Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive298

This is an archive page, last updated 11 September 2012. 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>, <122>, <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>, <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)

CP at its most accurate ever

The database at CP is so bollixed right now the main page just says:

“”The database did not find the text of a page that it should have found, named "Main Page" . This is usually caused by following an outdated diff or history link to a page that has been deleted. If this is not the case, you may have found a bug in the software. Please report this to an administrator, making note of the URL.

The entire site is also moving as fast as molasses in January. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing Ken's manic oversighting has finally broken the SQL table or something. I can't even get the main page or recent changes to load. --PsyGremlin^Hable! 11:47, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess the internet really does have a maximum level on bullshit? Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 12:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

If you're patient enough, it's as if the entire layout crashed so all you'd see are links and text. Just three whole actions the day of August 23rd, including Karajou's "we say crazy shit and it's your job to disprove us!" block. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 12:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

It's back now. Looks like they've lost nearly a day of edits. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 14:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

0h, if only they could take it all back to October, 2006! Perusing MPR shows the same...lapse and you know that if anything is going to have edits to it it's going to be MPR! C®ackeЯ 14:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

DDoS

Did RW organize a DDoS campaign to take down CP? The last couple days have seen spotty access to my favorite hateblog. Or is it the public rushing for conservative insights? Either way, I'm sure August traffic will be record-breaking. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The decline in bookshops in Laredo means people worldwide are flocking to Conservapedia and jamming in the doorway. This site is growing rapidly! 80.74.16.198 (talk) 15:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Nah, it looks like somebody broke the database - only 3 edits remain from yesterday. probably Ken through his over-eager oversighting. --PsyGremlin^{Поговорите!} 15:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I could hardly get a response from CP yesterday. I think those edits are only there because Assly and Karajou were determined enough to make them. Does anyone remember seeing more edits than that? Occasionaluse (talk) 15:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, there were definitely many more edits yesterday than we can see today. And I didn't see any CP outages yesterday from here in the Boston area, though they seem to be down this morning. Phiwum (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Another classic from Kara"Scour the Desert"jou

You accepted my challenge and provided us with peer reviewed papers that support your point? BUY THEM FOR ME! Even if you do, I will still ignore you, boy. ~Karajou. WilliamR (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I love how he saids it like he's a drill instructor. Still pissed you never got your own personal love boat Karajou? --Revolverman (talk) 06:54, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Wouldn't posting the papers for all to see be piracy? Is Karajou asking for CP to be used for piracy? --Opcn ^{with regards to regarding my regardliness} 07:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I might be wrong, but I doubt it. The price to pay is more for the effort of getting, and sending the papers then any royalty fees. --Revolverman (talk) 07:54, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Uh, what? This is the information age, the total processing power and electricity cost of sending those papers is a tiny fraction of a penny, like a few hundredths of a cent. Unless they are really old and someone is just being a dick the papers are probably still owned by the publisher, and selling access to them is what they do for a living. --Opcn ^{with regards to regarding my regardliness} 08:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I was suprised how little is electronic now a days. I know when I was at university, most of it was still just journals and the such. --Revolverman (talk) 10:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Can someone put this one into context for me? I had a quick scour through the guy's contributions and couldn't find anything that looked related. All his recent ones concern Todd Akin. --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 09:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

It's an oldie, but a goodie. You, Jamesmackenzie, are going to scour the area once known as the Kingdom of Urartu^img... rpeh •T•C•E• 10:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, how I missed Kara's impotent drink-fueled rages. "Yes, you've shown me evidence that contradicts me, but YOU WILL abide by my totally arbitrary conditions, otherwise I will ignore you." I seem to recall him doing the same during the Kool Aid debate on CP - demanding that somebody physically read his source to Karajou. Presumably because kara was too pissed to read it himself. --PsyGremlin^Hable! 10:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd forgotten about that one! That isn't good enough. I want YOU to read it and SAY it here. Happy days. rpeh •T•C•E• 10:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Is that pissed in the British or American sense?--Spud (talk) 11:04, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Didn't even notice this until now, after making said demand, he promptly blocks him. God, it must be nice to win arguments at the click of a button. --Revolverman (talk) 11:06, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

A-ha! Another Karajou classic:^img

“”Since you decided to leave a sarcastic entry on my talk page regarding Flavoraid, you're now stuck looking for real references which are going to be used to create and improve the Jonestown article I am writing. You are going to get newspaper, newsmagazine, or video references which state explicitly references to Flavoraide at Jonestown; these references will be dated within two months of November 18, 1978 and not later; and you've got until 10:30 pm central time tonight to dig them up. If what you've implied is true, they will be posted in the article, you will get the credit, and I will eat my words to that effect. If not, then I will block you for a week for the sarcasm as well as assisting in a lie. Get to work. Karajou 14:42, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

--PsyGremlin^Speak! 11:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

More stunning is this rare admission^img from Karajou:

“” Sorry to revert the block, LearnTogether, but I didn't take offense at all to his comments of yesterday, and he did take them back, as well as myself. Besides, and I'm referring slightly to the cheap order I made (and it is cheap, with my apologies to TomMoore), when someone says that he does go to a library to do research on a particular subject, I have to give that person the time to do so...so when 10:30 came and went guess what could not happen? My block threat. Not everything is available on the net, and unlike Tom, I do have a ProQuest access through my university. Karajou 00:05, 31 May 2008 (EDT)

I honestly have trouble imagining him to admit to being too heavy-handed these days. I suppose he sobers up on occasion. Phiwum (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Does it seem to anyone else that with JPratt pretty much MIA, Popeye has taken it upon himself to take up the slack in the being a complete idiot department? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 21:10, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Definitely. The corollary to that is that Popeye's reaction to a JPratt comment is to repeat "Yeah man" through froth-flecked lips whilst banging his head against the soft furnishings in his room. rpeh •T•C•E• 21:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you imagine how long this guy would have lasted on Wikipedia if he didn't get banned over what happened with Ed Poor? There would be no end to his edit warring. Even providing cited sources would be hopeless, as you'd have to buy your peer reviewed articles for him (nevermind the fact that he has in the past claimed to have access to a college's database of journals....speaking of which, maybe someone with a sock to burn could bring this up?) WilliamR (talk) 21:34, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Meh, the Koward was never in the running for sysop at WP so it's all immaterial. Also, he probably does have college access to journals. I think that I am correct in assuming that as an ex-serviceman he gets tax-payer funded further education Somehow that doesn't count as liberal sponging. Effing hypocrite.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 21:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Karajerk is indeed sucking at the government teat when it comes to his education. Even more bizarre, he's apparently studying anthropology and archeology at LSU. Not sure how he equates that with being a YEC fuckhead? Maybe he yells at his lecturers and tells them they're wrong if they come up with a date older than 6,000 years ago. --PsyGremlin^Tala! 09:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, many YEC wingnuts take geology courses so that they can then brag about their credentials, but they're already so cemented in their mindset that they won't waver. They'll just parrot enough of the course material back for the benefit of the examiners and then revert to the party line but with added ORTHORITTEE! Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 11:11, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps its an act, and he really isn't anything but a bully, and just licks Andy's asshole because he gives him a place where he can feel powerful? --50.98.213.233 (talk) 09:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

An aside

Found it funny - whilst searching for the Kool Aid / Flavor Aid debate, to find Ed the Moonie Cultist objecting^img to use of the words "mind control" and "brainwashing" in the Jonestown article. I guess it hit a little close to home. --PsyGremlin^Tala! 09:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Karajou reading fail, part MXXXLVIII...

NOt exactly a surprise that Karajou would take a hateful screed and promote it as truth without a cursory reading of the original source. Turns out that while the DOJ and other Federal offices are being instructed to try to hire more disabled people, this sentence in the document Karajou's source links to is curiously ignored:

"A qualified individual with a targeted disability is a candidate who, based on his or her background, skills, and experience, would have been otherwise appropriate for selection for interview, with or without a disability."

