hopefully tomorrow or the next day, at the latest, I'm doing a bit of research on the visual side. --Kels 19:47, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

Table?
I'd love to put these in a more readable format, say maybe a table with the quotes on one side and my comments on the other, but tables in HTML are such a PitA. Is there an easier way to do it? --Kels 12:00, 25 May 2007 (CDT)


 * Well, there are Wikitables (which are basically just HTML tables for people who can't spell). The markup is fairly simple (see here), and if you like, I can breeze through briefly and set up a basic table with or without thin borders around each cell... if you don't like the result, feel free to tweak or revert. Just an offer... --Sid 12:05, 25 May 2007 (CDT)


 * I'd appreciate that, thanks. Even if you make it no-border (my personal preference), it'll still line up the comment with the quote well enough for people to read.  That last one from the Franklin discussion particuarly needs it.  --Kels 12:07, 25 May 2007 (CDT)


 * In retrospect, I think you were right, a thin border here would be better. It's fine for organization, just a touch difficult to read. --Kels 12:34, 25 May 2007 (CDT)


 * Yes, I was about to say the same. Not sure if this sort of table is the best format here. Maybe a width-restriction wouldn't hurt..? Really not sure, though. I'll put in borders for now, maybe it'll do the trick. --Sid 12:37, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
 * You could always copy one of the "mirror" essays and substitute your texts. I'd suggest Cretionist behaviour on CP, since it has lots of headers.  I also have saved a (html) boilerplate version with no text if you want me to put in my sandbox or something. human be in 12:50, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

Looks good to me, at this point. Readable, more or less organized, pretty uncluttered. It'll do unless someone has a good idea. If so, then definitely go ahead and implement it. Oh, and once I have a chance (later) to add some cites, should I move this to the Conservapedia namespace? --Kels 13:01, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

Think tank
A short exchange betwixt Ed Poor and Aschlafly here.


 * I remember that one. Struck me as particularly surreal, and was never referred to again.  Funny, that. --Kels 13:52, 25 May 2007 (CDT)


 * Yep, it made me go "...o-kay...", too. (Fixed the link, btw. No pipe "|" character when making external links). "CP as a think tank" may make a fascinating essay/study topic. --Sid 14:16, 25 May 2007 (CDT)


 * Heck, just the correlation of the words "think" and "CP" make me go O.o --Kels 14:18, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
 * here is another one for you.
 * "I don't find you to be forthright in stating your views. You may say that you are "hardly a liberal," but I'm not fooled by that. I'm 95% confident that you oppose prayer in the classroom, and that you believe in evolution.

I know liberals insist on having the last word. But this is my talk page, and the last word will be mine. Don't post here again on this issue. Thank you and Godspeed.--Aschlafly 14:08, 25 May 2007"(EDT)
 * Can you hear the paranoid, psychotic voice buried in that quote? "YOU CAN'T FOOL ME!!!!" *insane cackling*  I wonder how much longer untill he just snaps and starts shooting "Libruls".Prof0705 15:15, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Oh, be fair to the man. After all, this looks like the face of a sane, detached professional, don't you think? --Kels 15:20, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
 * I really ask myself why he chose that image. He looked okay and professional in the YouTube vid. Surely, somebody who had taped it would've been able to supply a screencap under fair use? Of course, I personally still prefer the picture we use in the userboxes ;) --Sid 16:03, 25 May 2007 (CDT)
 * He could be more unlucky - this is worse. --ύικι ντερ π ρ ετ ηρ  woo!

Another gem
Mississippi Mud, you said that "Thelonius Monk" is an innovator of Bebop. No kidding. Wow, that's just so clever!!!! Please explain yourself, and soon, or else obviously your account will be blocked.--Aschlafly 18:15, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * He is indeed an innovator of Bebop, having participated in the early 40s Minton's sessions and having particularly developed the harmonic language. What's the problem? MisMud 18:38, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * You're right. Please accept my apology. I'm learning here too.


