Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive122

This is an archive page, last updated 16 March 2009. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>

, (new)(back)

Not that anyone cares, but..

Ken has come out with another Gentlemen that seems like it was generated by the kenquote

Text posted below

Dearest Ladies and Gentlemen at a rather liberal website,

A certain campaign is at the stage where it is about to be implemented on the internet. Wait until the heavy artillery portion of this campaign starts reigning down!!! This campaign alone could put the evolution article in the top 10 for the search "evolution" at a rather popular search engine that begins with a G. :)

Ole!Ole!Ole!

Affectionately yours, :)

Conservative

More fud for Kenquote. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 16:26, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

At times like that, we pwn, just as when Andy spouts off something the assquote could have made. It's funny that a simple series of randomly chosen phrases can stay ahead of these idiots. ħuman 01:42, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I think we were all busy ignoring it (It's the second version today, BTW) _and marmite 16:38, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

At least he's being more "chivalrous" in his openings. --Kels 16:39, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Ignoring does seem to be the best approach. His messages are inevitably rehashings of the same half dozen words with a stupid youtube link. They can all be reduced to "Hey. Hey! HEY! I'm still here guys! Hellooooo? Pay attention to me. I'm still obsessing over SEO, in case you're interested. Evolution is totally doomed. Hello? LOVE ME! - Cordially, Ken." 17:23, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Seriously, he's gonna have to be more creative than that if he wants us to play with him. It's like he's not even trying. --Kels 17:38, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh, and your last line made me think of this, Gentleman Pub, although you'd only get the joke if you're a HUUUUUGE dork. Not that I get it, nope. Not at all. >___> --Kels 17:43, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Someone might want to clue him in on the difference between "reign" and "rain." --Phentari 19:26, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Sings: The reign in Spain stays mainly on the Plane ;-) (cause when you are a king, you don't get off the airline).--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 00:57, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Many years ago there was a King in Africa. One day, the king became concerned about the safety of animals in his realm, so he banned all hunting. The villagers suddenly found themselves without a means to feed themselves and sent an envoy to the king begging him to reverse his ban. When the king refused, the villagers revolted and overthrew him. This event is highly significant to historians, as it is the first time in history that the reign was called on account of game. (rimshot) SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 01:48, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Was this African king related to the one who was tragically crushed to death one day under the jewel-encrusted royal chair he had unwisely cached in the attic of his straw hut? --Marty 01:57, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I liked it Marty. _and marmite 16:59, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Is that a throne being over king? Pseudomonas 16:14, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

The moral of the story is that people who live in grass houses shouldn't stow thrones. --Marty 13:29, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

2+2 Used Correctly

I just read this and found it funny. After dealing with CP and hearing Andy plunk down 2+2 every time he starts losing an argument (so every five hours or so) I tend to view the Dos Y Dos argument rather harshly... But this one is spot on:

“”The pervasive idea that religion is the source of our deepest ethical intuitions is absurd. We no more get our sense that cruelty is wrong from the pages of the Bible than we get our sense that two plus two equals four from the pages of a textbook on mathematics

SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 01:19, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

(Fixed that for you. "know" != "no".) --Marty 01:53, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

link??? Runderful 08:04, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

It's not online, it's from a book. I'll see if I can find anything else about it. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 11:12, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Sorry, I actually assumed you read it on CP somewhere and was anxious to read it. Now my earlier comment seems dickish. Runderful 12:26, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Comments by namespace...

Aschlafly	AddisonDM	Bugler
Conservative	Ed Poor	HelpJazz
Karajou	PJR	RJJensen
RSchlafly	TimS (CPAdmin1)	TK

The comments of some profiled editors at CP - including the self-declared main player AddisonDM...

• No, TK isn't in danger to violate the 90/10 rule - especially as Andy would count his work on the block log (not included) to his favour...
• PJR grew more silent
• conservative's habit to create/destroy numerous entries seems to have started in 2008
• at least, RSchlafly is willing to discuss his entries at the talk pages

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 05:15, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

TK's block comments

(Block log); 05:46 . . TK (Talk | contribs) blocked 69.159.116.0/22 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (account creation disabled) (Member of Vandal/Parodist site: yet another disgusting Canadian liberal troll: bas12-montreal02-1168078303.dsl.bell.ca) Disgusting? Anyone know what it was? We really ought to collect some of these. _and marmite 06:12, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Looking at TK's recent block history (as well as his selective censoring of his talk page) Rons asked him a question about the HLR articles being signed, which seems to be a blockable offence. As for the disgusting part... well, just add me apparently using a Mexican proxy - TK is a lying skunk. (and a coward). --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:19, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

"Yet another"? Dude, there's what, two of us? Barikada 10:48, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I'm Canadian, but I'm NDP, not Liberal. And I've never had an account at CP, for socking or any other purpose. --Kels 12:43, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

In TK's limited understanding of technology, trolling CP from a BlackBerry makes you a Canadian troll. I'm honestly shocked that he doesn't think our proxies are representative of real, worldwide trolls. "Damn those liberal Uzbekastani trolls!" Neveruse513 12:48, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Historical Revisionism

Now that I know according to Conservapedia that it was the Yanks That Won It in WW2 I look forward to some more interesting revisionism on their site ! Also this notion that something isn;t an idea until someone rights it down is actually a weird version of Platonism where Ideas are the reality - not the material world. --Rovander 06:38, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Most substantive edit ever

Yes it's what you've all been waiting for: 127 blank lines.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 06:52, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

This site is growing rapidly! sorry, it had to be said -Redback^{demands obedience} 07:04, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

You know what else grew rapidly? THAT'S RIGHT. 194.6.79.200 08:07, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

BABY HITLER?! --GTac 10:47, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Another creepy Ed edit summary.

W.T.F. - that's all I can say. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 08:43, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

It's the same thing as he was saying with CP:Homosexuality and alcoholism. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 08:54, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

The next liberal?

Will Andy declare The CIA World Factbook to be libb-burr-ull? MDB 08:59, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Actually, the CIA factbook has been cited before and Andy declared the citation to be liberal. He was soon asked directly whether he thought the CIA factbook was a liberal source, and I can't recall what happened, but it might have been a burning of the evidence following a Schlafly Slip. Anyone else know more? Runderful 09:26, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

There was certainly some discussion here - with our very own SpinyNorman Worm ^{(t | c)} 09:43, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Ah, the Assfly definition of "liberal" -- "disagrees one iota with my definition of the conservative agenda." MDB 10:05, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

That's the one I was thinking of. Seems he conveniently ignored the question and instead went to pat someone on the back for mentioning God. Runderful 10:24, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

He's covered it with

Don't believe everything the government says, obviously.

Well, obviously. Silver Sloth 10:53, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

That's a quick turn-around from when Dubbya was the govt. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 10:57, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

(EC EC) Heh, nice talk page.

• FredFerguson politely posts several factual rebuttals of Andy's deluted ideas on mysteries of World History.
• Andy: "Your spelling sucks, you are wrong and it's your fault that Americans can't read"
• FredFerguson: "Well typos do happen. The facts support my side, and why are you being rude?"
• Andy: "Rude?! I wasn't rude! YOU ARE RUDE! And your spelling sucks! And you are a lying ranting liberal!
• FredFerguson: "What are you talking about? Also, here are some more facts and books supporting my claims."

I'm expecting a ban in an hour or so... --GTac 11:21, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

So was I.

I really, really, really hope the poor home-schooling parents don't believe the utter, utter, utter crap on CP's history pages. Some of it is just as stupid as their maths and biology. FredFerguson 19:43, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

Defining Literacy

Since the latest Conservapedia pissing match seems to, in part, cover the definition of "literacy", I'll propose what Andy thinks is an acceptable definition of "literate" -- reads and contributes to conservapedia. Not just "capable of...", mind you -- you have to be an active participant there to qualify as literate. Obviously, CP is such an incredibly valuable resource, any literate adult will be drawn there to contribute. If you're not there, debunking evolution and fighting against gays and atheists, well, you're just a pretender to literacy. MDB 11:12, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Hsmom, as ever comes up with the goods with this report which is well worth a read. Thanks Hsmom. Silver Sloth 11:17, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I don't get it...is she paying Andy to homskool her kids? Does she know Andy IRL? Why hasn't she been banned? Neveruse513 11:40, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Hsmom is a bit of an enigma. I'm sure we would disagree strongly on many major points but I really like her. Her impeccable manners and the way she likes to argue from fact, not dogma, have earnt her mucho respect both here and on the other site. Even when she shoots teh Assfly down she does it so nicely, so politely, and, above all, with such well resourced figures, that it would be to churlish, even by teh Assfly's standards to ban her. Silver Sloth 11:50, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I'd vote that she has to know Andy IRL; there's no way he'd let someone who presents so many facts stick around on his site this long. Z3ro^talk 12:09, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I doubt they know each other IRL. Hsmom was the victim of that all-time classic Andyquote:

You deny far too much, Hsmom. Join the "Economist" in losing credibility by refusing to admit that liberals deify government officials.