So while having a targeted disability gets you right to the front of the hiring queue, you'd have to be able to do the job in the first place to score an interview. Classy as always, Karajou. --DinsdaleP (talk) 18:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure his fellow veterans support his anti-disability stance, because no ex-servicemen are disabled. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 07:11, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

"have to be able to do the job" is tricky though. One of the things we really, honestly see in my profession is that most non-senior jobs will get a high ratio (sometimes more than 90%) of applicants who cannot do the job. They have paper qualifications and a glowing CV but I mean simply that they are unable to do the actual job, they aren't remotely capable of the core task for which they would be hired. We now use screening, but if you don't know to do that (or more likely if your work isn't suitable for screening) then you would have to interview these useless candidates as we used to. There's no reason to think that disabled candidates would magically reduce that number from 90% so that means more often than not the disabled candidate who jumped the queue is useless. How many times can you interview and reject such candidates before your management conclude that you're discriminating and require you to just hire the next one based on their paperwork? 82.69.171.94 (talk) 08:53, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be the Peter Principle? Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 17:09, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Not really, no. The Peter Principle is when Bob, who is a perfectly good mechanic, gets promoted to manager, at which he's no good, usually because there is no mechanism for career advancement or salary increases outside of promotion to a different role. That's a problem with an organisation, it's not really Bob's fault that this happened to him. Whereas what I'm talking about is when we advertise a job for a Java programmer, we will get a large number of external applicants who cannot in fact write programs in Java. It's as if Bob quit his mechanic job and specifically went out looking for a job as a manager even though he's no good at that. Dunning-Krueger might have something to do with it, or some other cognitive problem in the incapable, or maybe they're just lying. It doesn't really matter to an employer which is the case. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Piers Morgan is a liberal?

Um...yes, he is. If editing the Daily Mirror wasn't enough, he gave the paper an anti-Iraqi invasion position. London Grump (talk) 23:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

So is Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity according to Andy.

Yes, but LG's point is that even by usual standards he'd be a liberal, making the comment seem odd. 81.137.227.129 (talk) 11:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

That CP page has never existed. Was the unnamed editor being ironic, or has Andy called Coulter and Limbaugh liberals? --PsyGremlin^講話 11:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Is that page's lack of visibility because CP is so futzed right now? (Okay, CP is always futzed, but this time, the reason is technological.) MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Maybe, but there's nothing in the logs for it either. --PsyGremlin^Tal! 12:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I saw in the logs that Andy created a page titled "RINO Backers" (or "RINO backers"?) yesterday, to list persons who were not RINOs but reacted against Akin's stupid claims. I saw it yesterday, but didn't bother to view the page. So, I suppose that the unsigned link noticed those three names were listed on the page and the page has since been unexisted. Phiwum (talk) 14:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Something is terribly borked over there. From what I see, only three edits occurred at CP yesterday, at 00:01, 00:40 and 00:45. I guess that August 23, 2012 just didn't really happen. Phiwum (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

We'll have to wait until CP is less borked to find out for sure. --PsyGremlin^Zungumza! 14:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

There are thirty-three missing hours in the logs. I'm not sure if it will become less borked. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if addle-brained User:Conservative was ultimately behind this lost day. That, or God. Mean ol' son-of-a-gun. Phiwum (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Looks like the article in question went west during The Day That Wasn't. Also, with Ed driving off August, there's not much chance that Andy will be able to recover the info this time. --PsyGremlin^Prata! 14:39, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Insistence that data be recoverable is a liberal value. True conservatives know that God remembers everything. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 14:47, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

What happens to socks accounts that were created yesterday, the 23rd? C®ackeЯ 14:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that was me who forgot to sign that reply. If you look at the new RINO Backers page, Andy has Coulter Limbaugh, and Hannity on the RINO side, which is just another word for liberal in Andy's mind. I am not shocked by Andy's support of Akin, given his and his mother's view on rape and women in general.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 20:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Todd Akin - now a mystery

The GOP's party bosses are behind the bullying of Akin.

Good to see that Andy is sticking to the line that rape doesn't cause pregnancy, and defending it in his own batshit revolting way. --PsyGremlin^Zungumza! 12:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps Andy is beginning to realize what I realized ages ago: the GOP's leadership doesn't give a damn about social conservatives' issues; they just want their votes. And they have those votes so locked up they'll treat their social conservative members like shit if need be. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Does andy know that in 31 states, Rapists can sue for custody of their victim's children. Or does that not happen, and these women being sued for custody by their CONVICTED rapists are just illusions? --GodotIz a sekret Kristian 17:09, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

WHAT?! That is seriously fucked up. So a convicted rapist can sue for custody of a child, but let a gay couple try and adopt... PsyGremlin^Parla! 17:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

1. Citation needed.
2. How many have actually managed to get custody? MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 19:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Dumb question

If Andrew Schlafly's "Homeschool" is the pooled efforts of several teachers, he teaches classes over 30 kids, and it's in a church basement... is it even homeschooling at that point? It sounds more like a parochial school with no oversight. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 16:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

It is, but because he gets to lead the class in prayer before feeding them his bullshit. Remember, prayer is more important than knowledge for Andy. --PsyGremlin^Parlez! 16:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, I believe it's 2 hours once a week, so it's pretty hard to call it "school" in any meaningful sense. I think this sort of endeavor isn't uncommon for homeschoolers, albeit with a less batshit insane instructor. Also, is it the pooled efforts of several "teachers"? I though it was at least 90% Andy. DickTurpis (talk) 16:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy has a rather, what should I say, "liberal" view of what constitutes home-schooling. Basically it can be anything that is not state-funded education, although he did apply for a government grant at one time. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

To be regulated as a "school" in Colorado, you need to meet with the students more than 1/2 time (I think fully time is 38 hours, but I could be wrong) and have more than 7 students. Otherwise, it can be framed as "tutoring" or "supplementation" or "specialized classes". The University of Boulder has a program for kids who are homeschooled, that teaches them languages, or advanced sciences, or advanced math. I'm sure that's how Andy's "school" is regulated.--GodotIz a sekret Kristian 17:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Didn't we send off for some sort of care package to the NJ Department of Education was considering an application from Andy? Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 17:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you all for explaining. That's pretty disturbing. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 17:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

@TOP Yeah, I did. I imagine it probably got nuked during the great purging of the CP namespace. Occasionaluse (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

File:SES_Application-0001resize.jpg Occasionaluse (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Notice how Andy says the learnin' will take place at a school, not a church. I think I remember something about him switching from church basement to school basement. Occasionaluse (talk) 19:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

No, that was just Andy bullshitting. He doesn't have a venue that can satisfy New Jersey's SES requirements, so he just handwaved that the teaching would take place in schools. That whole incident was hilarious. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Has Thrustbuttocks given the game away?

An interesting insight into Terry Thrustbuttocks' views. Here's a rant by Roseanne Insanitary about evilution on TT's blog. Go to the comments and note Thrustbuttocks' response to the second comment: "[USA Constitution Amendment] XIV: Much of that text was an act of cynical revenge." Note that this was the amendment which, in 1868, gave equal rights to blacks and penalised states which refused to comply. What Thrust says just looks like a rant about wicked politicians defying the will of the Founding Fathers but actually, what he's really objecting to is the idea that people with a different colour to his should have the same political rights. I think I know where he's coming from in his rants about Obama. The Real James Brown (talk) 20:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. I didn't actually have a clue what the 14th amendment was about and I didn't bother to check, but that information does light up a few bulbs. I'm not personally sure about Terry being racist though; he's certainly a religious bigot, but he appears to have at least one Arab friend.--Fergus Mason ^{Thruppence I got for selling my coat, tuppence for selling my blanket. If ever I 'list for a soldier again, the Devil shall be my Sergeant.} 20:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Arab =/= Muslim and I doubt that Terry has "friends" in the way that we might define the term. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 11:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

If you're referring to that equally racist Bader Qarmout, he's Jordanian Christian. And I doubt he's a friend. Terry latched onto his campaign (run by Unsanitary) so he could feel important again. Notice how Qarmout hasn't contributed to, nor been mentioned on, Terry's blog since he lost the primary. Hurlbut has no further need for him, so under the bus the raghead goes. --PsyGremlin^Prata! 11:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one I was talking about. So is Qarmout a full-on wingnut as well?--Fergus Mason ^{Thruppence I got for selling my coat, tuppence for selling my blanket. If ever I 'list for a soldier again, the Devil shall be my Sergeant.} 16:14, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I think that's a yes-and-no answer. Yes, he ran on a Tea Party platform, with Roseann Insanitary as his campaign manager. However, he was also in favour of granting amnesty to illegals, something with apparently sent Roseann spare. Also, it seems fellow conservatives were less than enamoured with Qarmout. He was also associated with Col Manly Rash, aka Gene Hoyas. --PsyGremlin^Hable! 13:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Nope, Terry is blatant with his racism, as can be seen from this poll he added.

As you can see, the two options are:

• Agree. Obama has betrayed those he promised to serve.
• Disagree. Obama is doing exactly what the country, and black people, need.