 * Thanks for your entries.--Aschlafly 21:24, 5 April 2007 (EDT)


 * No problem. MisMud 21:27, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Infiltration
Surely you could use some or all of this one from his talk page:


 * We have been infiltrated, because we've welcomed infiltration. We grant accounts to everyone. This is a place to engage the opposite side in discussion, debate and conversion, through the process of improving an encyclopedia. Conservatives are not afraid of this process and we're confident that over time the facts and logic will win out. This is not a country club or a church. This is more like a public square.


 * You can see from the history on the Kent Hovind entry that I reverted it once. Please join my efforts for that entry and others. Please don't give up.--Aschlafly 01:30, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

It seems to me that the above quote represents the high water mark of Schlafly's hypocrisy, coming, as it did, the day after the Night of the Long Knives. Horace 00:00, 26 May 2007 (CDT)


 * Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, Andy. Heck, I was banned explicitly for discussing stuff! --Sid 07:07, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

MontyZuma racist
Kels, thanks for the heads up on that quote. I guess I'll have to watch out when my block expires. MontyZuma 13:25, 26 May 2007 (CDT)


 * My pleasure, and pleased to meet you (assuming I haven't already). --Kels 13:27, 26 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Shhhhh! MontyZuma 14:00, 26 May 2007 (CDT)

From usenet
From "Either you can explain it in your own words, or you don't know." I love all of Andy's C&P articles on CP even more now. --Shagie 00:45, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh, that's not fair! I just wasted the best two days of my life reading Schlaflyisms on usenet (he is SUCH a tool!) and I didn't realize I coulda copied the gems here!
 * Summary: "I am a brainwashed troll who knows nothing about science but think I can overturn it with lawyerly logic" ... "You're an idiot" ... "You're a liar". Repeat several HUNDRED times.  Footnote: t.o. archive.  ħ uman  00:58, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * FWUAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That thread is awesome, a must-read (even if you have no understanding of relativity). Does he ever hint at his reason for being so dense about relativity? My only unfalsifiable hypothesis so far is that he want it to be wrong so Newton can be right(er). NightFlareStill doesn't have a RWW article. 01:53, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * He has about eight "ideas" about science, and somewhere along the line, he was "taught" he was right, right, right (I'd link you to a nation article including the Kristol-ish neo-cons, but it's subscriber-only), so he expects his "logic" to prevail, without knowledge, without study, and without brainz.  ħ uman  01:59, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * @Nightflare: They (CP/Andy) have that weird argument that relativity causes some kind of moral decay, don't they? One of the many ugly views that can be excused by Andy's new favourite phrase "ideas have consequences". I do love his days on Talk.Origins, though -- it's so satifying to read conversations in which people are calling him a moron/propagandist every few seconds. 02:02, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * You forgot the second half of the classic assfly TO argument: "No court would even allow you to say what you do above." Peeps keep pointing out that science is not a courtroom, and yet teh assfly keeps playing to his imaginary jury.  All this TO/usenet stuff sheds a whole new light on "Our Andy" who built the straw castle that is CP.  @Jelly, yes that's what I love about it, too. They don't even do it until he deserves it, which he does eventually on every thread!  ħ uman  02:05, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * Endless lines like this: "You don't understand experimental science." Makes me wonder why CP ever got started (never mind, it's the assflyverse, different "rules" apply - like 90/10!).  ħ uman  02:11, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * That was one of the better threads - teh assfly totally out of his depth, and the "real" scientists totally pwning him for the clumsy idiot he truly is. Classic.  Priceless, even. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  02:24, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh, yeah, the "theory of relativity -> moral relativism" thing, I forgot about it. Think its possible to make him lash against the 2nd law of thermodynamics by making a parallel between it and renovable power sources? NightFlareStill doesn't have a RWW article. 02:41, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
 * Definitely :) They also have "irrational numbers = ... something bad". That debate was quite fun. 03:00, 13 June 2008 (EDT)