I'd love to know what Hsmom thought about that, and why she still sticks around after it.Runderful 12:21, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I don't know, I guess it depends if you think he talks like that in real life or not. I lean towards yes. Z3ro^talk 12:24, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Nah--Andy likes to play Mr Tough Guy online, but I seriously doubt he has the brass ones to be that confrontational in public. We've seen over and over again that he avoids situations where he might actually have to debate a liberal in person.--WJThomas 13:15, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

This is reaching new and fascinating levels of stupidity. Ancient Greek and Roman women by and large didn't learn to read?? STOP THE CONSERVATIVE PRESSES!! Neveruse513 13:29, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Personal incredulity FTW! Neveruse513 15:15, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Your 5% figure is not credible. Socrates had a big following, and all of them could read and write. WTF? Oprah's book club has most certainly a bigger following, therefore all inhabitants of Detroit can read! larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 15:40, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

"democracy of Athens would not have originated without widespread literacy"...IRL, their democracy was partly necessitated by illiteracy...OMIGOD MAKE IT STOP Neveruse513 15:49, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

By the way, may I ask a dumb question? What were all these "literate" roman & greeks reading? I could be wrong, but it seems to me like there was no printing press. So no real textbooks. No newspapers. No signs around town like "I-25 next left"... This man baffles the mind.--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 16:27, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Also, according to the Almighty Andy, they did not even have words for things such as "comedy", and certainly was not great philosophers either. All ancient Greek books must have been liberal homo-erotic novels. Etc 17:19, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Just back on the Hsmom knowing Andy question, my recollection from the early days of Hsmom is that she homeschools her own kids - Andy doesn't get anywhere near them. She only knows Andy via CP which she originally came to as a potential resource. I guess that delusion didn't last long though as it was quickly evident that if anything she was even more shocked by what she found than the rest of us are. Matt 17:38, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I think that Matt is right about Hsmom's homeschooling. [1] Unfortunately, Hsmom is one of very, very few (like 2 or 3) sane people left on Conservapedia who pay attention to what Andy says. I didn't realize BrendanW was gone (another one bites the dust). Hsmom will be blocked eventually. It seems impossible, but from what I've seen, it will happen sooner or later. JArneal 21:04, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Hsmom poses a dilemma for Andy because she's a positive role model of a homeschooling parent who's smart, articulate and probably doing a better job educating her kids than most schools (public or private), but at the same time taking him to task on a regular basis for his B.S. and unprofessionalism. I hope she lasts there, but I have a concern that someone like TK will decide to take her out over perceived disrespect, and Andy won't intervene. --SpinyNorman 10:14, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Feudal gun control!

"Note that gun control would have been impossible under feudalism, because there was no centralized government workers on the manors had their own weapons." ... Uh, right. Atrocious grammar aside, peasants had weapons? WRONG. Peasantry would not have swords and crap. Why? Because they're peasants. They're the lowest of the low. They'd have tools they could use as weapons, yes, but that's nowhere near the same thing. Seriously, what the hell? Does this man just mash the keyboard and hit "Spell check"? GAH! Barikada 11:31, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Please, don't insult spell-check. Z3ro^talk 11:32, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Ah the feudal era. A simple time where things were better for everyone. Where there were no weapon control laws, and the peasantry lived in constant fear of a neighboring lord suddenly attacking, raping the women and carting off the rest to a life of servitude. If only we could return to such a time.--ScottA 11:58, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

But did they have classroom prayer? Totnesmartin 12:00, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Haven't you been paying attention? A quick look at Merriam Wester reveals there is no entry on classroom prayer, meaning the evil liberals have been successful in eliminating the word, thus eliminating classroom prayer. Z3ro^talk 12:08, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

They had compulsory prayer. & woe betide anyone caught outside their parish on a Sunday! _and marmite 12:09, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

It's amazing that someone so American, who should therefore be pro-democracy, pro-freedom and anti-aristocracy, can idealise the feudal system like Andy does. Especially when his reasons include 'No commuting to work' and the like. It's bizarre.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 12:16, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

One of the fundamental parts of conservative thought is that "the old, tried and true ways are probably better than new and unproven ideas". Andy seems to take that well beyond even the most logical extreme, and apparently feels that automatically, the older a system is, the better it is. Thus, his fascination with feudalism and his obsession with ancient Greece and Rome. And I still assert that Andy is convinced he would have been Duke Andrew the First of the House of Schlafly, Senator Andreus Schlaflus, or Alexandrew the Great of Schlafledon, rather than a peasant cleaning shit out of the stables. MDB 12:34, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

People like Andy claim to love Democracy, but we all know that Andy would be quite happy living in a Theocratic Dictatorship as long as it was the "right" religion with the "right" leader. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 12:38, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

People like Andy love anything when it serves their purpose. "Democracy" is great when it's about gays and marriage - but it's "beyond reasonable" when it means people have voted to make rich people pay more, and you know, kill babies. Freedom is speech is wonderful when you are degrading a black president, but how dare you say a war is unjust. that's anti american". --En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 13:03, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy is living proof of the old maxim that egalitarians are fine with aristocracy, as long as they get to be the lords. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:15, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I can see Andy wanting to be King, insulated from the real world, making weekly Royal Pronouncements, having underlings to do his dirty work, believing that he was appointed by God. Yep.--WJThomas 13:18, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I've made an edit. How long will it last?D-Notice 15:27, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Two hours, but re-instated D-Notice 20:10, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh, it's like every other belief Andy has: it probably emerged during some conversation, on or offline, when he made some out-of-nowhere statement, refused to recant it, and has to spend the rest of his life backing it up. I can imagine him explaining some conservative idea to somebody who says, "But that's practically going back to the Dark Ages!"

Andy replies, "The Dark Ages weren't bad at all. That's a liberal myth. You had prayer in schools, there weren't any abortions..."

"What do you mean? There was plague, torture, feudalism-- "

"Feudalism? Feudalism's a great system! I'm 98% certain that you can't name one thing truly wrong with it. Open your mind or lost credibility."

And so on, forever. Andy has been spending months or years looking for any possible Good Thing in feudalism, all to validate one statement made to an atheist this one time, and to maintain his internal self-worth which is based on the rock-solid belief that he is never wrong. Bluefish 16:20, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Holy shit, ^this a thousand times. - DSFARGEG

...wasn't there some mediaeval pope who specifically banned every good Christian from firing each other with those giant f-off crossbows that had just been invented? (Naturally, infidels could still be shot freely.) ...or was that in renaissance era? My memory is a bit hazy. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:39, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

"Note that gun control would have been impossible under feudalism, since guns hadn't been invented yet." ħuman 19:59, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

And besides, once the "pleabians" did get guns, didn't they have lots and lots of revoultions against those lords and ladys of chivalry? I seem to recall several Red Octobers, and "let them eat cakes" in my history of that period.--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 21:38, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Moar insanity from World History 7: "Critics today make a big deal about how torture was used by the Grand Inquisitor, but torture was used by virtually all civil authorities in that time, particularly as a threat to discourage lying by witnesses (perjury) [ed. note: teh deciet!]. Torture could be applied only once and could not endanger life or limb." Aperture Science Conservapedia: We do what we must because we can. Anybody else feel like putting Andy on the rack after reading that? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 13:27, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

"Cardinal Schlafly? Bring in... the comfy chair!" (jarring chord) MDB 13:40, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

edit conflict Only once???? Not endanger life??? Hello, what the heck do you think threatening to burn someone at the stake for not admitting to heresy was? (not *after* they had been tried, but while trying to get a confession). Does this man read anything about history? Try "Foucault's Discipline and Punish for a far better discussion on why we use torture. and it ain't to get info. at least not out of those we are torturing". (by the way, I wonder if andy understands that one of the most effective ways to get so-called "truth" by torture out of someone is to torture their innocent children, to death. then threaten to do the same to the next child."--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 13:34, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

In the world of the Schlafly, there are no innocents. If you're being tortured, you've obviously done something wrong? the proof? If you were innocent, you wouldn't be getting tortured. People like Andy, that excuse and cheer on torture think that the ends justify the means, forgetting the fact that torture isn't reliable anyway. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 13:37, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

For a long time, I resolved the seeming contradiction of "Andy the complete idiot" and "Andy the Harvard honors grad" by assuming that he didn't really believe what he was saying (just making Momma happy). I now believe that he must have paid others to do his homework and take his tests while at school.--WJThomas 13:38, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

OH, wait wait, isn't that that "projection" thing, where you put on your opponent's tongue that which you do yourself? (Obama didn't write anything, and never has)--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 13:44, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

But honestly...don't you think it's a little strange that Obama couldn't find the time to get some literature published while he was in law school and presiding over the law review?

Unless Obama comes out and accounts for what must have been copious amounts of free time (with third party sources verifying), the question of his authorship remains one of the world's greatest mysteries. Neveruse513 13:52, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

What, you mean other than the stuff he did write? If you're going to troll, at least google first. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:32, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

"Jeeves", not only is your spelling atroshus, one of the very first sentences of the article you sourced reads "[h]is name doesn't appear on any legal scholarship." That's as far as I need to read. And I don't care if the article goes on to say something to the contrary, because politico is nothing but liberal doggerel anyway. How about you stop swallowing the kool-aid for a minute and open your mind?