Nope, not racist at all. --PsyGremlin^Parlez! 10:05, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

That's not even his most blatant. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 16:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I can only attribute his shockingly bad faith (not just poorly researched for a "journalist") attack on Obama for Congress' removal of "Advice and consent" requirements for a few non-key positions to racism. Other presidents have done this far more. The disgusting part is that he uniformly misrepresents the effects of the statute by misnaming positions, etc., solely to tar Obama as seizing "kingly power." When I challenged him to either correct his essay or simply remove it because it's irredeemably fucked, he started 86'ing my posts. What a hatchet job. What a scumbag liar. How can one exult so stridently in a program of deceit? Is that a traditional xtian or "conservative value"? 16:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Terry's also got a pretty clear history of racism closer to home, against them damn illegals and anyone who looks even vaguely like them. Part of that is his knee-jerk fandom of whoever the far right decides is a golden boy, so Sheriff Joe's racist acts become A-OK in his books, but that's clearly not all of it. He just doesn't seem to care for Latinos in the first place. --Kels (talk) 16:50, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand why Andy tolerates him. I thought that genuinely not being racist (qv hero-worship of Clarence Thomas) was one of Andy's few creditable character traits. The Real James Brown (talk) 21:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

The GOP not conservative enough for Andy

Now that the RINOs have had a power grab that "marginalises social conservatives and Tea Party folks like Todd Akin."

I wonder if we'll be getting a breakaway wingnut party after Romney loses? Also, it's called "damage control," Andy. Unlike you, who thinks the best way to put out flames is to add petrol. --PsyGremlin^Tal! 14:40, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Petrol is nourishing and good for the environment. The Real James Brown (talk) 14:58, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Whilst I'd love to see a breakaway party, I doubt it's going to happen. There are now two parties within the Republicans: Teabaggers versus the old fiscal Conservative types, but both sides will claim to represent the "real" GOP. Over the past few years, there's been a steady shift to the former, which has led the more reasonable GOP members to switch parties (Arlen Specter) or just quit (Olympia Snowe).

This election is going to be largely boring. I know things look close at the moment, but Obama will crush Romney. The interesting bit will be what happens next: does the GOP shift right or left? If it goes right, it'll be out of power for a generation. If it goes left, it could well win in 2016. rpeh •T•C•E• 16:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't get it. You people can reach CP today? It's been unreachable for well over 24 hours for me. Phiwum (talk) 17:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Methinks Karajerk is tired of being made fun of, so he's ranging blocking the planet. Odd how conservatism is so powerful that only certain people can be exposed to it, it's like nuclear waste in that regard. Shame Capturebot is off on one her little benders at this point in time though. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 17:36, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

It was slow earlier but it's fine now. rpeh •T•C•E• 17:46, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Think Johnny Sedition will be calling for a Teabagger "secession" soon? Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 17:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that's it, Iscariot! I hadn't bothered to check, but my phone can load Conservapedia while my computer cannot. Phiwum (talk) 20:15, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Ed tells it like it is.

Respect my authority. I am a professional. Theory of Practice Haters gonna hate. 20:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, Ed does teaching writing too. Is there anyone on CP who doesn't? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 20:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

That quote that praises him is anonymous. How pathetic can he get? lol Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 20:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

"I know how to write encyclopedia articles" Bwahahahahahahahaha! Vulpius (talk) 21:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

"it just so happens that nearly every word I type, link I create, article or template I start - gains instant and widespread acceptance" - by whom???!!! The Real James Brown (talk) 21:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Himself and the little demon that sits on his shoulder who must be having a whale of a time. --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 23:07, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Here he is getting all pissy again. I like how he needs to remind everyone he is a 'senior admin' not once but twice. Oh and there is this gem, as well as throwing down some "I'm an expert with media-wiki, peasant". Ed Poor, what a guy. Aceⁱ⁹ 23:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Isn't Ed on record (I think it's somewhere on Wikipedia) as saying that he can't write for shit? Didn't he say that's why he writes for free on wikis instead of being a published author? I guess that private school in New York didn't read that. It's also nice to see that Ed is still living in a parallel universe where Conservapedia is not a YEC site and respects all points of view.--Spud (talk) 04:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

So, he's been hired to teach writing? Sounds like our great scholar was unemployed. I wonder whatever happened to his computer programming exploits? Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 08:04, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing that by "private school" he means some Moonie kiddie indoctrination camp. Then again, it could also exist in his mind, like his non-existent wiki skills. Last I heard, Ed was working for customer services for some company that made some sort of eco-friendly scooter. --PsyGremlin^Sprich! 08:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Here we go. It's electric bikes. Although I see he's not listed on their website anymore, so maybe he quit. Maybe he didn't want to work for a bunch of global-warming advocates. --PsyGremlin^Sprich! 08:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Just looking at the original Ed post that created this thread, I'm counting at least 3 errors I'm 100% sure of (Misused colon, misused comma and poor sentence structure). There are a few more that if they aren't true errors, they certainly muddy up the writing..... The irony is strong in this one. SirChuckB^{Call the FBI} 08:36, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy, Ken, and now Ed. Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 09:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Psy, that didn't look too much like Ed in the photo. Maybe this was just someone else with the same name? Phiwum (talk) 12:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Conservapedia down for 64.180.243.0/x?

I still can't get to CP, but with a proxy, everything loads fine. Did Andy block me on a server level?RandonGeneration (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I had problems a couple of days ago (as did others) but it works fine for me now. However, Andy has implemented server side blocks in the past on IPs that have been clickbotting. Генгис^mutating 18:55, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh so you're brenden. Nice editing, comrade. 108.166.185.165 (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, my IP address is certainly blocked, and I doubt that it's due to anything that I've done. I don't clickbot, nor register accounts on CP, but only read the madness and discuss it here. Maybe someone in my IP neighborhood pissed off Karajou or whoever has gone off the deep end. (Since my home IP address is static, not much to do aside from viewing the site from the phone.) Phiwum (talk) 21:09, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

My access has been down for days now. Apparently, according to Karajou, conservatism is so weak it can even stand up to being viewed by my eyes. It's a bit sad really. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 08:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

No mention of Armstrong?

I first heard about it about 5 or 6 hours ago and I had to wake up to find out about it. It is a pretty glaring omission. I suppose it is result of chasing all editors away no one is around to update the place. - π 04:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

What would you expect them to say? Something about overated astronauts? Peter ^{Rapidly running out of marmite} 04:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd say that Andy has not yet made up his mind if Armstrong was a great Conservative Christian hero or a filthy godless liberal. No doubt he'll do some research flip a coin and decide.--Spud (talk) 04:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Considering all the other batshit craziness CP endorses, I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see them embrace the moon landing hoax conspiracy. I guess the fact that it sort of diminishes an American accomplishment makes them balk. If it had been the Soviets who made it to the moon they'd dismiss it in a heartbeat. DickTurpis (talk) 04:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Apollo 11 wasn't just a huge leap for mankind, it was a very nationalistic moment, so this is strange.

What's their opinion on NASA again? Osaka Sun (talk) 05:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

"Unfortunately, NASA has also lately been distracted by anthropogenic global warming theory, due to the political machinations of alarmists such James E. Hansen [1]. George Deutsch, an appointee of President George W. Bush, tried to rein in NASA's turn towards environmental radicalism, but this provoked a reaction from the liberal media [2]."[1] Armstrong is clearly part of the AGW hoax, smear him! Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

(EC)At the moment Conservatives love NASA and blame Obama that there is no replacement for Space Shuttle and the US has to rely on foreign countries to get astronauts into space. CP I don't knoe their particular position. @PeterL, I would expect them to say something, at least an RIP. - π 05:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I see that in the past 24 hours the Wikipedia article about Neil Armstrong has had well over 500 edits (getting on for a thousand, I'd say) but the Conservapedia article has only had one. It looks like the Conservapedia regulars still neither love nor hate Neil but couldn't give a toss about him either way. I've been hearing all day that Armstrong gave very few interviews and I'm sure that he was quite careful not to reveal his views on politics or religion, to avoid becoming a divisive figure instead of a representative of all humanity.--Spud (talk) 12:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Last time I looked the WP article didn't mention his religion but a generic Goggle search suggested that he was "protestant". Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 14:09, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and very surprisingly there's been no mention of the other Armstrong either. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 14:10, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Or the other other Armstrong. C®ackeЯ 17:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Or the other other other Armstrong. --Night Jaguar (talk) 19:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

The Unhinged, starring CP sysops.

So just looking at recent changes...

