User talk:RobS


 * Archive1
 * User:RobS/Archive2 (21 June 2007 - 26 October 2009) non-contiguous, excerpted



That's it, I'm blowing your cover
RobS, I really appreciate everything you've done for RationalWiki. But you've just become too hard to work with lately, and you've outlived your usefulness. So I'm blowing your cover. Andy, RobS here has been working with RationalWiki for some time, feeding us information from your secret sysop mailing list. But it's not worth it anymore. We have other/better sources. So be advised - your sysop's loyalty is not as strong as it appears. Goodbye, Rob.-AmesG 07:49, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
 * LoL. More RW bullshit. Smoke and mirrors obfuscation can't hide the fact that you are just a bunch of vandals who have stated that you view all tactics, including exposing minors to pornography, as justified in your pathetic squabble for bragging rights over CP. לול 08:13, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Don't worry, Fox, you dont have to pump you creds here...we know youre under deep cover.--PalMD-yada yada 08:25, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
 * I don't need - or want - the kind of notoriety that "cred" here entails, thanks :D לול 08:24, 21 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Even Slash got kicked out of Guns & Roses. You were great, and seeing as Ames has let the cat out of the bag, you helped a whole lot, but - and if i may quote - "with your bitch-slap rapping and your cocaine tongue you get nothing done".  In other words, you've just tipped the scales into burdendom. δαιισρΗ ταλκ  09:56, 21 June 2007 (CDT)


 * By their fruits ye shall know them.
 * I think Andy and CP insiders all operate under this concept. This is a big weakness of the RW cabal, unfamiliarity with credible sources.  And when RW cabalists do employ a credible source, they misues or misquote it, not necessarily deliberately, just out of carelessness or a condescending attitude that Bible beleivers are too stupid to see the ruse.  Pity, if these "cybervandals", as the mainstream press has dubbed them, took the time to realize the difference between the spirit and the letter, they could become more constructive contributors.   RobS 10:33, 21 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Oh ho! This from the guy who invents the "New Ordeal," and then cannot find any support (and sometimes has to invent it) for his contentions!--Franklin 11:03, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
 * He never did finish defending that. However, it has been moved to the essay space, so it is all presumed fiction/opinion anyway.162.82.215.199 12:20, 21 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Heck, he could not defend it. He made up a term, argued it was common knowledge, then began citing sources that had the word "new ordeal" in the title. Problem was, none of them supported his argument. RobS, a sterling example of a CP sysop: a friggin' moron.--Franklin 12:30, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

John T. Flynn is one source. His book on the subject will be used. RobS 13:05, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
 * He doesn't use the term anymore than the rest of them. Why don't you admit you made it up? You just throw a "source" out like so much sand in an opponent's face. I think you page for Schlockumentary is just as sterling.  ʄĹїþþїɲ ;-) 13:12, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
 * You might also point out in that case why a book written in 1935 would use the term "New Ordeal" to describe a period of economic hardship the nation has just entered. Further, this does nothing to support the contention you have that this period went on for 20 years. The whole issue is ridiculous. Do you expect children to write in the New Ordeal instead of the New Deal on their tests?  ʄĹїþþїɲ ;-) 13:18, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

The 1935 piece is not even a book. It is a very short ( seven pages I think) philosophical piece that has nothing to do with RobS' essay. Hey dumbass, here is a tip for you. You do the research, then you write. Oh, wait a minute. We are talking about CP, where their fearful leader says "don't read a book to learn, write a book to learn!" Good God. That place is a den of morons.--Franklin 13:37, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

Your antics are getting tiresome, Rob. That's too-deep cover. --Linus (plot evil tech) 14:00, 21 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Is it possible that the e-mails we've been receiving are not from RobS, but from a script that someone put in his inbox program? I mean, maybe he didn't write the script, but when his e-mail went "out," someone put the script in?  I guess it could be him, unwillingly then: I don't really care, as long as we keep getting the e-mails.  Otherwise, how would I know to laugh my ass off at how RobS thinks every user from Houston is me, and how Karajou simultaneously thinks that every user from Atlanta is me, too?  You guys should stop picking on poor Houstonian users.  There are 6 million of us, you know.-A m e s G 01:45, 24 June 2007 (CDT)

Your insanity knows no bounds
How is this liberal commie propaganda? You're starting to sound a little nutso-er than usual.-α m ε σ (!) 19:57, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * We're not a platform for liberal hatemongers. Wanna know how to survive? quit parrotting DNC/CNN/MSNBC/MoveOn.org/DailyKos talking points.  Not too hard to figure out.  RobS 19:48, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * P.S. See talk:


 * There has not been a single day gone by for 7 years where we have not heard how Kathrine Harris and Jeb Bush stole the State of Florida from the Democrats. Somebody is not being very truthful here.  Rob Smith 21:12, 4 September 2007 (EDT)

What?α m ε σ (!) 20:06, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Oh, I remember that one! That's where he disputed the fact that Liberals haven't won any southern states by providing an example of Liberals complaining because they hadn't won a southern state.  I have no flippin' clue how this makes him look like anything but an idiot, though. --Kels 20:16, 6 September 2007 (CDT)


 * He left his tin foil hat in the microwave...and well things are getting...hazy....don't ask him to elaborate or we will get another RW essay submission. 20:07, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Well, linking the initial question and Rob's answer, the concise version seems to be that CNN and MSNBC spread commie propaganda. Duh. --Sid 20:09, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

Liberal hate mongers, you know, the people who spew DNC/CNN/MSNBC bullrot. RobS 20:10, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * It's a good thing Conservatives never do anything similar, isn't it? (Let's see if the Irony detecting neurons in his brain are still active...) --67.102.192.7 20:12, 6 September 2007 (CDT)


 * Voicing the unspoken question: Rob, is "commie" just another synonym of "liberal" in your universe? Then your post would at least make sense by CP's low standards. But you were asked how the referenced edit was "commie prop", and you start about CNN and liberal hatemongers. --Sid 20:15, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I know it almost becomes a joke, and I catch myself with a bad attitude sometimes, but truth is, yes, there a commie kindergarten teachers out there corrupting the minds of innocent 4 years olds with commie bilge. I've seen it with my own two eyes.  RobS 20:17, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * What are you doing hanging around kindergartens? Perv! DickTurpis 21:22, 6 September 2007 (CDT)