(IRL, they go on to discuss a case note he authored, which is basically a simple summary of a legal decision and doesn't truly leave a great deal of room for interpretation - regardless of what that politico article says [it's wasn't "Obama's answer", it was the courts] - I actually read the entire case note to settle an argument with a conspiracy theorist) Neveruse513 14:41, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Um, WTF? a) Nothing in my above post is spelt wrong. b) The law review doesn't attribute any student authored work, so that's entirely to be expected, and c) You're not wrong because the source that proves you wrong is "liberal"? No offence, but you are TK, aren't you? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:48, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

FFS, you're not that thick...are you??? Neveruse513 14:54, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Apparently. Would you care to expand on that? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:57, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Are you new here? Do you know what an Assfly quote is? Neveruse513 15:00, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Yes, I recognise the style. Unfortunately, thanks to your earlier trolling and extensive use of said style by TK, Poe's law sets in. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 15:09, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

It's all part of my master plan... Neveruse513 15:14, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

And no, I'm not TK. TK would (and did) acknowledge the current policy of not signing work and demand that you find out exactly how long the policy has been in effect. Neveruse513 14:56, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Again with all the aggression, Neveruse. If people don't get that you're being sarcastic, cynical, funny and/or clever, perhaps you need to work on your delivery rather than go on the attack. Ajkgordon 15:15, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

He should have gotten it. Quoting the name, citing spelling errors that don't exist while offering my own and when all else fails dismiss the source out of hand as liberal...It couldn't have been much clearer. Would you have gotten it? Neveruse513 15:18, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

To be fair, I got it the first time you commented in the thread. I figure the both of you got your backs up, for whatever reasons, but now that we're all on the same page there's no real reason to keep it up, eh? --Kels 15:24, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

When I do lay it on obvious and a regular like Jeeves says he doesn't get it, it just makes me think he's out Poeing me....and I just can't lose a Poe battle. Neveruse513 15:46, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Maybe you should, now and again. It's good for the soul. --Kels 15:55, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I'll give it a shot sometime. Thanks. Neveruse513 15:58, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

(unindent)Neveruse513 (what a silly name), you're fooling nobody here by claiming you didn't mean what you said. Your spelling (gotten????) shows you are a strict fundamentalist creationist Christian conservative American with an obsession with homosexuality, mostly defensive weapon of gun, and claims that WW2 was fought single-handedly by General Patton to protect the tiny and weak British Empire. I suppose you deny that 2+2=5. Open your mind and lose all credibility. Ajkgordon 17:40, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Linguistic Determinism

Now that Andy has given a clearer statement of his developing theory of history in Lecture Seven, I've finally got round to putting his central claims in an article, going under the name Linguistic determinism, in reference to the old (pseudo?)-Marxist economic determinism. Whereas Marx explained history as class struggle in the context of the development of productive forces, Schlafly has explained it as a struggle between languages. Just giving a heads up so people can write it better. Bil08 14:36, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

There should be some just grand "Schlafly Theory of History" article. If anyone's interested, I'd rather someone more technically competent made it. Some of it is normal American Christian revisionism, but quite a bit is peculiar to the Schlaf, and some very clearly has been developed just as a response to criticism; that is, he didn't really believe it til evil libruls prodded him. Which makes his homeschooling even more unfortunate because each lecture increasingly goes down the rabbit hole to defend all the insanities. --CWaddell 15:57, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Did you know?

That the idea that women are inferior to men did not exist before 1968? I mean, if the idea had been around, they would have had a word for it! DickTurpis 21:04, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

As the old saying goes "fish don't have a word for water". - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 21:22, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Never heard that before, but I like it. DickTurpis 21:35, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Yes, Pi is right : when you always treat women as inferior, you don't need a word. When you start thinking of it, you need words. Barraki 21:53, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

More like when it becomes frowned upon. Remember Andy's rant about how there were no genocides before the 20th century?--Nate River 22:01, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Of course they didn't exist before the 20th century, 1944 to be exact. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 23:03, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Patriot or parodist

Paul Revere: you decide _and marmite 21:16, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Why would we want to out him? Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 22:15, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

To up their paranoia - like it did, good old AddisonDM! _and marmite 22:43, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

What can I say- it worked. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 22:48, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

If you have to ask, you already know the answer. DickTurpis 22:28, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh shit! He just got a free pass to do whatever he wants! An unblock from Assfly is like a get out of jail free card. If Andy were to say he's a parodist now, he'd almost have to admit he was wrong. DickTurpis 22:33, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

(ec) Yeah, I like that he gets a free pass because he injected the right kind of moar crazy. Even better is that this happens as TK makes DinsdaleP an unperson. TK is the best parodist, hands down. If Bugler was a wrecking ball, TK is, uh, a shitload of wrecking balls. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 22:47, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

That's the irony, TK isn't a parodist.... He's very upfront and obvious about his hatred of Andy and CP. Next time Jinx comes by and claims that we claim to be Rational, but CP really is, I'm just gonna remind him that they not only welcomed TK back, but they promoted him back to sysop. If TK shows his cowardly mug around ever again, I'm dumping him in the vandal bin. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 23:00, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

TK isn't a parodist. He is what parodists use as a role model: "Suck up to the right people, slap around everybody else and disguise your own decisions as Community/Andy Consensus - promotions will be inevitable." (In related "news", this is also how Ken works. If you don't believe me, check out the current main page to marvel at how he made JM move the Weekly Feature and now the Masterpiece under his vanity features.) --Sid 07:18, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

World History Homework Seven

Finally got around to reading the questions. I'm real excited to see what his scholars have to say about "Why did the Renaissance occur in Europe and not in Asia?" Also "Dante's great work about Hell: something we should hear more about today? Your view, please." How is that an honors question when he gives you the expected answer? Or this question: "Do you consider the non-Catholic English Christians (the Anglicans) to be 'Protestants'?" --CWaddell 22:34, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

And here's a link to the questions. Any student who doesn't answer "Obama cause he's a deceitful librul" to answer 7 will get points deducted (and not just on that question, all questions will be graded tougher!). Also, Andy can be damn lazy concerning his precious dozen students sometimes:

H6. Chivalry, revisited: write about any aspect of this issue that you like.

H8. Write about any other aspect of the material covered by the lecture.

H10. Write about any subject I like.

Okay I made the last one up, but then again doesn't it actually summarize every question? --GTac 07:56, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

4. Summarize the history of the English language. In a couple of sentences, presumably, with marks deducted for not including the word 'upgrade'. Cantabrigian 08:25, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

The delicious irony being "and don't worry about grammar, this isn't an English class". heh.--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 12:52, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Latest/Earlier entries

While I agree those are better headers, there is (was?) a bot that moved the lower one while doing some archiving, etc., and the new headers might trip it up? ħuman 22:30, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

freebie

This link should oughta give one idears about a possible (high scoring) WIGO. MOAR!: I'll even give you a sample snark to go along with it: "According to Conservapedia there are only TWO socialists in the United States, one is the most powerful man in the nation and the other is (just) the President." CЯacke® 05:38, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh, great googaly moogaly, they don't even list Senator Bernie Sanders, and the man is a self-described "democratic socialist" (lack of capitalization intentional). And the charge that Soros is a socialist is laughable -- you don't find many billionaire socialists, especially not ones who are credited with helping bring down communism in Eastern Europe! MDB 05:41, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

So a socialist in his position should have supported the Soviets? ListenerX^TalkerX 14:32, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy in the Courtroom

Andy, of course, claims to be an attorney. I'm wondering if he ever actually argued a case in court, and imagining what that might have been like.

For instance...

• At a certain 'Trial of the Century' in Los Angeles
  • Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, less than one percent of retired NFL running backs have ever committed murder. Therefore, Mr. Simpson cannot have killed these people.
• Brown versus Board
  • Being charitable, and assuming he would have argued for desegregation
    • Honorable justices, do you know who would have supported segregation? Darwin! And do you know who was influenced by Darwin? Hitler! I rest my case.
  • Or, being less charitable
    • Honorable justices, why would you want to saddle these poor negroes with the public school system? Obviously, they'd be better off home schooled.
    • The attorneys for the opposition are liberals, and liberals use deceit. Therefore, you can't believe anything they say.
• Roe versus Wade
  • You'd have to be a liberal to want to make abortion legal!

MDB 07:27, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Dover v. Kitzmiller: "Your Honour, I'm 95% certain I know your position on classroom prayer." --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:53, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy would say "your Honor" -- he wouldn't even spell it British-style when he's speaking! MDB 09:02, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

No it would be "your honor" - capital H is reserved for HELL Runderful 09:58, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

This is good stuff! Can someone make an article about it? With appropriate links? (We all know where these Andyisms came from, but the public doesn't.) Gauss 10:55, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I don't know enough Andy history to properly link it, but I'll gladly contribute the original to someone who wants to make the improvements. MDB 12:02, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Copyright?

The lawyer in Andy surfaces?