• Conservative reverted and oversighted in the community portal, a fantastic example of abuse to hide abuse.
• Karajou's blocks are becoming more volatile, being freely able to call users idiots and morons (SamCoulter's really getting under his skin, teehee).
• Ed Poor keeps returning after several days/weeks of inactivity just to push people around, and AugustO appears to have given up on Andy's lengthy "review".
• With their support of Todd Akin, CP throws even the most right-winged fools under the bus. They have little to support, but everyone else to hate.

At this point, all users would do is ask "what would you do if Obama wins?" and expect them to go off like that Texas judge did, calling for arms or something. You'd usually see one of these things happening at CP, but it's all colliding at once like a 8-way train junction. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 13:40, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

...I'm actually kinda surprised that the Community Portal still exists. --Sid (talk) 16:26, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd love to see Andy and his Get Along Gang mounting up for the civil war. It'd be like a LARP, minus costumes, weapons and any kind of connection with reality. I suspect as well that this could be Ken's first view of sunlight in quite some time, and welcome relief from his bed sores and frenzied masturbation. Concernedresident ^{omg!!! ponies!!!} 16:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Media Bullying

A term allegedly coined by Andy and in use exactly nowhere else is suddenly a Best New Conservative Word. --PsyGremlin^Tal! 14:46, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Hilariously, the closest cousin to this term/usage that I personally have seen actually comes from tweenagers crying on fanfiction forums, "IF YOU DON'T HAVE PRAISE FOR MY STORY DON'T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL." The thing is that when one presents an idea 'in public' it's like putting one's best foot forward. It's like stepping on stage. If you step on stage covered in fish guts and garbage, no critic should be blamed for saying that you stink. That's not bullying; asking special privileges to be accepted and not judged doesn't fly in a reality where people are constantly evaluating ideas. It's not done with some kind of LIBERAL GOAL. If something stinks, then people will comment on it.±KnightOfTL;DR^{lavishly loquacious} 14:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Coined by CP in 2008? I'll be generous and not count "social media bullying", but still, a quick search gives me for example this site from 2007, this one from 2002 (using the Waybackmachine to prove the date), and let's add this 2003 piece for good measure. Yep, FIRST COINED BY CONSERVAPEDIA! --Sid (talk) 16:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Things like this make me sort of wish Rommney would win. If Obama (likely) wins, It's four years of Andy ranting about how the RINOs doomed the US to whatever boogie man he comes up for a given week. If Mittens pulls it out, and he does purge the Tea Party from the Republican Core like I have to suspect he will, Andy will have NOTHING left. --Revolverman (talk) 18:03, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

And did you know that the postponement of the Republican Convention is the result of media bullying, not because some clot arranged to hold it in Florida in the hurricane season? The Real James Brown (talk) 20:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Andy can't even get that right, he keep saying that the first 36 hours have been cancelled even though his source says postponed. Lying? Or does he really not know the difference?--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 03:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, facts have a well-known liberal bias. You think Andy would trust them over his own word? (That just gave me the scary thought of Andy as a reality-warper)--Thanatos (talk) 03:10, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

That gives me an idea for a new SCP23.16.216.193 (talk) 04:02, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Do tell, dear anon. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{more at 11} 21:44, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Huh?

Can somebody explain to me what Conservative is on about here? I'm not sure if he is trying to get a point across of if this is a bot putting random sentences with words from the news together. There'as digital cheese at the end of this labyrinth of words! --K. (talk) 12:24, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

It's basically Ken on one of his anti-science rants. Private companies can expect to bring in plenty of money by ferrying people with too much money into space, but NASA just does science and that doesn't turn a profit (and shows a love for evolutionism and a hatred of God), so therefore their budget needs to be slashed and given to the Creation Museum.

Or something.

Conservapedia - where the illiterate main page is enough to scare away prospective browsers. --PsyGremlin^Prata! 12:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I think he's pissed because someone on the talk page said something about how the "In the news" section is full of stupid blog links instead of, say, something abou the passing of Neil Armstrong, so he figured he should dance on his grave out of spite. Seriously Ken, get some help. Carlaugust (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, so it's basically "Kill them! They are libruls!". I guess I was looking for reasoning were there was none to expect. --K. (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Just wait till John Glenn passes. He had the colossal nerve to be a Democrat. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 13:34, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Aaaannndddd.... it's gone.^img --PsyGremlin^Sprich! 14:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I had this debate with him interestingly. NASA actually paid back the entire cost of all previous programs, plus a lot of interest, somewhere around 1980. Not to mention that a great deal of the money was actually paid to contractors such as Boeing. He doesn't listen to anything. Ayzmo (talk) 16:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

The links are so worth purusing. My fave is Unreasonableness of Young Earth Deniers. There are two theses put forward: 1) Young Earth Deniers don't object to Jesus's turning water into wine because it's unscientific, so they're inconsistent and hypocritical, and 2) YED's insist on repeating the myth that the Church persecuted Galileo, when it was really liberals. Whoover (talk) 21:35, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, Europe was awash with atheistic scientists at the beginning of the 17th century. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Not to mention the fact that those 17th century atheistic scientists have yet to answer the 15 questions and are being cowards by not debating Cockofgod. The 17th century lacked machismo! Ole! Hiphopopotamus (talk) 22:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

There's a certain cleverness in adopting the term "Young Earth Deniers". It makes it sound as if believing in an old earth (i.e., doubting that the earth is young) is just as unscientific as doubting that the holocaust took place. It's a cute way to turn it around and pretend that science is on your side. Phiwum (talk) 02:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I love how he potshotted at "extraterrestrial life", which, just like evolutionary theory and the 13.7Byo universe sciences, have been accepted by the abortion-hating, contraception-despising RCC. -- Seth Peck (talk) 15:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Ugh.

I thought it would be creepy Uncle Ed, but Popeye takes the crown of the most revolting man on CP by promoting the most revolting man in the universe. These fuckers revolt me. Scott Lively is frankly a murderer, and the people who promote him are hate-filled shitbags with no conscience or sense of decency. Fuck you, fuck you all at Conservapedia. Stop being fucking arseholes. Just stop. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 08:22, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

So, as opposed to the "Fuck off, I'm a senior editor" guy it's the one who just leaves it at "Fuck off". I'm not checking that WND page, because if I end up reading it out loud as I sometimes do, I fear my minor intestine will leap through my body and strangle me to death. The headline is enough for me. Now, is Scott Lively literally a muderer or am I missing something here? --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 11:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

We really need a term for the nutter train of thought that homosexuality is the only cause of anything bad in the universe... Pink-batting? --Revolverman (talk) 18:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll get to work thenRandonGeneration (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Where to begin...

... when it comes to this entry of Ken's on MPR.

1. Gannett presumably owns the News-Leader, but they do not "produce it's web site", at least not in the sense that they're directly responsible for it's content.
2. The fact they published a letter to the editor does not mean they endorse it's content.
3. Ken, are you so desperate to validate Conservapedia that you're quoting letters to the editor in small city newspapers?

MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 11:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Why did Ken finish his post by saying that liberals are unable to find a single factual error in the Conservapedia homosexuality article. Citation needed, Ken! Allen Kemper, who sent that letter to the Missouri newspaper, doesn't sound much like a liberal. After all, he says he has an open mind and all good Conservapedians know that liberals are incapable of opening their minds.--Spud (talk) 12:53, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Googling his name leads directly to his Facebook page, where how open his mind is is available for all to see. He appears associated with some outfit that describe themselves as a "Procalimer of Truth". MrChris (talk) 13:44, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

The "About" section of the Facebook page is just plain creepy: 'I have been saved according to Romans 10:13 since I was 8. I was baptized, that same year, and since then I have sought to be baptized and filled with the Holy Spirit, again and again to be a useful, and faithful love-slave of the Master! ' Also 'My good friends, Wayne Terrill, and Zach Dyer (also on Facebook) have worked with me in creating www.GodsCrafts.com. This is a site dedicated to displaying, and distributing "Crafts With A Message". These prayed-over crafts, like prayer cloths can then be tools to drive out demons, and bring His Healings & Miracles to Bless, and Convert Unsuspecting People! Perhaps you know some godly, believing crafters who would greatly benefit?'. So, the ideal kind of person to give an unbiased assessment of Conservapedia's articles.. Cantabrigian (talk) 14:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if he's AK who has posted on the Homosexuality page and created a category Dutch People, Kemper is a Dutch name. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 14:51, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I've been praying over the macaroni and glitter crafts I make on paper plates for years while I huff model airplane glue. Nothing. 14:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

"... to be a useful, and faithful love-slave of the Master!" - that could be right out of some BDSM fiction. ^{ONE / TALK} 09:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, so that's what God's realm on Earth will look like?