 * Why is it liberal hatemongering to observe that the Democratic "Solid South" changed parties due to Nixon's Southern Strategy? These are simple historical facts.  Has any Democrat even won a state in the SS besides where they live since LBJ?  Heck, Gore even managed to lose Tennessee!  All your article needs to to point out that ca. 1968-72 the GOP "broke" the Dems "Solid South" electoral bloc. human <font color="#00AA00">be in 20:18, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Nixon's Southern Strategy; this premise has no basis in fact; see the electoral map from 1968 when a Democrat, who ran as an independent carried the Solid South.  And saying Nixon did it in 1972 carries no weight -- it's not Nixon's fault Democrats nominated an idiot, and we'd have to say the Solid Nation at that.  RobS 20:50, 6 September 2007 (CDT)


 * there a commie kindergarten teachers out there corrupting the minds of innocent 4 years olds with commie bilge. I've seen it with my own two eyes.  I knew the Internet connected the entire world, but I didn't think it connected to 1956.  Or was said Communist Teacher also sacrificing the kids to Satan?  ISTR that was a big problem back in the 90s.... --SockOfGulik 20:21, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

Rob, you still haven't answered the question - why would you remove a statement that is clearly a very positive Republican story? Those of us who are NOT Republicans are happy to admint we seem to have lost the South to you over the past many years. Wouldn't you want that fact mentioned in this article on the poltiical affiliations of the South? Your move still makes absolutely no sense? <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  20:27, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Just no basis to it; Dems carried it 3 times since 1976 and GOP 5 times. And Dems still dominate at the local and state level.  RobS 20:50, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Dems carried "it"? What, won the White House, yes.  Won the friggin South?  Wow... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human <font color="#00AA00">be in 21:15, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * He still sounds like a parody of himself tonight.-<font color="#CC0000">α <font color="#A0A0A0">m <font color="#0099FF">ε <font color="#003399">σ (!) 20:27, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * After a while, they all start sounding like that, I think. I'm just amazed he's posting anywhere people can back-talk him without him being able to ban them. --SockOfGulik 20:29, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Rob, the Reagan Realignment after the Johnson election, but capitalized upon by Reagan, is an actual fact. And it's not detrimental to Republican's; it's simply objective reality (which I know CP has a problem with).  While I was at Rice, I studied with one of America's greatest experts on Southern politics (Earl Black).  He's written books on the subject.  You're just wrong.-<font color="#CC0000">α <font color="#A0A0A0">m <font color="#0099FF">ε <font color="#003399">σ  (!) 21:19, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * OK. So Clinton and Carter never got elected, and the majority of Southern States do not have Democratic Governors, Legislators, or US Senators & Congressman. Dems today in fact, with thier minority do not control the US Congress.
 * Weeew, do I feel better. Liberal thinking really does work.  I learned how to do by listening to libs, for example, the day after Reagan, GHW Bush, and GW Bush got elected, I always listen to NPR or other sources to have it explained to me how they really did not get elected.  Works like a charm.  RobS 21:48, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Objection: Nonresponsive.-<font color="#CC0000">α <font color="#A0A0A0">m <font color="#0099FF">ε <font color="#003399">σ (!) 21:51, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Sustained. <font color="#003153">Locke [[Image:Eye.jpg|10px|User is Vandal/sysop]]  <font color="#082567">Always Watching...... 22:01, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * Well, Clinton did get elected, but he didn't carry the entire south. Carter got beat in 1980, if I recall. As for Senators and governors, well it seems there are 17 Republican Senators from the south (using the ex-Confederate states as the defintion here, there are obvoiusly various viewpoints on what is a southern state) and 5 Dems. For governors it's 6 to 5. So, no the majority of southern states do not have Democratic Governors or Senators (the statistics on the House and state level are less straightforward, but we can look those up if it's important). Sarcasm only works if what you're saying isn't actually the truth. DickTurpis 21:59, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * So it's not even solid anymore. Just hammering a square peg in a round hole.  RobS 22:11, 6 September 2007 (CDT)
 * There are many states that Reps have won in all of the last six elections in the south. Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee come to mind. Texas and Oklahoma too if you count those. Georgia and North Carolina were red 5 of 6 times. Arkansas, Virginia, and Louisiana went Rep 4 times. The only state in the south that went D more than R in the last six elections was Florida, and that's in effect a bellwether. Нет, я не Русский! 13:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Rob, you say both parties "won it" a few times. Won what, exactly, in the context of which we speak? There is no electorial unit for the 'Solid South'. They may well have won some Southern States, but that's not the Solid South, is it? There's seven or eight States there for heavens sake! Just exactly what are you referring to? <font color="#00F0A20">DogP  21:34, 6 September 2007 (CDT)

Ban This Bitch
Hi Rob, couldn't help noticing that you blocked me from creating an account on CP simply because I posted here, without breaching a single commandment. Not to worry, I've changed my IP address quite easily (it's a dynamic one you see) and so I can happily vandalise away if I wanted, although I simply clicked edit to steal some wiki code. The end result is that you've banned around 200 dynamic addresses for five years (locking out many prospective editors) and I get off scott free for a crime I never committed. Good day to you 124.183.9.177 04:47, 13 September 2007 (MDT)
 * Another Liberal Deceit. After all, blocking someone for their activities on another site would violate the Conservapedia Commandments, and we all know no Real True Conservative would EVER do such a thing.  --67.102.192.7 16:13, 19 September 2007 (EDT)

Darn commies


Hey Rob! :D --<font color="#00FF00">Linus (plot evil tech) 21:41, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

Linking to satan worship websites...
Since you brought it up and like pop culture... Could you Look around and see who the person who not only linked to (in the upload comment), but copied an image from a satan worship heavy metal band? Whats more, this image is a copyright violation (and certainly not fair use). Once they get around to it, I'm sure they'll be filing a DMCA takedown request (I did send them an email that CP has a copyright infringement). You might want to chat with someone about it before Conservapedia gets sued by Satanists who win the law suit and take down. --Shagie 01:17, 4 October 2007 (EDT)