1. (diff) (hist) . . Template:Mainpageright‎; 09:17 . . (-42) . . Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) (photo removed)
2. (Deletion log); 09:16 . . Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Obama inch deep.jpg" (link not provided and authorship is unclear)
3. (diff) (hist) . . Template:Mainpageright‎; 09:16 . . (-38) . . Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) (photo removed)
4. (Deletion log); 09:15 . . Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:9-11 Towers.jpg" (link not provided and authorship is unclear)
5. (diff) (hist) . . Template:Mainpageright‎; 09:00 . . (+939) . . TK (Talk | contribs) (Muslim terror scum take pride in "religious" killing of 3,000)
6. (Protection log); 08:48 . . TK (Talk | contribs) protected "Image:9-11 Towers.jpg" ([edit=sysop:move=sysop] [cascading])
7. (Upload log); 08:47 . . TK (Talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:9-11 Towers.jpg" (United States Government, 9/11 Commission, Photo)

_and marmite 09:29, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

This is the second slap across the face from Andy to TK in the last few days. Could we be seeing the dawn of a new age in Conservapedia where Andy suddenly opens his eyes a realises that the likes of TK only serve to poison his blog? JoeDuffy 10:12, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Al Gore, Non-Scientist

Let me see if I get this straight: If Al Gore, who is not a scientist, speaks on science it should be discredited. However, if a scientist, such as Lenski, speaks on science, it should be discredited. Wait a minute, I think I get it! Nothing from science is accurate! Unless, a scientist speaks in favor of creationism. That should be taken as truth. Finally, I understand... I was lost, but now am found. Jimaginator 11:12, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Found Jesus that is! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 11:26, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

My sister found Jesus this weekend. He was under her bed. -Master Bra'tac^Kree! 11:52, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Sounds like a childhood nightmare. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 11:56, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I never realised that was holy water before. And Calvin has his defensive weapon of gun! Perfect! Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 15:54, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I dont' know, the rockin' Ted Neeley was hot stuff. He could live under my bed and sing about god all he wanted. ;-)--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 13:10, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Editing gone south?

I might be wrong but I think the editing rights for humble non-sysop users on CP have disappeared. A look at the recent changes page shows a massive lack of user participation today.--stunteddwarf 11:39, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Looks like an all-Ed Poor day today. God help the little children. Z3ro^talk 11:59, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Yes, I'm quite enjoying it. This edit comment (on a page that only he has edited) sums up his working methods nicely: fill up pages with incoherent jumble and then get cranky when other people fail to sort it out.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 12:02, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

For a little while, I was going to edit non-controversial articles on CP and see how long it took for me to get banned. Then another little scandal happened, and I realized that helping a project like this, even for the sake of lulz, is not worth it. -Lardashe

How long does this go on? Another delay in the Plan... Why would you do this CP? Let us edit!Broccoli 17:43, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Just a delay. Just a delay. We can wait. *evil grin* --<choose>

<option>^Input The Resistor^Output</option> <option>Coyote^{Over 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages}</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 17:46, 10 March 2009 (EDT) At the moment it's stuck in Night Mode. ENorman 18:04, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, but it's not just that. Look at Talk:Main Page - I mean, that's normally one of the most trafficked pages, as drive-by users complain about mad crazy distortions of the news stories that get posted to the Main Page (and it's a page that used to attract a LOT of non-RW, non-WIGO users). But there's been no comments about the Gardasil posting, no comments about the latest Guantanamo Bay posting, no comments about the White House party budgets, the jobless numbers due to foreigners, the Texas school thing - all topics which would have attracted much ire over how the story is portrayed in the past. The page is dead. And that makes me think that really, THIS is the moment when we are seeing CP drift out of relevance. I've not been one to proclaim the death of CP in the past, but I'm increasingly of a mind that there's just a lot less interest in them these days. Which is, as I'd like to point out, a Good Thing. DogP 18:51, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

FYI, ignoring vandals, parodists and entertainers, there's only about six actual CP editors listed in the last 500 edits at present. So we are really now talking about a site used by less than fifteen or twenty people at most. Influence, eh? Andy - time to report for duty at the Eagle Forum again - they need some cakes baked for Mommy's coffee mornings. DogP 18:57, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I"m a political hac, and probably everyone knows my politics, but I can't help but wonder that, since now we have a real adult at the helm, who is making mistakes, making decisions, and actually listening to people who are both for and against his decisions (from the left and the right), if parodyesque reality just isn't as important to most people compared with seeing the world try to get back on track. That, and this kind of extremism, childish antics (see Chuck Norris, for truly childish antics) is seen as what it is, rather than seen as *the* voice of the White House and politics at large. Hopefully, conservative (religious) radicalism in all its forms, and not just CP, is dying out as we learn to once again say "wow, ok, so this is what governance is supposed to look like" (not saying O isn't making mistakes or doing things I wish he woudln't, but that's he's owning up to them, listing his positions openly, etc.)

If it's stuck in night mode, none of what DogP describes can happen. No one who doesn't have "editing" rights can edit. Nice to see the stock market go up today (DJIA), Andy should leave CP on hold more often. ħuman 21:17, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

But many of those items were posted way before it fell into full-time night mode yesterday, Human. That's what's funny - no-one has been commenting on those stories for days and days now - the last thing that got any discussion going was the British health care thing, on March 4th, almost a week ago. Things are just drying up over there. And, yes, Night Mode isn't helping, which is hilarious. But that's only an incidental detail in the overall trend I think. DogP 21:29, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Talk:Main_Page is pretty much the Miner's Canary: As long as people are actively discussing there, the site as a whole is more alive. But over the past few weeks/months, they kept banning ANYBODY who disagreed with them, and so there simply is nobody left to discuss. (Especially since all sysops are basically going Lone Wolf in pushing their agendas in their own tiny kingdoms.) In the end, basically only Dinsdale and Hsmom were left... and then Dinsdale was banned, too. Now it's basically only Hsmom (not counting the various "survives less than two week" accounts) who dares to speak out against the blatant stupidity, and even she by now realized that doing so is bad for one's wiki-health. --Sid 21:50, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

It's never been more obvious that bans for dissent are stupid. Everyone there agrees on everything now. So what do they talk about? Mei is useful 21:55, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

@ DP, ah, ok, I get what you meant now. In general: maybe they instituted flagged revisions, and aren't bothering to "ok" any chatter at talk:main? ħuman 22:23, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I don't see it installed. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 22:29, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Maybe the entire world got bored of them all at the same time? As someone pointed out above, due to the crazy wing of US politics (Limbots) now being completely irrelevant? or maybe TK did a /2 IP block, which, as I recall, includes the Moon, Europa, and the ISS? ħuman 22:49, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Incidentally, a warm hello to TK, in passing. Hope you're enjoying reading here - there's lots of good articles, and a chap like you could learn a lot. Stop on by sometime, OK? You cocksucker. DogP 23:07, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I was just about to bring that up myself. Hi TK!! Bang up job on bringing CP down. Ace McWicked^Revolt 23:11, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, it is nice to see all those people who thought accuracy is something that you should strive for in news reporting are gone TK. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 23:15, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Don't beat about the bush PiMan. TK - what PiMan means is "nice to see you have no interest in anything other than lying". You cocksucker. And don't EVER email me again. I've had enough of that. DogP 23:22, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

File:Ppd-Conservapedia-20090301.png Comments per day - I

Comments per day - II

Editors per day

Some observations:

• at the moment, there are more comments per day than there were last year
• But: the number of comments by common editors (those without any additional rights) is quite stable (150-200 per day): it's not proportional to the overall traffic. So, a spike in the number of the edits by sysops (lights) doesn't indicate that something interesting is happening, but only that janitorial stuff is going on

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 05:56, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

And that's why we love you, LArron. Nice job. Have you a rational way of looking at where those comments are? My theory - poorly developed, I freely admit, is that comments on articles inside CP more often represent WIGO readers, RW regulars, and the readers of blogs that cover the madness at CP. Whereas Talk:Main Page more often represents new, drive-by editors who either blunder upon CP or have sought it out having heard about it. Is there an evidence to support this theory, do others feel it might be even vaguely correct, and if so, is there a statistically significant drop in Main Page comments? DogP 11:51, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Thanks - it's an interesting theory, but because of this, I'm afraid, I can't look into it anymore. --larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:36, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Ah, right, yes. That would throw a large spanner in the works, wouldn't it? Hurray for history deletions! Well, anyway, I've been a student of Andy's, and he says there's no need for actual evidence when making an assertion like this. SO. I hereby declare my theory proven and it is undeniable that the decline in Main Page comments is proof that CP is dying, or perhaps dead. Godspeed in your efforts to find someone to debate me. DogP 17:21, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Moar Andy Statistics

I love when Andy posts stupid shit like this I mean, he's already shown us that he has no idea of a correct sample size when it comes to statistics, but now he's proving that the doesn't understand side effects and the idea of causation. What a fucking tool SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 11:54, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

She is called Kenzie Bear(!) Best name evar. [2] Mei 13:02, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

So, kid has vaccine, kid gets sick more than a month later. Shouldn't these events at least be coincidental before you imply causality? (Also, I think you'll find that their son, Theodore Bear, has a far more awesome name.) --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 14:00, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I've been deceived. Mei is useful 22:38, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