You know, like Russia! Yes, god's realm will give such wonderful things like restriction of free speech, beating of protests by police officials, murder of journalists for political reasons, mindless imperialism, protecting dictatorships, bribery of officials, patriotic conditioning of soldiers and of course punishment of the lazy! That's the spirit of the American constitution and what the founding fathers wanted! --K. (talk) 09:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Launchbooty's Grand Plan

First found this on Pharyngula. It would appear that Terry is the secretary/treasurer of a group who wants to create a "museum" called Creation Science Hall of Fame near Cincinnati based on this website, (which is as far as the project has currently gone). The website itself rides the coattails of legitimate scientists such as Issac Newton, Johannes Kepler, and Sir Francis Bacon in an attempt to link Creationism to prominent scientists in the centuries before evolution, or even modern chemistry and geology existed, in order to attempt to tie science to their religious dogma. Hey Newton was also into alchemy and occultism, so I guess that means these also must be legitimate branches of science, amirite? The mind boggles. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 16:54, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd go. Just to see crap like this in 3-D -- from a Terry comment on the Galileo page (remember that Galileo had no disagreement with the Church, only with Aristotelian liberals) --

And the church mistakenly followed Aristotle when it came to the place of the earth in the cosmos. The earth need not be the center of the universe to be the center of Divine attention. But the Galaxy is likely the center of the universe. We know now that the entire universe rotates about an axis that is not only parallel to but coincident with the axis of rotation of the Galaxy, and in the same direction.

He's big on the Milky Way being "the Galaxy" because it's the one God cares about. Cue the Twilight Zone theme. Whoover (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

This has been around for a while without going very far. Largely it seems like some sort of vanity project. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 18:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

"We know now that the entire universe rotates about an axis that is not only parallel to but coincident with the axis of rotation of the Galaxy, and in the same direction." We do? From what I can tell, this notion of the universe spinning is an idea in physics but it is far from seen as definitive in any way. It was thought that such rotation explained the "Pioneer Anomaly" (until we found out it is just thermal radiation off the Pioneers themselves). The reason it is thought to be possible is due to the fact the majority of galaxies observed in the night sky towards the "galactic north pole" spin counterclockwise, (research is still being conducted to see if galaxies in the direction of the galactic south pole are spinning clockwise, in either case it still be on a small portion of the observable universe). An interesting idea, however even if it were true, it still wouldn't suggest the universe spins around the Milky Way, which is contrary to Hubble's law.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 18:49, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Wait. When they claim we're in "the galaxy", are we talking young-earth creationists here? I'm just trying to wrap my head around how they could reconcile our measurements of the universe, and how we make those measurements, with the belief that it's all only a few thousand years old. I guess it explains the hatred for relativity, at least... Q0 (talk) 01:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Creationists have been trying to reconcile the immense distances of the universe with their 6,000 year time frame for quite a while now, it is commonly called the Starlight Problem. Well most creations try to reconcile. Andy though will simply baulk at any distance written that is greater than 6000 light years from the Earth. That was my main argument with him when I wrote any astronomy article there, whether it be the Crab Nebula or the Andromeda Galaxy, anything that was listed as >6,000 light years was automatically suspect by Il Duce; who than proceed to edit out such distances.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 04:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

You got to hand it to Andy. Most would twist, turn, spin, but not Andy, he'll just ram head first into the wall until it finally gives way. --Revolverman (talk) 04:26, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

According to Andy the Starlight Problem is "a bigger problem for atheistic views, because those views cannot accommodate the explanation that some of the light in the sky is show for people on earth."^img Also, the >6,000 light years is possibly the "distance artwork" of God^img. Oh Andy, you're a gem. --Night Jaguar (talk) 05:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

This is the same guy who believe the fact that leaves turn various warm colors in the autumn is sure proof that evolution is wrong because they are aesthetically pleasing for people to look at, which serves no evolutionary purpose; ergo the night sky is beautiful and such beauty would serve no purpose other than to be pleasing to the human eye, so why should those stars and galaxies really be those great distances instead of simply "painted" onto a huge 6000 light year radius black dome for our pleasure?--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 13:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure you really meant to type (a)esthetically (beautiful) pleasing and not ascetically (avoiding physical pleasure). Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 14:16, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. Stupid auto-correct :P --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 15:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

It's the religious basis for "truthiness." Once you accept that reality is comprised of tricks to test your faith or provide distance artwork, it's a small step to finding valuable alternate realities on your own. Like building a presidential campaign on Obama's elimination of a welfare work requirement, contrary to any evidence whatsoever. Or making a convention theme out of, "If your business uses roads or other public infrastructure If you have a business, you didn't build that." Reality is a canvas on which to paint righteous lessons. Whoover (talk) 20:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

The existing Creation Museum is already near Cincinnati (as well as the Answers in Genesis office/sacrificial altar/mother's basement), so the location is probably not coincidental. -- Seth Peck (talk) 20:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

So he wants to be California Adventure to AiG's Disneyland? --Revolverman (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Probably more like Adventure City. -- Seth Peck (talk) 21:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

WOW, between Disneyland/CA, Universal, and even Knots Berry Farm on the outside... how is that place still running? --Revolverman (talk) 21:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, it is only $14.95... -- Seth Peck (talk) 21:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, budget prices is something you won't find in any of the big three, thats for fucking sure... --Revolverman (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Last time I saw the creation science hall of fame site it looked pretty much like it was abandoned, is this actually still a current thing or is this just Chuckarse's operation flying fortresses? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 22:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Someone noticed CP

Here. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Karajou

Do you realize that you're siding with the ACLU?

The linked Fox News story mentions the ACLU has gotten involved. Isn't that conservative kryptonite (conservanite?) MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 15:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

ACLU also fights for gun rights. Conservatives don't like hearing this because it causes their faces to seize up, which can be inconvenient. ^{ONE / TALK} 16:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Do they? I don't remember that. Doesn't seem too consistent with their stated position either, depending on what you call gun rights. Have you any particular case in mind? Phiwum (talk) 17:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

The ACLU says the right to bear arms is for militias not individuals. They do not fight for gun rights. How could you when Northwest Indiana and Chicago alone have more gun murders in a few weeks than all of Canada and Western Europe in a few years. Murder is not a conservative value but then again Conservapedia doesn't seem to have a problem with Catholics being called "pagans" so I guess I'm not conservative or Christian after all. Nate Keaton (talk) 12:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Their stated position is interesting; I hadn't read that. It seems the national organisation acts differently to state chapters of the ACLU, which regularly defend gun rights. In Texas they defended the right of gun owners to keep guns in their cars without being prosecuted for unlawfully carrying guns. In Florida they defended the rights of a gun-owner who had his guns taken away from his home by the police. A similar thing in Rhode Island. Here's one in Nevada. ^{ONE / TALK} 15:39, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I suspect the ACLU are concerned about these laws more for how they will be policed, enforced, and prosecuted. That is they will be used disproportionately against blacks, similar to the selective prosecution for drug posession. Pi 3:14 (talk) 22:51, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, in the examples I give, the first and last are general lawsuits/statements, the second is on behalf of a Jewish guy, and the third is on behalf of a Hispanic guy. So I would say your suspicion is unlikely, though certainly possible given my small data set. ^{ONE / TALK} 17:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Addendum: apologies for the sources; some are clearly biased and I haven't checked them out. But since they're conservatively biased, I assume they're pretty reliable when describing the ACLU doing something they actually agree with, so I assume they check out. ^{ONE / TALK} 15:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Er, Nate, I understand that Chicago is a pretty violent place, but could you really back up your claim? Do you mean that there was one particularly "few week" period in which the number of gun murders there was more than a few years that of Western Europe and Canada combined? Do you mean that this regularly happens? HuffPo reports 228 homicides in Chicago from 1/1 to 6/16/2012. Supposing that double that occurred in the area you're speaking of, the average per week would be roughly 456 / 27 \approx 17. Is it really the case that Canada + Western Europe produces fewer than 60 gun murders per year? (Hint: Canada's recent very low figure for 2010 was 554 murders. I'll bet the bulk of them occurred with a gun.