Happy Anniversary!
Happy anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, Rob! May the victorious proletariat go on to yet greater successes in the bright future! :D -- AKjeldsen Godspeed! 12:07, 7 November 2007 (EST)
 * Wow. Resurrected from the ash heap of history to my talk page. Life is strange. RobS 14:57, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * Speaking of anniversaries, in a couple of weeks CP turns 1! We've been stockpiling balloons, cake and goat pilaf for the occasion! <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  15:00, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * I saw the other day CP is exactly where Wikipedia was in its first year of existence, 20K articles. In another 5 years, we should be number 8 in Alexa. It may pay to start kissing up to the cabal now, huh?  RobS 15:18, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * 20,000 articles, lol. -- מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!
 * Come on now, they try. But it's hard to write a good article when you can't find something to copy it from.  Jr  ss  r5  15:56, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * I've been down now since the end of September. I got dragged into the WP/RfArb/Attack sites case, and had a private mediation with SlimVirgin.  But I think we got that all cleared up now, so seriously, I'd like to ask you guys for a CP/Request for Comment/Wikipedia/Brandt-Berlet feud, including all the subsections.  I distinctly left SlimVirgin's role out, but other than that, brought all relevent facts upto date.  RobS 17:37, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * I don't think Wikipedia spent quite as much time banning people in their first year as you Conservapedia guys did. Which might have something to do with WHY they're the go-to quick-reference site on the Web, whereas CP's main use is for cheap laughs. --Gulik 23:54, 8 November 2007 (EST)


 * Conservapedia number 8 in Alexa? O RLY? <font color="purple" face="Times">DINESEN yep? 19:01, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * I went to your link, RobS. Since the first sentence was an impenetrable run-on, I stopped reading. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  21:17, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * The Essjay scandal destroyed WP's credibility, which is covered here . I was one of Brandt's "cronies" at WR, and there's even more to the scandal than was reported and is still ongoing.  WP's cabal tried to deal with it in the Attack sites case, but failed, so they're now pursuing a different track.  One more piece of independent evidence to corroboarte existing evidence is needed, and this next scandal will blow & shake WP to its foundations even more than Essjay did.


 * In the Essjay scandal, WP got caught trying to engineer a hoax against academics & students. This next scandal is much worse, and you can find elements of it in my footnotes, but I'm leaving out direct accusations against individuals. My differences with WP is on a policy level, but I just have too much evidence how thier policies have been abused in a systemic way by the very authors of those same policies. RobS 01:26, 9 November 2007 (EST)
 * CP at 20k/1 yr is not the same as WP being there. When WP was one year old, no one even knew what wikis were (well, not many people).  Granted, CP started 11/06 with no one on board who really know how a wiki worked, but by the end of 3/07, dozens or more new editors turned up who knew all about how wikis worked - from their experience at WP.  Also, as pointed out above, a large majority of CP "articles" aren't even good definitions, let alone 'pedic articles.  But, at least, the site is growing rapidly!!!oneone11!! <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  21:17, 8 November 2007 (EST)

Also, I think it's fairly clear that Conservapedia has hit its maximum number of users. Everyone else they've offended or scared away, and even certain sleeping dragons seem to be tiring.- 22:01, 8 November 2007 (EST)

¡☭!
<font size="1024" color="#ffd000">☭!

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist :). --<font color="#00FF00">Linus (plot evil tech) 21:54, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * Ah, the beloved interrobang. That's Rob's logo, you know. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  21:57, 8 November 2007 (EST)


 * The interrobang? No, that's ‽. --<font color="#00FF00">Linus (plot evil tech) 22:09, 8 November 2007 (EST)
 * If you don't have the special character (or don't know you have it), ?! is used. Of course, you used the spanish version in the header, right? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  12:45, 9 November 2007 (EST)
 * Ah. Well, I have a lovely collection of special characters, so… --<font color="#00FF00">Linus (plot evil tech) 13:15, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Hey Rob! Hey! HEY!




Comrade!
I recently found this picture of you on the internets!



What do you think? -- 02:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you should also add an auto-playing "Lara's Theme" here. 02:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

http://folk.ntnu.no/makarov/temporary_url_20070929kldcg/anthem-sovietunion-1943-en.mp3

...is better. -- 02:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Is that Paul Robeson? brings tears to my ears.....  RobS (talk) 17:00, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Frank Marshall Davis
so, Rob, have any reliable articles (other than the Telegraph one, which is another argument) which confirm that Sex Rebel: Black is indeed an autobiography and not a work of fiction? Because if it's not an autobiography, saying FMD is a self-confessed pedophile is pretty vicious defamation. Megaten (talk) 05:16, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Per WP policy, it's "verifiable." Also, let the dead guy sue me for libel; then we can get him under oath and have hjim perjure himslef.  RobS (talk) 19:13, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Huh, must be one o' them "compassionate Conservatives" we keep hearin' about. --Kels (talk) 19:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Rob "almost" has a point - you can't defame the dead. You can still be a twerp, of course. 20:03, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * What's the purpose of even discussing whether this man is a pedophile except to tar Obama with the sins of his "mentor." Just more shabby ad hominems from CP, is it RobS? If you knew what darkness was in the hearts of those around you, your family, friends, parents, spouse, whatever, you'd think twice about this kind of vapid, intellectually squalid nonsense. Conservapederast (talk) 20:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Intellectually squalid nonsense? Are you refering to "healthcare reform," or Frank and his old dashiki self?  RobS (talk) 20:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep guessing Rob, I'm sure you'll get it someday. --Kels (talk) 04:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You know...RobS is loyal to this "God" character...and I have it on good authority that God created <BIG>HITLER!!!!!</BIG> It's a serious issue that bears further investigation, you know. --Kels (talk) 20:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I really don't see what Wikipedia's policies have to do with the subject (although if that's an admission that Conservapedia seeks to emulate them, I do admire this difference in stance from Schlafly). Rather, I repeat my question - do you have any reliable sources other than the Telegraph saying that Sex Rebel: Black is really an autobiography? Megaten (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. Please feel free to improve the article. RobS (talk) 20:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I was blocked by TK for being a member of the vandal/troll site before I ever even found RationalWiki. Why hasn't he blocked you yet? Conservapederast (talk) 20:07, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, here's the Frank Marshall Davis-Walter Jarrett-Henry Wallace-Valerie Jarrett-Michelle Obama-Bernardine Dohrn-Barack Obama connection.  RobS (talk) 02:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well done RobS, you have become about the 10,000,000th person in history to demonstrate an example of the 6 degrees theory. You can make these connections all day long about any two randomly chosen people you want. Did you know that your are at most my 50th cousin? Think about that for a while. 02:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Amazing, especially in that Barack Obama doesn't have a direct connection to his own wife! Don't ever change, Rob, although I doubt you could. --Kels (talk) 03:57, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