If you read on through the (excessively long) article, it gets even better: "[Dr.] Shoemaker said blood tests have confirmed that Kenzie has a series of abnormalities in her innate immune system, a condition that affects less than 1 percent of Americans." Also, "According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 23 million doses of Gardasil had been distributed nationwide as of Dec. 31. As of that date, 11,916 reports of adverse reactions following Gardasil vaccination were made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System". That tells us that 0.052% of vaccinations are associated with "adverse reactions". That's background noise. Something near 0.05% of the population of the US is experiencing symptoms like the ones described in the girl in this article *at any given time*. In short, this is all utter nonsense. OneForLogic 14:25, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy remind me a lot about the news media when it comes to Airplane crashes: The big story is sensational, it;s shocking, it's horrifying, but they forget to mention that this one plane crashed among the thousands that fly each month. Andy will hold onto any story he possibly can to show Vaccine is da evil. And oh yeah, the CDC website says that any reactions to the vaccine typically show anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours after receiving the dose. I'd say a month later is a little longer than that wouldn't you? SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 17:16, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I wonder if he actually did any division... Neveruse513 09:09, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

TK tries it on with HSmom

Smarmy TK asks HSmom to look in her inbox. yes, he's still the same old TK. Wonder, is she being economical with the truth, & trying to force him into saying what he's got to say on open Wiki? _and marmite 15:52, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I'd have a whole new respect for HSmom if she was cornering Teacake. I mean, she's probably one of the most sane people there at the moment, but she also seemed very straightforward. ENorman 16:08, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Just remember: Private email is neither required nor encouraged. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 16:18, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Red Telephone moment - please, Hsmom, if you read RatWiki, please beware the Teacake, he's not your friend. Silver Sloth 06:55, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

My sock has dropped her a note, along similar lines. If she receives it, I think she'll take heed. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 07:09, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Another day, another pathetic YouTube video

(direct link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXla5GnFUEY)

He's at it again. Cower you silly evolutionists! The Conservapedia evolution article is taking over the internet!!! --Horace 19:28, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Funny, the guy who made it; look at the things he's for

• Proud Right winger*
• Roman Catholic*
• Arch Conservative*
• Proud Republican/Theocrat*
• Audiophile*
• Pro-Israel*
• Pro-Christian*
• Pro-USA*
• Gun owner*

and the things he's agin:

• Anti-Abortion
• Anti-Capitalism*
• Anti-Cloning
• Anti-Communism
• Anti-Gun control
• Anti-Embryonic Stem Cell Research
• Anti-Fascism*
• Anti-Feminism
• Anti-Anarchism
• Anti-Globalism*
• Anti-Leftism
• Anti-Homosexuality
• Anti-Humanism
• Anti-Islam
• Anti-Scientology*
• Anti-Anti-Semitism
• Anti-Masonry
• Anti-Satanism
• Anti-Witchcraft
• Anti-Liberalism
• Anti-Marxism
• Anti-Modernism*
• Anti-New World Order (a.k.a the Illuminati)
• Anti-Blasphemy
• Anti-Political Correctness
• Anti-Socialism
• Anti-Secularism
• Anti-Atheism
• Anti-National socialism
• Anti-Mormonism
• Anti-Jehova's Witnesses
• Anti-Pedophilia
• Anti-Woman's "ordination" to "priesthood"
• Anti-Heretics
• Anti-Evolution* ( a.k.a Darwinism )
• Anti-Racism
• Anti-Animal torturing
• Anti-Drugs
• Anti-Slavery
• Anti-Human trafficking

Very constructive. _and marmite 19:39, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I was about to comment on the uploader too. He describes himself as a "Future Priest/Exorcist/Assassin", and his hobbies include "swordsmanship , archery, computer, guns, piano playing, animes, the internet, video games, lecturing liberals, and silencing heretics". Yikes. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:42, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I particularly like the way that he has helpfully marked the issues that he is willing to discuss with an asterisk. So, for example, he will discuss his anti-fascist views but he will not discuss his anti-feminist views. --Horace 20:00, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I can has a questions? if you are anti Socialism, Anti Communism, Anti Capitalism - what else is there???--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 20:01, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

There is Jesus. Or maybe he's a feudal revivalist like Andy. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:05, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Maybe he used capitalism as a metonymy for Laissez-faire...if that makes sense...either that or he just labels himself a centrist, not that you'd be able to tell from the rest of the description. User:Ttony21/sig2 20:24, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

What else is there? there's the "third position" for starters. Totnesmartin 14:53, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Speaking of funny things there:

“”It's funny how after only (1hour?) This video gets flooded with atheists commenting on how "pathetic" this video is. Quite amusing.

This is from Swordsman in the second comment on this vid. A flood of comments? Then how come I just see one? Seriously, comment moderation? How openminded! --Sid 20:15, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Am I the only one that finds it strange that he's from Austria, yet he supports the NRA...all the way from Austria? I thought maybe it was just a random country selection, but he comments in German. Odd.

Direct link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXla5GnFUEY. Mei is useful 20:47, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

So Conservative found a guy that is worried about the Freemasons and the Illuminati to help promote his pet articles? I can only assume that evolution on the global internets will soon be destroyed. Ole! Ole! Ole! Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 23:32, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I think when you move in evangelical and fundamentalist circles, encountering people who believe in New World Order conspiracies with shadowy jewy bankers and freemasons and bilderbergers preparing the world for the antichrist is kind of an occupational hazard. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 02:53, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Occupational hazard? I thought it was mandatory; have you seen our new article of the weak? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 02:57, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

"This video is not available in your country." Meh. Ajkgordon 04:27, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

You're not missing much. Just your typical Reducto ad Hitlerum. Its just moved to youtube Schnooog 05:50, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

So by the sounds of it, Ken's made a deal with this guy to drive traffic to CP that's either (1) laughing at that guy already, so they'll go laugh at CP, or (2) loving that guy, and too crazy to work at CP. Good job, Ken! --Kels 06:47, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

To you "Christians" who say that the Bible isn't true: don't even bother sending me friends requests, because you are everything else, but not Christians. - He'll fit right in at CP. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 09:43, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Will the Kotomi-love survive....

this piece of gross hypocricy: 07:22, 11 March 2009 JessicaT (Talk | contribs) blocked Falco1029 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 5 years (account creation disabled) ‎ (Member of Vandal/Parodist site: Appreciate your honesty at keeping the same user name, however)? Jessica, Jessica, you should have heeded the warnings: touch not pitch lest ye be defiled. Will you now do the decent thing and block yourself, especially as you didn't have the honesty to keep the same user name? I'm starting to think Bugler had the right idea about you. Fretfulporpentine 08:23, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

She has an account over here? EddyP 08:27, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

She is Tokyo Rose, though she has been keeping her head down since her elevation to the elect. Fretfulporpentine 08:29, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I think her honesty is actually the problem. TK et al use "Member of vandal site" or "Inappropriate name" as pretexts for arbitrary blocks. Jessica then sees those pretexts and assumes that they are actual policy, so starts to enforce them consistently and efficiently.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 08:37, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I decided to help her along a little. Feel free to add to Ze List. EddyP 08:39, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

(EC) I doubt she'll show up here again. In fact, now that we know there is load of email correspondence prior to promotion (thanks Fretful), I'm pretty certain that not commenting at RW again was a condition of becoming a sysop at CP. To Kris, who's to say that those pretexts aren't actually policy. Just because they're not in Commandments doesn't mean the sysops haven't had instructions (off-wiki) to block RationalWikians on sight. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 08:40, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

JessicaT, you are about to reach the point of no-return. -DSFARGEG.

Another point: she must watch our Recent Changes pretty closely to have spotted Falco's simulaneous sign-up so quickly. Hi Kotomi - I still like you!-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 10:19, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Will she fix Dianne Sawyer's paycheck? Stay tuned. Update: Yep. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Jebus!} 10:30, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I've never gotten the Kotomi lovefest that sometimes seems to reign here. I've written an essay explaining why I think she's as bad as anyone else at cp here: http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Essay:Contra_Kotomi Arithmostoutheriou 14:08, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

As you have probably seen, I agree with you. Ultimately, it all comes down to religion. She is just religious enough that she'd stick with CP over RW anytime. As mentioned somewhat above, it has a lot to do with the psychology of being elevated to be one of the CP "deities" and the sense that you are now better than everyone else. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Jebus!} 14:31, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I know it's RW policy to never block anyone permanently, but what say we make an exception for CP sysops "for their own good"? Wouldn't want them being defiled by Liberal Cooties and rendered Unclean in the eyes of t3h Schlafly... --Gulik 15:36, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Or we could promote them to sysop and watch them get expelled from CP--Nate River 21:08, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

We have done that with Ken

and Geo.plrd or what ever his name is. I am going to promote CPwebmaster and see if it make Conservapedia explode. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 21:37, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

To the Ham-Fisted Louts At Another Website

Number 15 on this list is self-evidently a pack of lies, so how about removing it already? If you can't be good, at least be honest. --Gulik 15:35, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Am I missing something? That link takes me to the edit section for this part of CP Talk, Gulik... The Foxhole Atheist 16:50, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Me screwing up and pasting in the wrong link is all you missed. It should be the right one, now. --Gulik 21:34, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Hey thanks... I should have figured out that was the list just by context. So n00bish. So ashamed. The Foxhole Atheist 09:23, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Number 14 makes me laugh, it's so obviously "I don't care if you are a professor, I'm still right!" --Kels 08:15, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

I am going to add 3, 6, 11, and 13 to the "loudly laughable differences" list. The Foxhole Atheist 09:49, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

I hadn't read that in a while. Can I just say Jesus Christ on Crutches on a Cracker! they are loons. Have we side-by-sided this? ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 09:51, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Kinda. Here. The Foxhole Atheist 09:54, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Auto create?