No offense intended, but I sincerely doubt your claim. I'd be interested if you can back it up. Phiwum (talk) 16:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I was wrong about the several weeks remark. For some reason I thought I heard on the radio that Chicago had that astonishing number of murders. August was a record month but nowhere near what I said. There were 346 murders through the beginning of August this year and the estimate is that 75% were gun murders. So that's 242 and the year isn't up. Just back of the envelope calculations here: for Canada all I could find looking quickly was there were 598 homicides in 2011 and the estimate is that 30%, or 179, were gun murders. So I think over in Chicago they've got about as murders per year as in Canada and Western Europe. Sorry for the mistake there. I don't why I thought I heard that silly number. Nate Nate Keaton (talk) 18:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough. I'm stunned that only 30% of Canadian murders were gun murders. Well, so we're more efficient than Canadians. You surely can't fault us for that. Phiwum (talk) 19:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I wanna take a quick sidebar here and note that one of the reasons why Europe has low homicide rates (and numbers) is not just that we have stricter gun control laws, but also that we don't have street gangs and with that no gangbanging or territorial conflicts between those (although there are small pockets of Latin American gangs expanding to Spain). --K. (talk) 21:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I wanna tell you that you're talking total bullshit if you think there aren't gangs in Europe. FFS, what kind of peril-sensitive sunglasses are you wearing? rpeh •T•C•E• 22:05, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I laughed out loud Rpeh. Had those before Blueblockers back in the day. Nate Nate Keaton (talk) 03:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you know the difference between gang and street gang or should I explain that? --K. (talk) 10:59, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you should explain that. ^{ONE / TALK} 17:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

A gang is any kind of criminal organization, while a street gang is a gang in an urban setting. Street gangs are dominated by by younger criminals (in contrast to example mafia organisation or biker gangs). Apart from that the difference is largely in style, mafias and biker gangs try to stay under the radar of the police, they don't drive around other neighbourhoods and randomly shoot people they think might be from another gang.

Of course saying that there are no gangs in Europe is BS, that's the reason I didn't say that. --K. (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh I *see*. The problem is simply that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Now I realise that I can ignore you with a clear conscience. rpeh •T•C•E• 23:24, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I ought to clarify that a bit. You're basically saying we have no freeway crime in Europe because we don't have freeways. Excluding the Mafia from gang-related crime is fucking stupid and introducing "street" as a prefix changes nothing. rpeh •T•C•E• 23:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

If that explanation of you not knowing this makes you happy, go on. --K. (talk) 12:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

So Canadian murderers are ice-hockey-mask-wearing, knife-wielding maniacs? That country all of the sudden sounds way worse now that I know it's filled with Jason Voorhees's. Carlaugust (talk) 19:35, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, most of the non-gang related murders were carried out with poisoning in Canada.

Enjoy your Molsons buddy. --Revolverman (talk) 20:35, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Breaking news!

Kendoll got a follower on twitter! That's the whole thing. I'm not kidding. Conservapedia just redefined pathetic. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 10:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Great grief, that's bad. Oh, and BTW Ken, please learn the difference between "Your" and "You're". rpeh •T•C•E• 11:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

My belief that Kenny is the type who screams at the emmental in Wal Mart has just been torn down. It has got to be the stilton. --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 12:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Nah, Venezuelan beaver cheese. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:38, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

My schizophrenic cousin does this word-salad stuff when he doesn't take his medication. This usually happens a few days before someone has to go bail him out of county lockup. I know how my cousin's illness affects our family, sometimes being very suddenly disruptive, and that's with 22 cousins nearby giving as much support as we can. It doesn't look like "Conservative" has a very good support network to help him with whatever his problems are and he does have serious problems. It is simply astonishing to me that nobody as Conservapedia wishes to help him by at least by cutting him off from embarrassing himself and Conservapedia on the front page blog. Nate Nate Keaton (talk) 12:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Three thoughts:

1. I've never been sure Ken is truly mentally ill, or just weird.
2. Andy et al could just view Ken as zealous, not mentally ill.
3. Andy trying to get Ken to seek help would require Andy to admit he was seriously wrong about Ken, and we know that won't happen.

MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

There is evidence for 1. But you need to be a crazy-ass creepy stalker-fuck to find it. So it's not discussed or documented. ^{d hominem} 13:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Am I missing something? Ken posted something in the news section that is most definitely not news. Not the first time he's done that. Remember when he posted the "news" that he got a near perfect score on a vocabulary testing website? It's not as if he wrote something random like "Cluck cluck cluck jabber jabber jabber. My old man's a mushroom" on the main page. In short, it would be strange behaviour for most wiki users but it's nothing spectacularly unusual for Ken. --Spud (talk) 13:45, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

How about we ignore him until he does just that? Vulpius (talk) 17:39, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh god.... how the fuck is it that even now, Ken finds new ways to blow my mind as to how utterly pathetic he really is. If Andy lets this stay up on the main page he may as well get a sex change and formally rename himself as Mrs Demeyer. Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 17:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

On the subject of the administration's opinion on Conservative, check out the leaks. Before he was admitted into the group, the other administrators questioned Conservative's "Jekyll and Hyde complex."

The quote in question , for reference:

"Ken DeMyer is 45 and from Buffalo, New York. Remember troll and user KDBuffalo? Was KDBuffalo trolling against us before or after the Ratwikians claimed he was Ken DeMyer?

If the above is true, then we got someone with a clear Jekyll/Hyde personality. If it's not true, then we've got one hell of an elaborate ruse going on. Either way, I am of the opinion that Conservapedia should not have to suffer this. Any thoughts on this?"WilliamR (talk) 18:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Jesus wept. It's like Ed's live blogging of every vapid thought that strays through his mind. Coming next to the front page: a guy in the queue at Safeway tells Ken that he's not entirely sure about this whole evolution thing and that he needs to think it over. Concernedresident ^{omg!!! ponies!!!} 17:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

How can you expect Andy or the other sysops to decide that Ken is mentally ill when they're all bonkers as well?  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 18:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

A homicide detective and former atheist? Where does he come up with this crap?--"Shut up, Brx." 18:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that an alleged homicide detective is any less an authority on evolution than a random dentist or an electrical engineer? Concernedresident ^{omg!!! ponies!!!} 21:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

"Kendoll got a follower on twitter..." A whole one? You sure? Maybe it's a sock. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I know what you really mean, but I'm just picturing a literal sock. Probably argyle. It's still only following him for the schadenfreude, though. --_{sloqɯʎs puɐ suƃıs}uɐɪɹɐssoʎ 18:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I love Andy. He wears his heart on his sleeve.

Andy improves the Karl Rove article, now that Karl Rove is an unperson. Phiwum (talk) 02:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

By the way, it's official now. George Bush's two term administration was "ultimately unsuccessful" (see above diff). Phiwum (talk) 02:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

As I understand it, even Todd Akin has issued a half-arsed apology for what he said but Andy's still banging on about the RINOs who decided to gang up against a saintly defender of the unborn for no reason at all. Andy's determined to be the mad rabid right-winger who's too mad for other rabid right-wingers to go anywhere near, just in case he really has got rabies.--Spud (talk) 02:29, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

If he's throwing Bush and co. under the bus now, what the hell is he even supporting anymore? Will he get so far gone that it becomes Andy VS Ever other group, idea, human on earth? --Revolverman (talk) 03:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Did anyone notice if Aschlafly (or Hurlbut) went to the RNC? --PringleMan 03:50. 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm... Were the names of the guys throwing nuts at the black speaker ever released? --Revolverman (talk) 03:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so. Still, that doesn't seem like Andy's or Terry's M.O. Their racism is subtle, as in "anyone can join the country club, provided they meet the eligibility requirements...is it OUR fault no blacks meet these requirements?" --PringleMan 04:00. 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Credit to Andy, I don't believe he is racist at all. ( one for, many, many against) Terry.... well Terry is a much different story. --Revolverman (talk) 04:02, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, from what I have seen, Andy may have many flaws, but racism isn't one of them. As nutty as Ken is, he doesn't appear to be the least bit racist as well. JPatt makes up the slack though.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 05:28, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you see racism to be a black and white issue. Just because Andy is not overtly racist doesn't mean that he isn't a little bit racist. But then how many of us are truly unbiased when it comes to people who are different from ourselves; it's just a question of degree.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 08:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Spot on, Lily. London Grump (talk) 11:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I remember reading a quote from David Byrne where he admitted to feeling racist because he felt a certain way around certain people. He said that he felt like it was ultimately not something he could control, just something he would hopefully grow out of. Big daddy A just has some growin up to do is all. AdrianC (talk) 16:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Andy is insightful!

I know that this is a very old edit, but honestly what made Andy think that "foul play" had a damned thing to do with baseball? Has anyone ever heard a sports announcer say, "Gee, Bob, that was a foul play?" What the heck? Phiwum (talk) 02:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I guess he thought everyone thought that the word "foul" was invented to describe a foul ball? --Revolverman (talk) 03:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh this page is a gem. Such wonderous insights such as:

"worldwide - 1632: Did people really think in terms of the entire world nearly 400 years ago? Apparently so" -- Given the Magellan 's ships circumnavigated the globe in 1522, over a hundred years earlier, why wouldn't people think in such terms?