So Rob, I see you still haven't addressed your own strong connection to known racists, it has every bit as much validity and strength as the associations above, but fewer links. I know I speak for all of us when I say that your silence on this matter is...significant. --Kels (talk) 04:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Ken wears pants (I assume). God made Ken & Hitler.  God made racists, too.  Case closed.  RobS (talk) 02:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * We lack sufficient data to evaluate whether or not Ken wears pants. However, preliminary results tend towards "no". -- 02:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow. That was weird and highly non-sequitur even by Rob's standards. 02:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess he's claiming kinship with Hitler. Or something.  It's pretty much a given Communists are involved somewhere, of course. --Kels (talk) 04:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Dunno how Rob squares his conscience with posting on an evil communist website like what this is! 04:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Good job, Rob!
This is a masterpiece of absurdity. Keep it up and you'll soon trump JPatt as the top parodist at Conservapedia. Megaten (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You can't criticise people with dyslexia? What? 21:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Only if you're a NAZI! --Kels (talk) 22:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Under your bed....
Around the corner...

Down the street...

In your neighbor's rec room...

You know what is going on.

We surround you. We dilute your water. We contaminate your food. We indoctrinate your children.

We control your world. 04:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, putting LSD & flouride in the water. That explains the underground subculture of the 60s.  RobS (talk) 17:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You really should be more careful with your precious bodily fluids. Well, we have a sample now so it's only a matter of time. --Kels (talk) 17:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water? 17:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Vodka, hat's what they drink, isn't it?
 * That flour is nasty stuff, especially if you have a wheat intolerance. Silly twit 18:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've got a buddy who's deluded himself into thinking he has a wheat intolerance. Took forever to convince him that gluten proteins couldn't make it through the distillation process. Fucker still drinks potato vodka. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 18:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Greetings.

 * Arise ye workers from your slumbers
 * Arise ye prisoners of want
 * For reason in revolt now thunders
 * And at last ends the age of cant.
 * Away with all your superstitions
 * Servile masses arise, arise
 * We'll change henceforth the old tradition
 * And spurn the dust to win the prize.


 * Refrain:
 * So comrades, come rally
 * And the last fight let us face
 * The Internationale unites the human race.


 * No more deluded by reaction
 * On tyrants only we'll make war
 * The soldiers too will take strike action
 * They'll break ranks and fight no more
 * And if those cannibals keep trying
 * To sacrifice us to their pride
 * They soon shall hear the bullets flying
 * We'll shoot the generals on our own side.


 * No saviour from on high delivers
 * No faith have we in prince or peer
 * Our own right hand the chains must shiver
 * Chains of hatred, greed and fear
 * E'er the thieves will out with their booty
 * And give to all a happier lot.
 * Each at the forge must do their duty
 * And we'll strike while the iron is hot.


