User talk:Jfraatz

Welcome to the. Conservative Punk 18:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I can tell, by your userpage, that you and I are going to get along just fine. Conservative Punk 19:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'm sure we will. Look me up on facebook. (same name on FB: Johanan Raatz):D Johanan Raatz

Nitpicking/Warning
From your user page: "Ironically, I have accounts on both Wikipedia, Conservapedia, and RationalWiki." Nitpicking: It's not even close to being ironic. Warning: Don't expect to have an account at CP for long now that you are a member of a "vandal site." And finally: Wecome!-- 19:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. They will, probably, block you for being here. Even if you support a conservative viewpoint. Conservative Punk 19:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I reach for my banhammer and it is not there
So accept this, nematode. 09:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh I'm not a nematode, I'm a Goa'uld. Johanan Raatz

MemeShock
So...tell me about it. To be honest I'm not sure what you hope to achieve. 20:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It's like the opposite of a euphemism thats frequent use is supposed to alter ur mind to adopt a right-wing ideology. It's propaganda, but interestingly unabashed. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Just political-correctness that serves right-wingers instead of Reds, that is all. 20:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That was my understanding too, but I wanted to hear his take on it. 20:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh now, I only got the idea because DailyKos did something similar . I figured I could do it better than them and so I started MemeShock. The cat's already out of the bag so there is little sense hiding it.


 * And yes it's basically right-wing PC.


 * P.S. We found something that might belong to your side. It looks like the operating manual for Obama's zombie army. If you don't mind we'll copy it off to learn all of the command codes he's programmed into his base though for our own purposes.Johanan
 * I hope the postscript is a joke. The MemeShock idea is ridiculous, but the idea that Obama is engaging in mass hypnosis is downright pants-on-head crazy.TallMan 04:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well you know addition to being a memetic engineer I'm a smart-alek right? :D Johanan Raatz
 * THat's wrong. I have a copy of Obama's plan right here, it involves him using a necromantic ritual to turn Michelle into a lich, then reanimating the corpses at Arlington to have a plentiful supply of Skeletal Warriors.  Then, he can spread his Dark Acolytes (his Cabinet) to all major cities of the world, instituting world subjugation.  -- 04:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What? He can't do that! No fair! That was MY Skeleton army! Rat Bastard! :D Johanan Raatz
 * Not his cabinet, his secret unaccountable czars. 04:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Since I don't know you from Adam, I don't know whether or not you're joking. I do know about crank magnetism, though, and I also know that the AAPS (one of Andy Schlafly's employers) has seriously suggested that Obama was using mass hypnosis. So I wouldn't be surprised to learn that you drank that particular Kool-Aid.TallMan 04:26, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

May your days be numbered and unpleasant
I despise the purpose and means of your Memeshock project and find it only mildly entertaining that you're essentially trolling CP from the other end of the political spectrum than they're used to. That said, enjoy your mop and bucket. You're a fuckin' sysop now, Charlie Brown! RTFM and as-salam alaykum and all that. 21:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * "You're a fuckin' sysop now, Charlie Brown!"


 * Thank you! :D


 * "I despise the purpose and means of your Memeshock project and find it only mildly entertaining that you're essentially trolling CP from the other end of the political spectrum than they're used to."


 * Come on now, you didn't find MemeShock amusing at all? I've gotten compliments from left-wingers actually who couldn't stand the purpose of the group, but thought the methodology was pretty cool. Johanan Raatz


 * Yes, that would be because they use the methodology themselves, having written the book on it. However, most of the editors here are liberals rather than Marxists or post-Marxists, hence would disapprove of that sort of thing. 03:57, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If even liberals. I consider myself more of a left-leaning libertarian than a liberal. And many of the liberals here, especially ListenerX, oppose Marxism. 03:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have always thought of myself as a classic liberal, but I am unsure if that means exactly what I think it means. 04:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I see, well since I do know the difference between liberals and leftists, I will lay off on the neospeak and psyops when it comes to you guys. (moderates and average voters are fair game though) Now just sit back and watch MemeShockers fight the Marxists -relax and enjoy the show. (popcorn and soda are served at concessions by the ticket booth)--Johanan Raatz
 * It appears that the MemeShockers are being ousted from CP... anywhere else they're active now? --Retwa 04:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well just take a peek at the program directory on our facebook group. We have a number of different programs going on at various places at any given time.--Johanan Raatz
 * (EC) I hope the MemeShockers and the Reds treadmill-race each other into the mire of incoherence, thus revealing their philosophy's true face. 04:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Teabaggers, shockers, what next? A Donkey Punch movement?  Perhaps that will be Hannity's game.  Corry 04:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Archives
What part of "Please do not make edits to this page." caused you confusion? 03:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * My bad. I'm new here, and I wasn't paying attention. No harm intended. Johanan Raatz