"fission - 1617: Looks like nuclear fission is not a new idea after all!" -- I love how he implies that people in the 17th century thought about atomic fission and not the general definition of simply splitting anything into two parts.

"dinosaur - 1841: surprisingly late date of origin, the term means "terrifying lizard," which raises the question of why its real name of lizard is not used today" - Because dinosaurs are not lizards; thanks for pointing out once again why you should never be taken seriously on the subjects of evolution and biology.

Fun stuff; I really hope they expand this.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 05:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

And for "landmark" we have "Land was much more important in culture and the economy before the Information Age." That's nothing more than taking part of the word and writing an Ed Poor pseudo factoid. He's an imbicile, in the original meaning of the word. Concernedresident ^{omg!!! ponies!!!} 08:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I think you mean that he's insightful. Who among us has noticed that land and labor is less valuable in an information economy? No one but Andy, man. No one but Andy. Phiwum (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Landmarks are definitely old news. None of this "see you at the pub by the courthouse". I'll see you the agreed coordinates. Concernedresident ^{omg!!! ponies!!!} 15:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Oi, fuckers!

Since Karajou is so fucking petrified of being called on his bullshit on this page, it'd be really nice if you all followed the note at the top of the page and manually screencapped the crap over there for those of us that can't see it. Using proxies is a ball ache, and doesn't help if Ken's religiously using the memory hole. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 02:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Aye Aye, your lordship23.16.216.193 (talk) 03:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Zug Zug! -GTac (talk) 15:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Did they re-up on server-side blocks? Occasionaluse (talk) 21:17, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware they have, because I can't get the site and apparently you all can. With CaptureBot off on one of her drunken benders, I can't get my dose of wingnut humour. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 23:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

mmhmmnRandonGeneration (talk) 23:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Redundant, but true.

I'm an avid fan of Conservapedia (for humor-related purposes), and I've read on here, and on the Wikipedia talk pages about the IP blackouts. I linked the Lenski Dialogue to my facebook last week, and since then I have not been able to view Conservapedia from my work computer. I know it's not breaking news or anything, but I'm still baffled. Ah well.. AdrianC (talk) 16:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Your work computer eh? I hope your IP can't be traced to a particular company, otherwise Karajou will phone up your boss (actually he's too coward to do that, he'll just email your boss) ^{ONE / TALK} 16:38, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I would say no one's that idiotic. Then I read the article on Atheism and Obesity.AdrianC (talk) 17:01, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Karajou has a track record of doing exactly that. I think - I may be confusing him with TK. ^{ONE / TALK} 17:19, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

This is only a half memory, but I think it was TK who actually got in contact with employers, and Karajou who talked about some kind of legal action (companies letting employees use computers to harass conservapedia or whatever the fuck he thinks is a crime in his crazy head). X Stickman (talk) 21:29, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeh, those legal action fantasies of Karajou which he expanded upon on their internal thing were hilarious! You got the impression he thought he would just surprise the court with an "OBJECTION! I actually have here evidence that this person used our wiki to edit information in a trolling fashion!" and the entire court would be shocked and sentence that person to 50 years in guantanamo bay, and Karajou would be hailed as the hero and savior of all. I for one would actually really want to see what would've actually happen.. -GTac (talk) 13:07, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Been meaning to insert this for sometime because it is revealing. When Ken first announced his Homosexuality and obesity article, he signed the email to the private sysop group, "Ken". So, unless he is a liar (which can get you desysoped and banned at CP), all the sysops know User:Conservative at CP is "Ken".

From:Conservative Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:03 AM
To: group
Dear Conservapedians,

I unexpectedly came across some information on homosexuality and obesity so I whipped together a pretty good article.

I am going to be doing other projects for a while, you might want to keep an eye on the article and add material to the article. I did not protect the article.

Here is the article:

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_obesity

I am not an experienced Navy man like Mr. MCDonald, but I believe I just scored another direct hit against liberalism.

You can see what I mean here:

[see below]

Sincerely,

Ken

Here's the link (deleted) which doesn't work with quotebox template. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 21:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Are you still here Knob? London Grump (talk) 06:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I see the president is officially a satanist atheist muslim now.

"I see no protestants!" sayeth the Arsefly. Does he have a vision defect that prevents him seeing black people? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Why is Catholic Andy so concerned about that anyway? Vulpius (talk) 19:00, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I think because his interests are so wrapped up with the largely evangelical wingnutosphere, and that doubtless he never actually goes to church anyway, he's got to thinking of himself as de facto protestant. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 19:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I hope someone there asks what Obama's religion or religious denomination is. I know he looked at the non-denominational Everfree Church but doesn't regularly attend any church. Of course that doesn't mean he isn't Christian; in fact given by the churches he had visited (Baptist, Episcopal), I would have to say he holds most to Protestant traditions. Still for Catholic Andy, this is odd (since he could support Catholic Ryan), but I suspect Andy is Catholic only because of family, and not that he really believes Catholic dogma and views; instead I suspect he is much more enamored with Calvinism.--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 21:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

If "conservatism is winning", it's a secular brand. Just another example of how comfortable Andy is holding views outside the mainstream and swimming against the tide of demographics. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 21:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I honestly have not understood any post you've made. Not once. Weird, huh? Phiwum (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, so you're stupid. BFD. nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 21:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

The price of fish. What's that got to do with? --Yossarian^{Speak, Memory} 22:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm stupid. That's probably it. Phiwum (talk) 23:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

^{That is interesting, but what does that have to do with the price of fish?} --Sasayaki (talk) 23:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

JPratt in fantasy land

A real, actual Tory writes a column in the Torygraph, and that's apparently "leftwingers". What planet are these morons from, and when are they going back there? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 23:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Anyone not American is Leftwing/Liberal in Jpatt world. --Revolverman (talk) 00:03, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

So Jpatt understands British politics about as much as Brits and imperial colonialist morons here understand about American politics. Does that make it WIGO worthy? nobs^{Corporations are people, too} 00:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Cool Story, Bro --Revolverman (talk) 00:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Fuck off Rob, you don't even understand what's going on in your immediate vicinity. Just fuck off already. Stop trolling us and fuck off. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 00:17, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually i believe "Trolling" is classed as successfully managing to cause serious annoyance, offence, or confusion, of to start a flamewar between different users. Nob has done none of these, and the only reaction users have to him is a bored "fuck off, your not wanted". He is far, far below trolls in the overall hierarchy of abject patheticness (and yes I know thats not a a word). Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 10:09, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

^{That is interesting, but what does that have to do with the price of fish?} --Sasayaki (talk) 02:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

It's the most wonderful time of the year

Yes, it's September. Which means it can't be long before the undeniable, objectively beautiful fall foliage appears outside Andy's window and, hopefully, all over Conservapedia once again. Hooray!-- Kriss Akabusi^{AAAWOOOGAAAR!!1} 10:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

And in a couple of months, if we're good little boys and girls, we'll get the dissonant tut-tut about how Halloween is secularized language.--"Shut up, Brx." 12:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

CP Admins Don't Read the Linked Articles - Part Some Really Huge Number

Kara: "Will CBS believe the fake email about Gingrich forcing his wife to get an abortion?^img"

Headline from article Kara links from CBSNews: Phony e-mails say Gingrich forced abortion on ex-wife (emphasis mine).

We know they don't read the articles, but do they even read the headlines for the articles they link before spouting off?--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 00:55, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I saw that that a bit ago. I assumed I must just not be reading it right because how could he claim that they might believe the fake E-mails, when they themselves reported it was fake. --Revolverman (talk) 00:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Wow. It's not only the headline: they quote a press release calling the email a fake and also have "fake press release", "fake release" and "false email" in the first three paragraphs. Plus the whole thing is dated Jan 20 and Karajerk didn't realise. rpeh •T•C•E• 04:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

It's also Kara actual post that's just plain stupid: "CBS reports that a fake email is circulating [...] will CBS believe this email?" That's what happens when you start writing a post and come up with propaganda piece after typing the actual news. --K. (talk) 12:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Even by CP standards, this shows cognitive dissonance at an insane level, well beyond the usual "why isn't the liberal mainstream media covering <this story from a mainstream media news source>?" MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Kendoll. Many differences.

Kendoll helpfully lists three of the many differences his pathetic existence and the Vietnam war. Who wants to help add to the list? I'll go first.