 * TheoryOfPractice (talk) 14:54, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Mmmm .. nice! 15:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Commie Rot?
A family member of mine here in NZ gets cancer. Commie rot? Fuck you Rob, you fucking disgust me. Ace McWickedModel 500 20:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Intial Diagnosis - Free.
 * MRI scan - Free
 * X-Rays - Free
 * Blood tests - Free
 * Brain surgery - Free
 * 5 day stay in hospital receiving top-notch care - Free
 * Radio therapy - Free
 * 2 wigs for when hair falls out - Free
 * Chemotherapy - Free
 * Stay in hospital to recover - Free
 * Medication - $3.00 per prescription with Govt. Subsidy
 * Future palliative care when they get sicker - Free
 * Societal cost - a wonderful caring person who paid their taxes their whole life and spent their entire career looking after foster care kids and abused children so that they and others might be able to recieve this excellent heathcare gets to live another day.
 * Maybe you should read, Societal Costs of Menstruation it may warrant its own article.  RobS (talk) 02:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Fuck off you revolting cunt. Ace McWickedModel 500 02:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why can't you just say "I'm speechless," why so abusive? Let's sing all together now, "We are the world...we are the children...."  RobS (talk) 03:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You might be child of the world, but the rest of us are adults. 192.43.227.18 03:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I sorry, I must've hit an emotional nerve ( Need a kleenex? ) RobS (talk) 20:26, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah you fuckwit, you hit a nerve, you are calling the treament my dying family member receives to help them live an extra day or week as "commie rot". You are a digusting piece of of shit and obviously deeply disturbed and paraniod. Ace McWickedModel 500 20:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Ace! Mind your tongue!  RobS is in a very delicate condition.  He is making progress, yes, but who knows what kind of catastrophic reversal could occur if he learns that the only Communist state that could pose a threat to the US fell over two decades ago!  I have tried to stabilize him by placing him amongst right-wing fanatics, but then you had to ome along.  Please leave the poor man alone.  -- 21:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ace, you convinced me. We need death panels.  Theemperor, count me among the revisionists.   RobS (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Rob, did you read the article where the writer said that if Stephen Hawking lived in Britain the NHS would have refused to treat him? I felt he made a very convincing argument. EddyP (talk) 21:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Fuck you Rob, just fuck you and your 1950's mentality. I hope you are inflicted with the same cancer that my family has and I hope your treatment costs you your house and life. Ace McWickedModel 500 21:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Now now Ace, no need to be (too) rude. Just derive quiet satisfaction from the hate and bitterness Rob must feel as he watches America slowly but surely move to the left as the new generation takes control. EddyP (talk) 21:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * EC x 2 ) Re "Death panel". Would you rather have totally unaccountable insurance companies deciding? Oh, you've already got that, sorry. Like Ace's relative, I'd probably be dead now if I lived in the Land of the Free. Feel free to opt out of any health care Rob, your like will not be missed. 21:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ace, been there done that. My family went broke in the 60s over catastrophic medical bills (from two sick members), and my mother died anyway after the rational, scientific doctors used her as a guinie pig in experimental chemo & radiation treament.  No, didn't see the Hawking article, but it appears many die of "natural causes" in Britain's healthcare gulag.  My, how we've progressed.  RobS (talk) 21:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Rob, your first source describes a doctor who apparently died of a blood clot in the lungs - a natural cause, I believe, as the blood clot itself was not from outside the body. Your second source describes the death of a man who never went to hospital. I could just as easily insult US private hospitals by blaming them for failing to save a man shot and killed instantly on the street. Your third source describes a PRIVATE hospital. My god, you're even worse at this than Kendoll, and he once linked me to a thread where TK was assumed to be a parodist and presented it as truth. EddyP (talk) 21:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, a 31 year old mother of twins died of natural causes. That's beleivable.  RobS (talk) 22:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In a PRIVATE hospital Rob - the kind you love so much. Not a nasty socialized NHS hospital. Tell me Rob, how old are you? EddyP (talk) 22:03, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * About 800 years. Tell me Eddy, can I see financial statements for these Soros funded fronts? RobS (talk) 22:07, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I only managed to make it to the 150's. Good job!  Maybe there's something therapeutic and anti-aging about hating commies.
 * (A pox upon these ECs) I hope you've got your wallet handy Rob, 'cos I think it's time for you to go down to the hospital for a mental health checkup. EddyP (talk) 22:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Rob, it is not helpful to tar random things you disagree with as communist plots. All it does is help the real communists move under the radar with cries of "Red-baiter!" 22:43, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There are stooges and dupes who parrot the CP party line and may or may not be witting or unwitting. See Lenin, useful idiots.   RobS (talk) 00:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You gonna write those articles for us, or can you unlink them or use our nifty template?  01:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Might need them since it appears you've expanded your user base to include this group. RobS (talk) 02:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Just trying to de-red your talk page is all... &mdash; Unsigned, by: human / talk / contribs
 * There we go, all fixed. I know you have an irrational fear of the colour red. --Kels (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Phew. Did you get the one under his bed?  02:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * All this text squished against the side of my screen is a turn on. Web (talk) 02:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "There are stooges and dupes who parrot the CP party line and may or may not be witting or unwitting." That is particularly ironic given around these parts CP usually standards for Conservapedia. 03:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, there are such dupes and useful idiots; most of them identify as communists. 03:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ListenerX, thanks for sticking a pin in the lovely balloon of funny we were exhaling into. 04:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Listener is almost as bad as Rob when it comes to teh commies. He cannot joke about these things. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 04:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry - I hadn't realised this was THE RobS.
 * Please accept my apology. If I had known this was YOU, I would have called you an unsufferable cunt much earlier. I apologise for this gross lapse in etiquette. Perhaps if I call you an ignorant wanker it will make up for it? Keep up your good work being the most obnoxious non-parodist (apparently) on CP. You absolute asshole. SuspectedReplicant (talk) 19:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ty. I listened to Mike Malloy on AirAmerica last nite, and gave up counting how many times he said, "You cp:Dominionist Christers, I hate you," after 4 or 5 times.  Two questions: (a) is that hate speech? (b) are you Mike Malloy?  RobS (talk) 21:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Mike is hilarious. At least he's not urging people to "exercise their second amendment rights" at presidential "town hall" meetings.  Ironically, I don't know if literally saying "I hate X" is considered hate speech or not.  I think there has to be a call to action in the speech?  Or maybe it has to be directed at someone specific?  Eh, probably not, yeah, he gets a lot of hate out in his words, probably get shut down one day for it... "Have I told you tonight how much I hate these people?" - MM  20:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Comparing health care reform to the Gestapo.
Agree with health care reform, disagree with it--there are lots of reasonable positions to stake out around the issue. But comparing a policy initiative to a key actor in the genocide of millions is cruel, thoughtless, stupid, insensitive, inaccurate, and beyond the pale. You're a fucking horrible person Rob. A fucking horrible person. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 21:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not my invention, its just a neologism in common usage. I'm just reporting on it.


 * Hey, by the way, isn't this about as Godwin as it gets? "Conservapedia:Fascism;" don't rag me out with your BS.  RobS (talk) 02:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As much in common usage as the cp:New Ordeal, I'm sure.-- 02:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Re: Conservapedia:Fascism, find fault with it on its talk page if you can. 21:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why do I think this would be a complete waste of time? Dr. Lipson never finished his discussion with me at Essay_Talk:Conservapedia_and_Fascism after I tore that piece of garbage apart.  Bottomline, it's a Godwin & everyone can see it.  And raw hypocrisy from alleged "rational" critics.  RobS (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that might be because he got busy doctoring and blogging. "Piece of garbage"?  Aw, that's not nice. Oh, and also also, Godwin's law involves invoking Hitler or Nazis.  Fascism is another issue.  Also also also, to "lose" by Godwin's law, one has to be the first person to make the Hitler/Nazi comparison.  04:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, Lipson was checkmated and ducked out just before I did my signature nobsian debate technique I call the bodyslam.RobS (talk) 18:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not that up on wrestling, but I'm pretty sure the definition of bodyslam is not "spin around in circles until I pass out and the other guy walks away". --Kels (talk) 20:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Hitler, Stalin, Obama
You are an idiot. Apart from the fact that Stalinism and Nazism were polar opposites ideologically, what exactly has Obama got to do with them. The recent spouting on Conservapedia of how Fascism and Socialism and Liberalism are all the same thing makes me sick. 16:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Go to WIGO, I'll engage you there.  RobS (talk) 17:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've gone there, thanks for the reply. 18:15, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey Rob!
You gonna take that shit off of Jensen? Don't let him do you like that, man. You look like his bitch now. TheoryOfPractice 01:12, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Friggin' commie symp, who made him a sysop, anyway? --Kels 01:19, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * HE'S A COMMIE!!!  KILL HIM!!!!  -- 01:20, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Coming soon : the fascists, Stalinist holocauster deniers, and apologists and advocates of a murderous ideology need to rethink thier commitments (hopefully prior to the 2012 elections). No denying the Presidents commie associations from Grandpa, Toots, mom, Pops (Frank marshall Davis), the folks who got him started in politics, Ayers, Dohrn, Dr. Young, Alice Palmer, Jeff Jones, Mark Rudd, Frank Chapman, et al, to his appointments after he became Presisident. Who will be the next fascist Stalinst totalitarian liberal holocaust denier, and advocate and apologist of a murderous ideaolgy to bite the dust?  RobS 21:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow. You've outdone yourself there, Rob.  That even beats the "Hitler was kind to animals, too!" one.  I am impressed.  -- 21:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I was sure that was a parody post, and when I went to get the diff to point out your gullibility for believing it I was quite surprised to see it is Rob himself. We really have to stop engaging him; he is obviously not right in the head. While Ken has some sort of mild autism or Asperger's, Rob strikes me as plain schizophrenic. I've seen the writings of a few bona fide schizos, and this fits right in. I just hope he has some sort of medication he can take. He needs it. DickTurpis 22:05, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ditto, I had to double check myself. 22:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