 * No blood, no foul. 04:00, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC) Sign your posts with four tildes instead of three; this places a timestamp on them. 04:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I believe that that places only the sig on it. For comparison:

Three: --

Four: -- 04:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Five: 04:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

K, thanks.Johanan Raatz

"Ironically I have accounts..." on your userpage.
That's not what that word means. Just FYI.--Tom Moore fiat justitia 06:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * And (nitpicking) for someone who professes to be working with language and meaning: "both" implies that there are two objects not three. 06:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wrote that by accident before I decided to include Wikipedia in the list. user:jfraatz

Strauss and other right wing intellectuals
I'm not a man of the right myself by any means but I do hope you can act as an intellectual counterweight here. Unfortunately most of the kiddies around here associate intellectualism with the left and bogus historical ideals of 'relentless progression'. Give 'em hell. MarcusCicero 10:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's one "intellectual " to another. 10:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I intend to! :D They think pragmatism, relativism, existenialism etc. are so great until they realize that all of those things can be turned on their heads. If a woman has a right to choose to kill her kids based on existentialism then so does the Decider (ie. Unitary Executive President Bush) based on his existential choices of what constitutes a "state of exception." What's good for the goose is good for the gander! :D


 * Thanks for the support! --Johanan Raatz
 * I see nothing rational or intellectual in what you are doing. You admit yourself that you are abandoning rational debate purely to push through your agenda. 11:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the rational intellectual debate is what is done in our little ivory tower. See Plato pointed out that most people are driven by pleasure and not wisdom, as such the intellectual debate happens first among those concerned for wisdom. After they have determined objective principles of justice, natural rights etc, then they go and push their agenda on the people who do not care about such principles in their own right.--Johanan Raatz

Please ...
... indent your talk page comments one more than the preceding one each time,they're difficult to read otherwise. Oh and it's "non sequitur", BTW. 11:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

WND et al.
I saw on the facebook thing that you sent out the Correctspeak dictionary to a bunch of right wingers. Did you get any response? I thought some people at WND might jump on it.&mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 15:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I got an email response from Joseph Farah informing that he'd look it over and pass it on, but nothing after that. user:jfraatz

Eh up!
Your contributions are interesting indeed. Keep 'em comin'! 18:52, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion
How about you write up an article on Kos' MemeTank? &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:43, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I'll do that! Johanan Raatz

Calling your bluff
I'm calling you out! You are nothing more than a deep cover liberal! You are sooo crazy that all you do is hurt your own cause. You are a parodist, too. Trashing Conservapedia with tons and tons of nonsense. Jfaartz 22:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh come on, there is plenty of crazy out there and MemeShock is not even that crazy because it is largely unoriginal. However I do have a hard time seeing how Raatz thinks the decision to implement it is moral. But that's a different issue. 22:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No I'm for real. Look me up on facebook. I'm one of the more hated right-wingers there. Jfraatz 05:21, 4 December 2009 (UTC)Johanan Raatz

So...
...what? Is your Facebook thing an actual attempt to get people to think more conservatively or what? And what is your fascination with Facebook if I may ask? 22:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think his obsession is with all the MTV generational sheep who would follow his ass blindly. Ain't that right, JFarts? Jfaartz 22:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What do you think? I know the way people think in this day and age all to well! Muhaha! :D user:jfraatz

Basics of wiki debating
Most of these are convention you seem to ignore or don't know.: Thanks for your cooperation. 00:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Don't break-up other peoples comments, you only can read who is posting based on the signature underneath the comment. If you want to reply do it in full underneath.
 * 2) Always indent one level further than the person above you.
 * 3) Use 4 tildes so that we get a time stamp as well as your name so we can see when you commented.

Fundamentalism
Hi. Are you going to come back on Talk:Fundamentalism at some point?--BobNot Jim 18:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)