Is it feasible to have an external bot have an n% chance of creating an account for a new user signup that wasn't blocked within the first hour? Say "BobbyS" signs up on CP and is around for more than an hour without getting blocked. A bot looks at this, rolls some dice and creates an account called "BobbyS" here. See how many new signups we can get blocked for just existing? Bonus points for sending the password to the person on CP if they have enabled email? --Shagie 13:03, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

TK Paranoia

Doesn’t it make sense that TK would have a sock on RW. Would be someone who appeared perfectly rational and friendly. He is here amongst us – surely? Matt oblong 09:17, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I'm TK and so's my wife. JoeDuffy 09:21, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Hasn't TK tried that kind of thing and failed miserably? It's hard for him to hide his raging ego and need to rend apart communities. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 09:46, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Perhaps he might try again... Neveruse513 09:49, 11 March 2009 (EDT)?

I expect that he would try again. Recall that his MO is to lie low, ingratiate himself, and play nice until he needs something. So even if he is here, there's nothing to worry about until he starts exhibiting warning signs, and then it's entirely obvious who he is.-Diadochus 09:53, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

He has a pretty distinctive prose style too, when he's trying to be aggressive or persuasive. I think I would spot him.-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 10:20, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I'm TK! I RUUULLLE!!!-DSFARGEG

(unindent) I disagree with the premise. Unlike CP, we don't do our dealings in the back room. Almost everything is done on wiki where others can see it and comment on it. There's no information gained by creating an account that can't be gained by simply coming by and reading. Unless he created a sock on the thought that "I'll make a few left wing edits and they'll accept me," which is kinda stupid cause we don't work that way. However, I can't say anything for sure, because I have it on the best authority that TK is a massive prick. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 11:48, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I'm not TK. I'll be writing you all a personal email later on who you shouldn't be trusting, though. Bondurant 12:35, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Even if we did work that way, on this man's wiki there's more or less nothing you can do as a sysop that you can't as a regular user. There's simply no incentive to deception. You might as well just be yourself. CP could learn a thing or two from us and wikipedia. All their restriction just caused the parodists to become more inventive. Flagged revisions will be just more of the same, there'll be less MOAR HITLER! and more North Western Arboreal Octopuses. It's not like there isn't enough subtle parody being perpetrated on CP as it is, and if they weren't all such morons then they'd spot it. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:36, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I don't know, being yourself is overrated, especially if yourself sucks. Z3ro^talk 13:46, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

To paraphrase the Joker, if I'm going to have a persona, it may as well be multiple choice. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 14:27, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

TK would gain nothing with a deep cover sock as it is not TK we dislike but his behaviour. If he came here and didn't stir up trouble, edit war, throw his weight around and drive off editors than there is no problem. Basically so long as TK isn't TK he is welcome. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:56, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I think you misunderstand TK. He doesn't see that there's a problem with his behavior. If he was as smart as you give him credit for, he wouldn't be such a douche to begin with.-Diadochus 20:03, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I think he has a sock here and I also think I know who it is.......Ace McWicked^Revolt 20:21, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Lets start a witch trial (could someone find the link to the Monty Python video for me, thanks). - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 20:25, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

[3] --Parsley Magnet 20:36, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Ace, everyone here knows who TK's secret sock is. It's id. The Emperor_{Kneel before Zod!} 20:55, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Ha Ha. My javascript file thwarted you evil plan Theemperor. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 21:25, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

*raises eyebrow* Runderful 06:32, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

TK is the greatest threat to conservapedia. I will let nothing stop his most sacred of tasks.DSFARGEG 11:25, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Okay, why is my name getting tossed around so much lately? Did I log in drunk recently? Smyth 14:03, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Help get Andy's SES application and the state's response

Is there a US resident here willing to file an OPRA request for the SES application, then either scan the thing or forward it to someone who will scan it? I'll happily pay the costs involved and even do the boring task of scanning the thing if necessary, but not living in the US I can't file the request myself. I'm sure it'll be lulz-worthy and well worth a side-by-side article. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 09:59, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Did he file the application? Neveruse513 10:32, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Assuming he did, I suppose I'll make the request. Neveruse513 10:51, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I am writing to request a copy of the 2009-2010 New Jersey SES Provider Application filed with the New Jersey Department of Education by or on behalf of Andrew L. Schlafly and/or Conservapedia.

Please contact me at your convenience by email or phone regarding charges incurred during copying/redacting/delivering/etc. Neveruse513 11:47, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy said he submitted the application in late February. I know the man isn't usually trustworthy, but I can't think of a reason for him to directly lie about something like this. MDB 11:07, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Here is the info on filing an OPRA request, and a form for submitting a request online. These are the folks who are in charge of enforcing the OPRA law. Here is a toll-free hotline for folks who have questions about filing an OPRA request. Reasonable requests must be filled by the state in 7 days. It looks easy. Here is the SES application form, note the OPRA information on page 17. (Applications were due Feb 27, 2009.) This Department of Ed page for the SES program says: Contact Information 609-943-4283, Dr. Wendi Webster O’Dell Coordinator, Ms. Peggy Gills Porche, Education Program Development Specialist (commas mine) - it might be worth calling to see if an application has been filed. --Too tired to log in 11:39, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I filed the request as pasted above. I'll give them a day or two to respond before calling. Neveruse513 11:47, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

The request as pasted above, will probably not go anywhere. Usually, a RFI act (of whatever kind) needs to know who you are and why you want the info. A request cannot be a "blanket warrant" request for "everything you have, for any reason I want it". Good luck.--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 11:57, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

If you want to write one up, I would be glad to submit it. What's pasted above is certainly not a "blanket warrant" and the OPRA seems to only request credentials if you wish to access information that would normally be redacted. Neveruse513 12:04, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I've called the SES Program phone number above to ask if they've received the application, and will updates here with any response. --SpinyNorman 12:16, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

(undent) btw, I think this thread be moved to the Saloon Bar - any objections? --SpinyNorman 12:16, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I think this thread should stay here; it's Conservapedia related directly, and will be funny. On another note, any kind of information request might be denied if the application process is still underway. We may have to wait a few months. Z3ro^talk 12:25, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

This is Ames; if you need a legal-sounding intro I can write part of it. I've done FOIA requests before and know how they should look.-66.108.228.158

Liberal hypocrisy, Making money subsection - Dianne Sawyer

I just thought this was funny. I didn't realize that Dianne Sawyer only makes $12,000 a year. She definitely makes the most of it. I also thought it was funny that CP seems to consider the one-tenth of one cent digit to be significant. Maybe she gets paid in gasoline. How long before this gets fixed? At least we'll get to see who else is reading us regularly. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Jebus!} 10:23, 11 March 2009 (EDT) I can't help but wonder if it is just eating at someone to fix this, but they don't want to because then they would know that we know that they are looking here. Not that we don't already know that most of them look here. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Jebus!} 10:51, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

We have a winner. Hi Jess. I like how she tried to hide it with a bunch of other edits. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Jebus!} 13:21, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Black

Good catch. Notice how he was dressed in black. I've posted the news item, and next watch how liberals try to deny here the significance of his anti-Christian garb.--Andy Schlafly 11:32, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for serving the role of the liberal denier, Ieuan! The black clothing worn by youths is obviously serving a different purpose from that worn by clergy. Yes, intent does matter.--Andy Schlafly 12:42, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

If you're wearing black as an anti-Christian garb, it indicates that you are anti-Christian. If your're wearing it as a pro-Christian garb, it indicates that you are pro-Christian. Color me confused... --larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 12:50, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

It must be interesting living life with that kind of inflated sense of relevance. I mean, most people would see he was wearing all black and imply that he was using the long held notion that those in all black are villains and something to be feared.... Not Andy. When he sees all black he screams "Anti-Christian." Of course, there's no evidence given, no proof, nothing that even says black has any religious connection whatsoever, and when confronted with that, he just says it's only anti-christian if they intend it to be anti-christian.... Amazing. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 13:00, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

It seems that when posting that news item Andy used framed his words so as to intentionally pick a fight. Not surprisingly, Andy seems to be more worried about pushing his point of view than about the people involved in the tragedy. Maybe we shouldn't rise to the bait on this one and give him the satisfaction. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 13:00, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I'm sure Andy wanted to pick a fight on this one, but that's still no reason to give him a pass on something so very very stupid. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 13:01, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Oh, I agree that he takes an inane and self-serving approach to analyzing this. But I can't help but think "Why take the bait?" He explicitly posted this to argue. Why give him the satisfaction? Let him sit around the whole afternoon all puffed up with nobody to rant to. I realize that mine is an incongruent opinion, but his tasteless opportunism is really rubbing me the wrong way, even more than normal. Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 13:14, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Presumably, it's the little white dog collar that makes someone dressed in black pro-christian rather than anti-. Perhaps as a humanist, you could offset the evil intent of your ensemble with one of those colourful charity wristbands that I see so many people wearing. That way when you're out doing your shopping, the fundies won't burn you. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:20, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