It's Rob. No parody would be far enough off the wall to imitate him enough to fool someone. -- 22:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've done it on CP, although the only proof that I fooled anyone was Ken reverting a removal of my post. He's actually so over the top it's easy to parody him convincingly. There's no subtlety to it, and there's very little chance of overdoing it. DickTurpis 22:17, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

You STILL gonna take that shit off of Jensen? Don't let him keep doing you like that, man. You STILL look like his bitch. Does he at least give you a nice reach-around? TheoryOfPractice 21:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Carpal Tunnel
Rob,

We've had our differences in the past. But I'd rather you didn't leave. So, in the spirit of hands across the divide etc, let's talk about something apolitical. You say you have carpal tunnel? I sometimes worry that I am heading down that road - I spend all day every day in front of computers, it's my living. What were your early signs and how have you treated it? I have tingling in my right wrist often, for one. What's your experience been? <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 17:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As Rob actually wrote tarpal cunnel which is more of a spoonerism than dyslexia I wonder whether you can even believe him. BTW DogP I found that using a left-handed mouse is much less stressful on the wrists. With the navigation keys and numeric keypad the right side of the keyboard is much further away and using a mouse next to it puts strain on the wrist. It also means that you can enter figures in spreadsheets with your right hand and navigate round the screen with your left. 18:24, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Good idea, though I'm horribly non-ambidextrous - I seem to have been born with an entirely useless left hand. I switch the mouse for a pen and tablet sometimes when the pains kick in and that really helps.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 19:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems like a really good idea, so I'm stuck trying to pick between fear, uncertainty and doubt as a reason not to implement it. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block 19:55, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately my left hand was born in Kenya, so it's probably not eligible.  <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 20:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The symptoms are I can't type and I can't see. I've also diagnosed myself with Iatrophobia, but who cares, the commie/dems are gonna force me pay for health insurance which will only add stress to m,y life and probably gimme a case of PTSD as well.  Who can I sue if the commie/dems force me to buy health insurance, which will obviously destroy my healthe and wellbeing?  RobS 20:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, Rob, if you lived with in my country with its "commie rot" you healthcare would be top notch and...free! Terrible I know. Ace McWickedModel 500 20:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * haha, Rob actually has an interesting point about iatrophobia, but considering my repeated failures of astynomiaphobia as a legal defense for resisting arrest, I don't think it will fly. also, "I've also diagnosed myself with Iatrophobia" - does that mean you fear yourself? &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block 21:00, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Rob - have you seen a specialist? I went to one once and she was really helpful, gave me lots of tips for exercises and some pointers as to how I could massage where the ligament attaches right by the elbow - that helps a lot. Sadly my insurance didn't cover the visit. Oh well. <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 21:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Dont mean to rub it in but when my shoulder was buggered from work/typing etc I got sent to a specialist physio - and it was free. There's that commie rot again. Horrid, horrid. Ace McWickedModel 500 21:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Considering that the shortage of doctors is very real, how will adding 50 million new patients with demands on the system, and no new doctors, technicians or facilities, not affect quality or costs?
 * Fortunetly for me, I don't put faith in doctors. Unfortunely for my fellow citizens, they're gonna get the kinda care that that commie lib Alan Alda thought was all a joke.  RobS 00:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Many of those 50 million are in the system, just in an incredibly inefficient way. Also, due to delayed cared, their needs cost more and use more physician time than if they had access to timely affordable care.  00:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * "affordable care," code talk for : "I beleive in a slave system where somebody else has to pay for it." RobS 00:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * PS, Rob, do you find that throwing around random uses of "commie/X" helps you get your point across? 00:25, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It worked in Van Jones case, no? RobS 00:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Back to the OP, I enjoy having Rob around and I think he's a terribly good sport about all this. I'd hate to see him go, which is why I'm happy because I'm fairly certain he's not going anywhere. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 (Dictated But Not Read) / Talk / Block 21:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have to say that I enjoy having RobS around because he brings a certain amount of opposition that is good to have. What would we do without an opponent to be here and challenge us on what we believe? 21:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * While I agree with you in principle Goonie, if we dont have opposing views we turn insular like CP, RobS is a despicable prick who is to insane for reasonable debate. Ace McWickedModel 500 22:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. But if we are to oppose COnservapedia, then by all means we need to know just how nutty they are.  If we go there to talk to them, we get blocked.  But if they come here, we at least listen to them.  I gotta say, at least they are honest about how they think, no matter how looneytune it is. 22:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats true but remember some of them you just cannot debate though. RobS attempts it at least but having a debate with Andy "Double think" Schlafly or Ken "No one can find errors in my articles!" DeMyer is completely pointless. Ace McWickedModel 500 22:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, I agree. But the topic at hand is RobS. 22:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Not in our name
Hi Rob. I must admit, I'm curious, and hopefully you can shed some light on the matter. In cp:Not In Our Name you refer to them as a "Maoist" organisation. Sadly, you haven't added any citations to back up, or expand on this claim. Please could you point me in the right direction, as I would like to learn more (as they say in Starship Troopers). Maybe you should also add the citations you provide to the article. In fact, any citation at all would be welcome, if only to make sure Conservapedia is Trustworthy and not a haven for every conspiracy theory going. Or is that claim just another of Terry's "self-evident truths"? Thank you in advance. Hugs & kisses. --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 17:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC) PS I have no political affiliations, Comrade.
 * Come now, Rob; the references are not that hard to locate. NION was apparently made as a spin-off by members of the Revolutionary Communist Party, including C. Clark ("Rebel Without A Pause") Kissinger, who coordinated the development of its manifesto. The slimeballs in that party, Mr. Kissinger included, are usually ready to stump for Stalin and Mao, but NION adopted the "Peace, man!" shtick instead, in aid of establishing a "united front against imperialist wars" or something of that sort, and made its manifesto in free-verse.  17:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. While we're at it, Ed Asner is at the top of the list.  Ed Asner is also at the top of the list of the 911 Truther organizations that caused the demise of the late Van Jones.  What a coincidence, huh?
 * P.S. What do you think of cp:Communist front ? It's becoming a pretty good article almost without effort and just incidental to lots of other work.  RobS 16:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A brief, unspecific, poorly written intro followed by a bunch of cribbed quotes? A C-, maybe a C if you showed up to class in a short skirt. TheoryOfPractice 16:26, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm home schooled, I don't attend public school (hey, d'see cp:John_Dewey, father of American public education, wrote the 5th most dangerous book of the 20th century, right behind Marx, Hitler, Mao, and Alfred Kinsey, according to Ronaldus Magnus's favorite journal, Human Events. RobS 16:50, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Come on. Any serious anti-commie such as yourself should know that Marx didn't write in the 20th century. JS Leitch 01:08, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Couldn't get into a decent college, eh? Not even as a legacy admit? TheoryOfPractice 17:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ListenerX has it right. NION was founded by the Revolutionary Communist Party, Bob Avakian's loony-bin Maoist cult - just as ANSWER was founded by the Worker's World Party.  The RCP couldn't stomach that a rival Stalinoid cult controlled ANSWER so they took their ball home and started their own group.  Typical of how these groups operate, really.  They each think they are "the" vanguard party so they try to muscle their way into existing coalitions and take them over, or failing that, start their own.  Secret Squirrel 16:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What another coincidence, NOIN goes out business at the same time Progressives for Obama gets organized. Here's an idea: merge ANSWER with ACORN and drop the ACORN name; ANSWER would love to get federal dollars. RobS 16:50, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Different Stalinist cults. ACORN = CPUSA, ANSWER = Party for Socialism and Liberation, who took ANSWER with them when they left WWP.  Interestingly, Progressives for Obama was led by Carl Davidson, a (former?) Maoist, although I'm not sure if he ever had any ties to RCP.  He seems to be more associated with the Committees of Correspondence, which is an offshoot of CPUSA.  Always a big mess trying to sort out Stalinist front groups and their competing factions.  Secret Squirrel 17:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, especially when the infiltrate each other, too. RobS 20:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Homeschooled? As in still homeschooled? Apologies, as I assumed you were a middle-aged 1950s-style Republican. Obviously you are, but without the middle aged-ness. 11:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually self educated, kinda like Abe Lincoln was. I'm very old fashioned.  RobS 20:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's not hard to miss that, what with "commie rot" and your reds-under-the-bed ideas. 22:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey Rob, where's TK? 01:22, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

"Barry"
Rob, there must have been some wonderful cognitive dissonance going on when - in your ongoing attempt to badmouth your President - you had to stoop to using that commie mouthpiece Pravda as a source. Desperation, or double standard? --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 17:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not an attempt to badmouth anyone, it's unbiased reporting. Oh, do you suppose this  is restoring science to its rightful place, in the immortal words of our dear leader?  RobS 19:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Unbiased reporting = whatever Rob agrees with regardless of source. Yep, about right. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 19:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC) Commie rot can be used as a reliable source as long as you agree with what it's saying, Psy. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 19:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears the capitalists sold the commies the rope which they hung themselves with. Pravda gone commercial.   RobS 20:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * In the future, all inquiries as to the reliability of any given Pravda article should be directed to the sole discretion of Rob. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You know as well as I do Rob that'll be a "commie rag" again as soon as it states something you disagree with. Ace McWickedI'm a pretty big deal around here... 20:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I see his "reliable source" has as a headline banner "Cure for Cancer is found!" (which puts it right up there with National Enquirer) and "Hot! Men Avoid Modern-Day Virgins!". Sounds like a high-brow, reliable source to me. But, as has been said, Rob would cite Beatrix Potter if some reference to Obama could be found in her work. I await to see your next barrel-scraping episode. Maybe this will have some new sources for you. I look forward to you adding citations from Pravda to many more articles, seeing as it obviously meets the same CP criteria as WorldNutDaily. --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 17:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Much as I'd love to use the National Enquirer, Obama Sex Perv Scandal article, no can do. Last I saw, it sells for $175 (damn greedy right-wingers driving up prices so the poor, needy, and oppressed can't even read porno nowadays).  RobS 19:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Gosh, I know there's a commie Muslim (or do you prefer the term 'raghead'?) in the White House Rob, but I wasn't aware that conservatives see themselves as poor, needy or oppressed. --Psy - C20H25N3OYou know you want to 17:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * (a) porn: obviously a free speech/free market/free choice issue, which totalitarian big government gestapo regulation and control liberals hate.
 * (b) needy: higher divorce between conservative men and women is not surprising, given libs penchant for non-monogamous cohabitational relationships.
 * (c) oppressed: how do you define "religious state"? what science is used? Obviously cooked up liberal commie junk science much in the same vein as global warming, not to mention religious bigotry and coded hate speech (let him/her/other among you without sin cast the first stone). RobS 16:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Rob - can't use that stone throwing adulteress story, that's trash thats been inserted into the Bible to promote a liberal agenda, in case you didn't know. <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 23:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Good heavens. How do get an NPOV version of the New Testement, with all sides represented?