But Remember, Christians give more to charity than those ebil dirrrty libruls, so the braclet is just for show. They don't care about the causes, they just want to give the appearance that they care. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 13:33, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

where does this leave Johny Cash fans ? Is he evil incarnate ? or can you wear black after you are 30 ? 67.72.98.45 14:31, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Nah, Andy would argue that would put you in Hell's burning ring of fire (seriously, without getting the joke). MDB 14:56, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I am sitting here typing this in a black suit. I must be anti-christian. I do wish I had a gun right now also. Ace McWicked^Revolt 15:11, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Heh, I won't tell you what I'm wearing, but they're black.   .  ^{So, that's the tune they play on their fascist banjos} 16:24, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

MMMMMMM sexy. Ace McWicked^Revolt 16:34, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

With an androgynous name like toast, it's kinda tough...but I'm trying really hard to stretch my imagination. Neveruse513 17:09, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

We demand moar details Mei is useful 17:15, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I is female: get stretching.   .  ^{So, that's the tune they play on their fascist banjos} 17:20, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Undent to return to subject)
Don't I recall an occasion last year when all Andy's 'students' turned up for 'class' in all black. Was it kettleticket mentionedv it?   .  ^{So, that's the tune they play on their fascist banjos} 17:20, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Rainbows

But please let us not forget that anything with a rainbow is also verboten, antichristians as it is. That leaves, what, brown?--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 15:12, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

from that link:"Davis did tell the court that rainbows and T-shirts with messages such as "God loves me the way I am" called to mind images of gay people having sex." - homosexual obsession much? Totnesmartin 17:19, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

(badly paraphrased quote) from West Wing. Fundimentalist: Show a teenage boy a condom, and his thoughts will turn to sex. President Bartlett: Show a teenage boy a wrench and his thoughts will turn to sex.--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 17:23, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Plain white robes and sandals. Klapaucius^{Esteemed Constructor} 16:15, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Yes indeed. A nice beige suit with sensible shoes like this: . The Foxhole Atheist 16:19, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Nudity - Just like adom and eve.--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 16:43, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

No! No! WfG, A dom usually wears black (leather), a sub is teh nude one.   .  ^{So, that's the tune they play on their fascist banjos} 17:00, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

More shootings

As much as I loathe CP for once again hanging their agenda on a mass killing (I swear, I'm sure they wait, salivating, for things like this to happen), I also notice they're conspicuously silent about the Alabama rampage. Maybe it was a home-schooler that did it. Or maybe no gun-toting passersby played hero and shot him. Certainly, it seems to be something they can't spin. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 12:50, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy spun the guy who shot up a chruch because he thought it was too liberal. When they searched his room, they found books from Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity. He snapped not because of anything a conservative did, but because the liberals something something... There is nothing he can't spin.

I figure that Andy's already thinking about it. He has to start working the spin right away. He must be thinking that there's a good chance that this guy is going to turn out to be a southern-white-"christian" (from Andy's perspective)-conservative-Republican-2nd Amendmenter. My guess is that he goes for a No True Scotsman excuse. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Save me Jebus!} 13:16, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I do enjoy a good "That's not a 'no true scotsman'" exercise in futility... Neveruse513 13:44, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

You can always tell when Andy's going to make some massive logical leap (as in this case) - he uses the word 'obviously'. The correct way to read it is to temporarily translate 'obviously' as 'in my head, with no evidence whatsoever to support the notion,'. It basically signals that he's about to pull some sort of 'fact' out of his ass without really taking time to engage his brain. Worm ^{(t | c)} 09:59, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

World History Homework Six

I don't want to WIGO homework answers, because, if any of the students actually are real high schoolers, it seems kinda cruel.

That being said... the biggest result of the Crusades (question 7), as per Student 10? People got killed.

(EC)I think your knitpicking a little hear. The kid is write...Jew's have been one of the most oppressed counties in the world. 9/10 Neveruse513 14:45, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Ever since Jacob and Essay were born... ListenerX^TalkerX 15:51, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

In retrospect, Student 10 may be a parodist. His username is NathanaelH -- could that be a nod to Nathaniel Hawthorne, a great critic of the puritanical culture and religious conservatism of colonial New England? MDB 14:44, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I still think the preponderance of evidence is on the other side. NateH's last name is self-reported as "Hagan"; I think he's a brother (younger brother, please God) of one of the other H's, and one of Andy's IRL students. But yeah, his answers are usually the most facepalm. --Marty 00:55, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Has anyone else noticed that Student 8's name is James G.? I think it's funny. The Foxhole Atheist 15:09, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

"I believe God called her to bring hope to the desperate soldiers in the army and to be a witness of His love for all" Except, presumably, us British. And, er, Joan of Arc since she didn't fare all that well in the campaign. Still, at least she was warm, god's benevolence at work there. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 16:02, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Badly paraphrased... Lisa S. "But you told me to lead the french to victory in your name" Willy. "You told me to lead the English to victory in your name" God. "Oh, um, I never thought you two would be in the same room together"--ScottA 17:57, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

is Chinggis Khan just a horrible misspelling or someone I hadnt heard of ? I heard of Ghengis, Kublai and Chaka Khan . 67.72.98.57

Wikipedia and Google both seem to say that Chinggis is an alternate spelling/pronunciation to Ghengis. However I suppose its somewhat noteworthy that someone who is such a stickler for American spellings would use a less mainstream and dare I say foreign pronunciation.--98.193.36.63(ScottA)19:04, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Remember always log in here. TK is stalking you! --BoredCPer 19:47, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

(UI)"Goth architecture". Nice. --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 20:10, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Heh, TK ranged blocked my parents house, my apt., and my university a while ago. So no worries--ScottA 20:33, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Hehe I am premanantly banned from CP and TK is quite welcome to block my extremely dynamic proxy addresses if he wants 67.72.98.45 00:18, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

meth

Is it lulzworthy, or even unreasonable, that the "how to make meth" thing was deleted? Totnesmartin 18:24, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

It was originally deleted a year ago. What was the story this time? (the WIGO link is busted). Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:23, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

foxtrot deleting the part of the methamphetamine that described how to make it. Diff here[4] but you'll have to go back one to see what was removed, for some reason. Totnesmartin 19:29, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

It has been oversighted, no record of it ever occurring other than on WIGO. More importantly do we want it on site? - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:35, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

No. We should oversight it off of our site. And, IMHO, we should de-WIGO it. I think it's cruel to make people watch their badly-formulated WIGOs take a beating like this. I thought there was a policy about this a while back (when one of my bad WIGOs was given a merciful death) but apparently no more. Natural selection won't take its course until the end of the month. Heck. I'm taking it out. It's at -15. Gauss 23:00, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

you mean , is it WIGO-worthy? It was on minus 7 half an hour ago. shall we comment it out, or let natural selection take its course? Totnesmartin 19:48, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

I mean when I ran capturebot this morning the link was still alive. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 19:51, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Speaking of the meth article, TK's made a rather interesting edit... --Parsley Magnet 20:00, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

TK is an experienced Conservapedian and he has a vision for where the site is headed. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 20:46, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

And "Administrators are in charge of deciding the editorial policy of Conservapedia." (ref) --Sid 21:43, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

BrianCo is remembered

DuncanB pokes the bear. TK banned BrianCo for being a member here. Coarb 19:07, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

And this has to be discussed in the open, as TK isn't allowed to mail to DuncanB --larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 19:18, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Or not discussed at all. [5][6] Coarb 19:35, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Eh, the protection is just symbolism by TK. Unless he didn't get the memo... --Sid 21:38, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Stop the Presses!

Andy Schlafly corrected an error in a World History lecture, in response to input from a reader!

This is the big one, Elizabeth! I'm comin' to join ya, honey! I'll be the one not wearin' black cause I wouldn't want God to think I was anti-Christian! MDB 19:42, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

You can't see the Great Wall from space, unless you have a telescope--Nate River 21:13, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Even worse: You can't see the Great Wall from space, unless you have a spaceship. --Marty 01:02, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

This is all liberal deceit. The only thing you can see from outer space is God's creation, the Great Barrier Reef. --  Nx/talk  01:25, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

I heard you can see space from the Great Wall too! --GTac 05:26, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

That's not true; the smog gets in the way. Runderful 07:09, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

In Soviet Russia, Great Wall sees you! From space! --  Nx/talk  05:50, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy in Black

This photo doesn't show Andy in black. His shirt is onyx. Or charcoal. Or ebon. Or onyx. Or obsidian. Or slate. Or your choice. Anyway, only a libb-burr-ull would fail to see the difference. MDB 06:43, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Ah, but you'd have to be a bible-burning, baby-eating, public schooled Librull not to realise the significance of the flash of white at his collar, implying that under all the librull filth that gets thrown at him all day (hence the black), he is washed pure white by teh blud of jebus. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:55, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Ah, it's the blood of jebus. I wondered why Andy always smells of cheap wine in the afternoon. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:23, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

AndyJM WIGO

TK deleted the page, but I have a screen grab of AndyJM's userpage. Unfortunately, I only have the differences where AndyJM tells TK to delete his page and TK says he had spotted AndyJM long ago (though the rest of the conversation is still visible at the bottom of the page). Do we need it? --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 09:42, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

AndyJM had a good run. I'd like to see it. Neveruse513 09:48, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

There was some stuff where TK accused him of using Irish proxies hundreds of miles apart and a 'Godspeed' to our 'terrorist website', but not much else. I'm more amused by all the IP's TK blocked. EddyP 10:00, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

The real creepy bit was the bell tolling part. I uploaded what I have: --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 10:04, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

haha...über creepy. thanks! Neveruse513 10:08, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

YES! Create one or more subpages of Conservapedia:Burning_the_Evidence to hold the stuff, and add a subsection to Conservapedia:Burning_the_Evidence#Examples_of_burning_on_Conservapedia pointing to same. Gauss 11:00, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Hey guys, we're terrorists now! ENorman 12:09, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Hi TK. Nice job on the range blocks. You've taken out a substantial percentage of all Eircom's IP addresses. As Eircom is the major ISP in Ireland (43% of the broadband market) you're well on your way to blocking the entire country. But you have missed a few. You can get the full list at http://www.db.ripe.net/whois?form_type=simple&full_query_string=&searchtext=eircom JoeDuffy 12:28, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

I've cropped Arcan's capture to just the diff, made a cache screencap of the "bell tolls" one and updated the WIGO to avoid the dead links. --Sid 14:48, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

TK can you please block my current account on CP and kill it's user page and talk page? Also a please give me a range block as well I'm feeling left out here :) --BoredCPer 16:43, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

It's interesting, isn't it, that Andy can contort himself in order to avoid saying that the thousands of deaths at the hands of Irish paramilitary organisations constitute terrorism, but it's fine for TK to describe RW and its members that way. Go back to your instant coffee in its polystyrene cup, you pathetic twerp. Matt 17:49, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

OH...MY...GOD

Judge orders homskollars into public district classrooms

How long until this shit hits the fan at CP? I think we can expect great things from Andy about this. Neveruse513 09:49, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Here's the rub, what is unique about this case, is that it stems from a divorce where the two parents disagree over what is appropriate for the children. For all the whining you will see from the right, this isn't an open door to take qualified home schooling away as an option (and it's not just the right that homeschools. Liberals have long recognized that intelligent kids stagnate in the cesspool that modern public education can become if the district is poorly managed), but rather if you and your partner disagree about how the kids will be educated, a judge *will* decide, just like he will decide what church they can attend if that is in question.--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 10:17, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

The WND article only hints at it (there's a shock), but it seems the ruling was the result of the parent's divorce proceedings, and the father didn't want the kids homeschooled. WND, of course, portrays it as some kind of evil liberal assault on homeschooling. MDB 10:16, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

I've never understood how anyone can take WND seriously.... I mean, at the top of thier pages they post ads for thoses stupid foot pad detox things and in the middle of their articles they have bold links blatently trying to hock merchandise. Oh, and they're articles are really poorly written. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 12:11, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

What's so hard to understand? The same people that take WND seriously take CP seriously. Along with

Rush Limbaugh

Ann Coulter

Sean Hannity

Michael Savage

Bill O'Reilly

Fox News

etc etc etc ad infinitum ad nauseam

MDB 12:24, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Ssh tunneling

Can these give nightmares to Aschlafly? It seems Wikiversity has trouble with them and Conervapedia knows far less about computers than Wikiversity. Proxima Centauri 09:52, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

SES Application Update

I got a call back this morning from a staffer at the NJ Education Department office that handles SES applications, and she was pretty helpful in answering my questions. Here are the key takeaways:

• The department does not comment on the status of applications until they have been approved or declined, and this includes not officially acknowledging whether an application from Andy has been received.
• The review process that leads to an approval or rejection does not allow for public comment as part of the review process. The review is done by a panel of experts who evaluate the applications based on academic criteria and the supporting materials provided.
• The review process can take several months, and the only way to confirm that it's done is if we see Andy listed on the SES website as an approved provider. She suggested that if we check back in late June the review should be done by then.
• The SES program is designed to help kids improve in areas where they have an educational deficit, so the review process for these applications will focus on the content and overall quality of these programs to answer the question "will this help the kids catch up in this subject?"
• While you have to wait until an SES application is approved to challenge it, all SES providers must be in compliance with educational laws like Title IX and the No Child Left Behind Act, such as "SEC. 1119. Qualifications for Teachers and Paraprofessionals." and "Parental right-to-know letters". A nice recap of these guidelines is here.

And finally, my favorite takeaway:

• While the SES program supports providers from outside the public school system, it does not support programs providing religious instruction. While qualifying that I am not anti-Christian, I asked her politely but directly whether a course in World History taught from an openly Christian perspective, using the Bible as the overriding reference book and ensuring that all "facts" regarding the age of the Earth or ancient cultures conformed to YEC Christianity would be considered religious instruction or an academically acceptable history course for SES purposes, she answered "religious instruction" without hesitating or qualifying.

In short, Andy's application should be rejected in short order for three reasons. First, he has no documented track record of helping kids remedially in the subjects he teaches. Second, a review of his academic qualifications, his lectures and his homework grading should shoot him down on the "qualified" criteria. Third, while it's fine to teach "World History" from a hardline YEC point of view if you do so privately, you better not expect the state Department of Education to subsidize you. --SpinyNorman 10:59, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Well done, The Piranha Brothers'd be proud of you.   .  ^{Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence} 11:06, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Of course, the result you predict is exactly what Andy wants. He's setting himself up for martyrdom. MDB 11:19, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for the update Spiny. This sounds like bad news. We all knew that Andy would be rejected in short order. But, from the sounds of this we won't be able to FOIA the rejected application for lulz-enhancing purposes...-- Antifly ^{Now with 50% less retirement!} 11:22, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Well, in order to be a martyr, you have to admit failure...-- Antifly ^{Now with 50% less retirement!} 11:23, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy would have to conform to Title IX, eh? Fat chance o' that...--WJThomas 11:35, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Applauds for very nice work, Spiny! I'd send you a virtual beer, if i knew how! But you're all right, I can't wait to see Andy whine in Martyr mode "it's the evil libruls", even if his application is simply rejected because he did not provide the financials or the insurance that he didn't "need", cause he was, himself, "special".--En attendant Godot_{"«Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. V.Nabokov»} 11:44, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Nicely done, Mr. Norman. It's just a shame we have to wait so long for the inevitable rejection. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 13:26, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Thanks. I think we'll soon be able to add "What's the status of the SES application?" alongside "How's the FBI investigation going?" as surefire suicide pills for anyone asking it on CP. --SpinyNorman 13:39, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Does anyone here have a good "datebook" type program on their PC they can use to "bump" this topic in three months so we can follow up on our FOIA request? Or do you guys think that Andy will remind us? ħuman 22:21, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

I've made a "SES Application" note in my Todoist for June 10. --Sid 23:48, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Eggselent. ħuman 00:19, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Make a Holydaze for the date?   .  ^{Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence} 06:25, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Hate to out another Parodist but ...

..."MikeK, your liberal bias is showing. I can tell, with 95% accuracy, that you are a liberal. Would these same Democrats shell out money for a museum in honor Ronald Reagan??? Or Barry Goldwater??? You need to open your mind and embrace conservative principals!!!--Saxplayer 11:31, 12 March 2009 (EDT)". I mean, that's really OTT.   .  ^{Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence}

He kind of outed himself with that comment. And a quick look at his talk page makes it really obvious. That he isn't blocked yet is a testament to CP's stupidity. EddyP 11:43, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

heh! User was placed on parole on October 27,2008 and is on parole until April 25, 2009.: User page. Par/ole (broken)?   .  ^{Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence} 11:50, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Saxplayer was the guy who tried to pull a Bugler and was promoted to block rights, but when he realised we were onto him he panicked and created an obvious parody article. He was subsequently banned, reinstated, and paroled because the Schlaf doesn't like to be proved wrong. Or was that someone else? --Yossie^{Spring in Fialta} 12:16, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

He has less than 50 edits, but he did create a page called 'homosexual historical revisionism'. EddyP 12:19, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

OMG! I thought all those "musicians" were blocked long ago as obvious Bugler socks/wannabees! IIRC there were also an oboeist, clarinetist, etc. It was quite the thing for a while. Is Andy's refusal to admit to ever making a mistake the thing keeping saxplayer around? Gauss 14:17, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

It goes further than just Andy liking him: see this section basically what happened was another editor (NateE... Dinsdale?) called sax a parodist and Andy jumped in and blocked him for it. Another user defended Nate and got blocked himself. Then PJR totally pwned Andy with a chart comparing the two. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 18:54, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Bloxored! Corry^{I've made a huge mistake.} 22:19, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

(guilty feeling)   .  ^{Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence} 07:03, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

I just love how Andy was all like: "You're the next to be blocked for namecalling!" HAHAHA! Sounds just like a PUBLIC SCHOOL teacher trying to control an unruly class. Sorta like that scene with Judd Nelson earning infinity detentions in The Breakfast Club. The Foxhole Atheist 22:24, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Looking at the block reason, I see TK still has a hard-on for me. Psytroll indeed. --PsyGremlin_Whut? 06:58, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

I am feeling left out. Hey TK can you block the next random user for being me? Thanks. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 07:05, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Well think how I feel.... I've been member for like three years and not only do I never get personalized shout outs from Ken, I never get anyone blocked for being me.... In fact, I've had socks blocked for being someone else. SirChuckB^{Go Naked, Hitler Wore Clothes} 11:32, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Maybe id could introduce TK to <span class="myName">... then we could all feel wanted! --Marty 13:26, 13 March 2009 (EDT)