 * Obviously Jesus was a subversive infiltrator of the Jewish faith, saying that a woman, and a married woman at that, can screw whoever she wants and God's Law doesn't apply. Bedlam! Chaos!  Off with his head!  RobS 17:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Obviously Andy Schlafly wants to rewrite the bible to mesh up with his notion of what a good old conservative book ought to say. Did you see that Andy was a moderator last weekend at his mother's hippy camp Obama hate fest in St. Louis? What do you think of those people, Rob?
 * No, haven't followed any of that. Last I heard the First Lady of Conservativism recieved the coveted Claire Booth Luce Lifetime Achievement Award.  But go ahead and gimme your spin on this event, I can deduce most of that facts from that.  RobS 17:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm beginning to wonder if Rob believes anything he writes (including words like "and" and "is"), and instead just thinks flinging his own poo mud is fun. --Kels 17:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's evidence of my independence, broadmindedness, and dedication to NPOV. Not the first time this criticsim has been voiced, in fact the same charge was leveled (of all places) in a dispute over Alger Hiss, "you must not even believe in your own side." RobS 18:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Poo it is, then. No wonder they're called "movement" conservatives. --Kels 18:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Duh huh? Who and what are "movement conservatives"?
 * Now, allow me to get personal momentarily, kinda like Lucy in the Peanuts cartoon offering 5 cent psychiatric help. Perhaps one needs to examine one's own bigotted stereotypes that one possesses about conservatives, Republicans, and the right-wing in general.
 * This of course leads us to ACORN. For "organized" commie libs, and others associated with the "Organizing for America" effort, this is now readily apparent.  The facts are, leftists and commies are not only much better organized than conservatives, or even better at "organizing," they make the error of imagining these "organizing" traits are operating among thier opponents.  While the truth is Obama and the commies are so far ahead on the organizational plane than Republicans, they are advancing into thier second year of governing while prominent conservative journalists like Charles Krauthammer still think communism was defeated, and American Communism is not a serious threat.  Why is this?  Perhaps this basic desire to organize is just completely antithetical to conservative thinking.  Nonetheless, this does not stop people like Rationalwikians from imagining some vast organized (probably Schlalfy led) right-wing conspiracy from organizing together to thwart the progressive agenda.
 * Good luck in your efforts, and while I personally think all people, that includes libs and conservatives, have much more in common than partisan witch doctors would have us believe, the notion of right wingers organizing to take over the world is largely a progressive/commie/leftist/liberal scare tactic and fantasy. RobS 19:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Waiter! I didn't order a word salad! --Kels 19:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "...I personally think all people, that includes libs and conservatives, have much more in common than partisan witch doctors would have us believe..." - Wow, a perfectly reasonable statement we can all agree with!  No-one could disagree with that, and it's good to see you're not really as histrionic as you sometimes make yourself out to be Rob.   It continues to be good to have your around, even if that is to debate with.   <font color="#00F0A20">DogP <font color="#993300">Marmite Patrol 17:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

This one is hard to follow
Could you please explain this post? I think you've either got your chronology off or you're referring to the wrong document. 17:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He's just being sloppy & jumping to conclusions. No change there then. 17:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Considering teh eavle that Obama is, it's no surprise that his administration was pulling strings back then. He didn't just pop up out of nowhere, he's been lurking and doing shady things like this for some time. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 17:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Obama must have been pulling George W. ("Communist") Bush's puppet-strings as well! 17:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We should be congratulating him. He may well have created what will be the highest-scoring WIGO yet. EddyP 19:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt that a simple blunder over a date will get as many points as the protracted fraternal scrap we most recently observed. 19:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The Rob WIGO only has as many points as it does because we love Rob so much. If it were Andy or someone else, we wouldn't be so excited. 19:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Animal rights
Hi Rob. Some troll just hit this section up and it made me wonder if you are still concerned with this. Could you explain the connection? &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 19:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Troll indeed. I can help answer this one. 20:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course, but I'd like to know if Rob agrees or if he thinks there is something more to it. &mdash; Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block 20:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Simple: Obama is either (a) ignorant of history, or (b) a closet holocaust denier and Nazi apologist. Personaly, I'd gravitate to (a); for example during the Russian invasion of Georgia Obama remarked, "We should continue to push for a United Nations Security Council Resolution calling for an immediate end to the violence." David Axelrod or whoever is Obama's handlers neglected to inform him (i) Russia has veto power in any Security Council vote and (ii) Russia was already there in Georgia, at the behast of a UN Security Council Resolution in the role of Peacekeepers to put an "end to the violence."


 * So, in the scheme of things, it is a real toss up as to who is the dimmest bulb on the block, Mr. Potatoe head Dan Quayle, My Pet Goat GW Bush, the leader of the free world and Commander in Chief Bill Clinton diddling himself in the Oval Office bathroom sink while Monica Lewinsky watched (according the Jeff Tobin's book, pg. 179), or Barack Hussein Obama who doesn't know squat about the politics of the planet or world history & thinks the behavior of Adolf Hilter and Heinrich Himmler toward animals is an "indication of how we treat each other."


 * Does this answer the question? RobSmithdon't bother me 02:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * If the question was, "Is Rob really that stupid?", then yes. It does. --Kels 02:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, Rob, so what is true? In absentia 03:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

If you could...


...pass on the message to Andy that I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Cheers. 18:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I would, but only the bits of him that weren't on fire at the time. 13:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Back to WP/Wales/Brandt/Berlet and all that
I'm back from my trip and, being a bit of a masochist, I thought I'd have one final go at the earlier thread (now archived). I didn't look at many of the links you provided because frankly I don't see the point, and it doesn't seem worth my time. The original question put to you was pretty simple: how are the way WP and CP run in any way similar? You've as much as admitted they are not. Maybe someday, if I feel like wading through hundreds of WP pages, I'll look at the Berlet/Brandt issue some more, but I wouldn't count on it. The main issue of our discussion seemed to center on Jimbo's statement saying Brandt is not a reliable source. I read that and see a basic, factual statement (one even Brandt, if he is the private individual he claims to be, would agree with, it would seem). You read that and see it as a fatwa, or some sort of call to arms that WP editors have to fuck Brandt and fuck him so hard he never makes a peep again. I don't see it. Like all conspiracy theorists I've encountered, you're very good at projecting between the lines. Of course, I haven't seen the context in which Jimbo was speaking. Maybe that changes everything, but somehow I doubt it. DickTurpis (talk) 21:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Vatican/the Catholics on front page of CP...
So, is there any chance that as a CP sysop you can get a front page story about the Catholic Church that has less to do with holy relics and more to do with the systematic way that the Church protects people who fuck little boys? Thanks. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 23:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

"Mormonism and bestiality."
Working my way through that clusterfuck on talk main page. Gotta admit, made me chuckle. 17:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)