• Charlie don't surf. Kendoll spends all day surfing the internet.
• Many Americans were "too beaucoup" for Saigon's many prostitutes. This is not a problem for Kendoll.
• The Viet Cong had a policy of "talking and fighting", Kendoll only does the talking.
• The Vietnamese were led to victory by Uncle Ho. Kendoll was led to a blacked out panel van by Uncle Ed.

Add more! --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 04:14, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Kenny boy sure loves using violent imagery. I wonder if there's any connection between that and an interest in video games. Shouldn't Andy being investigating that? We don't want another "young' mass murderer on our hands, do we?--Spud (talk) 04:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Ken's safe enough. He'd never actually go on a murder spree - he'd only ever blog about how a prominent creationist from Buffalo was about to start killing people at some unspecified date in the future. rpeh •T•C•E• 05:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Why is that picture a sample of something from A Song of Ice and Fire? --Yossarian^{Speak, Memory} 06:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Because George R. R. Martin outsells the Bible on e-readers? The worst thing about that image is, of course, the lack of spoiler warning on it. It's an excerpt from A Dance with Dragons, book five for those who are reading the series, and about five years in the future for those morons who can't read and are only watching the TV show. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 3:18 pm, Today (UTC−5)

It's from Wiki Commons Worm (talk) 13:57, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I was going to post a comment asking him if he thought creationists need to take "Broken Arrow-like measures" because they feel in danger of being over-run by a numerically superior and better organised force, but the pointless coward seems to have blocked me from commenting on his blog after the last time I tore him a new hoop.--Fergus Mason ^{Thruppence I got for selling my coat, tuppence for selling my blanket. If ever I 'list for a soldier again, the Devil shall be my Sergeant.} 07:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I just love his belief that translating an entire book (assumedly into Mandarin) is "far easier" than writing one. Having spent the last 4 years of my life doing little else besides precisely this, I beg to differ. I challenge Ken to prove me wrong by taking his beloved "15 questions" and translating it - properly - into Mandarin. Oh, and one last thing: Marcel Proust -- 08:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

It's like you've never heard of Google translate. Geez. Phiwum (talk) 13:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Proust, in his first book wrote about... fa la la... Proust in his first book wrote about... He wrote about... Proust in his first book wrote about the... (gong sounds) rpeh •T•C•E• 13:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

And Marcel Proust was baptized a Catholic! So, if you're calling the author of A La Recherche du Temps Perdu an evolutionist, I shall have to ask you to step outside! MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 13:53, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I get MDB's reference, but not Rpeh's. Phiwum (talk) 13:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Text. Video. You're welcome. rpeh •T•C•E• 14:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Isn't that from MP's very first episode (or am I thinking of the Upper Class Twit competition)? -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

It's from series three, episode five. The UCT competition is in series one, ep 12. rpeh •T•C•E• 08:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

An actual "Summarize Proust" competition, though sadly without evening wear or swimsuits. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 14:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

A churlish, little-minded man would say, "Oh yes, I remember that skit, but you didn't do it right." A more honest man would say, "Wow, I plumb forgot about that skit." Now, you guess which one I'll go for. Phiwum (talk) 14:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Any athlete who disses Tebow is overrated

Andy is so darnedcute. Phiwum (talk) 14:51, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Note that he doesn't even bother to spell the Esiason's name correctly, even though it's in the article to which he links.

I will grant that Tebow's response was classy. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 14:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I actually lol'd at "openly Christian".... --Andy^{not Schlafly} 17:14, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Haha, oh Andy. I can just imagine Tebow, back when he was in the closet, bringing a Bible home for Thanksgiving, and telling his parents that it is his "roommate". Carlaugust (talk) 18:37, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I guess that makes ESPN's Skip Bayless the greatest sports reporter who ever existed, because he is the biggest Tebow apologist. And knows jack shit about sports. Aboriginal Noise ^{What the ...} 19:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Abd

Is anyone interested in helping me counter Abd's various claims on cold fusion?64.180.243.158 (talk) 00:20, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

You mean on CP? If so, why? Doctor Dark (talk) 02:00, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm...

After perusing some archives about CP "in the news", and hearing reactions from Republicans, I have been led to make the following assertion: Conservapedia is the new NAMBLA. Now I don't mean that Conservapedians want man-boy love, I simply mean that if they tried to publicly donate funds to presidential campaign, they'd probably get the envelope returned unopened. No public figure wants anything to do with them, they operate in secret behind closed doors, and they pretty much all around are dispicable. LGBT groups shun NAMBLA as a fringe homosexual group that is not on the same page. NAMBLA's goal was to rewrite the "gay agenda" to have people fighting for abolishing age of consent laws...who else do we know of that wants to rewrite a book of laws...hmmmmmmm

AdrianC (talk) 14:21, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I sincerely doubt that many public figures are aware enough of CP to refuse its contributions. Phiwum (talk) 14:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

That's valid. For the sake of this train of thought, Andy has taken it up a notch.AdrianC (talk) 14:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

That was my thought. Politicians who receive donations from Conservapedia wouldn't recoil in horror at the potential association but instead simply go "who"? Other than Cracked, Encyclopedia Dramatica, Wikipedia (cuz' they cover everything), PZ Myers, and us, who has any idea who Conservapedia is? Maybe Joseph "Obama is a homosexual Kenyan" Farah when he thinks about groups on the Right too crazy even for him ("At least I don't try to rewrite the Bible!"); but other than that? Certainly no one who has actually achieved office at the state or federal level. --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 17:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

It seems you know an awful many things about homosexuality BMcP. Maybe a listing from the Southern Poverty Law would be the better route. operate in secret^{— Unsigned, by: some BoN / talk / contribs}

Oh noes! I am associated with teh gheys now, what shall I do???!!!11111 --BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 18:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Rev. Moon is Dead

Anyone wanna take bets on how Uncle Ed reacts? --_transResident Transfan^form! 20:10, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Best part, someone already put it on Main Page Talk. Which one of you bastards was it? RachelW (talk) 21:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I think that this may qualify as grave-dancing. Actually, I'm more interested in what happens to the position of "messiah" within his church--"Shut up, Brx." 00:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

His son has been running everything for years. I'm sure it all passes to him, ala North Korea. --Revolverman (talk) 00:24, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh, oh. Am I too late to write his epitaph? I'm going with '"God is dead" - Nietzsche'. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 01:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

It's true this grave-dancing is despicable. Nothing short of pissing on this motherfucker's grave is appropriate.--Brendiggg (talk) 01:24, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I've got to say, for a man whose god just snuffed it, Ed's taking it awfully calmly. It's almost like being Korean Jesus doesn't mean a damn thing. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 04:05, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Nah, he took the literal translation of messiah, anointed one, and just sees that as "extra-special-not-quite-prophet-preacher-which-deserves-all-our-money"--"Shut up, Brx." 04:13, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Uncle Ed will know how to react appropriately since, in his own words: "I have been a member the Unification Church my entire adult life and am the Internet's leading authority on it. (My emphasis) I have access to the same public information as everyone else, of course, as well as inside information."[2] I guess we just have to wait for him to reveal to us the "inside information". Mick McT (talk) 11:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Someone add that to the Modest Ed section of his article, please. Vulpius (talk) 22:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I was a moonie cult leader - The Gruniad. CS Miller (talk) 20:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Close encounters

So, I was over at the Shock of Goat chat room today when I was startled by an approach from an individual calling him/her/themselves John316. "John", having pegged me as an atheist in need of salvation, asked me if I was familiar with a particular website. It dawned on me soon after that I might well be communicating with the great man himself! As if to confirm my suspicions he melted away as soon as I asked him if he was in fact Ken.

I feel like I've just seen the rare Night Parrot or a Tasmanian Tiger. --Horace (talk) 01:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

THAT is where these debates atheists keep ducking out on are supposed to happen? I'm laughing out loud! Shockofgod is surrounded by morons. Nate Keaton (talk) 03:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Unimaginative handle, pimping his own drivel, epic cowardice? Yep, that's our Kendoll. He really needs to go back to international man of mystery school. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 04:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

"I know you're sweating in Australia... I can see you... I can see your sweaty body oh god i'm gonna-- UGHN *logs off*" ^{ONE / TALK} 08:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Er, no. Ken, the self-proclaimed, college English-writing tutor said "I know your sweating". Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 12:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Glad I am not the only one creeped out by the "sweating in Australia" comment.

As for Shock, as mentioned by Kenny, the former is demanding a debate with Penn Jillette within 30 days or Penn will be deemed as a chicken. I love it when nobodies on the Internet feel that significant people with actual busy lives should give them the time of day; how self-important can you get?--BMcP - Just an astronomy guy 12:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe Penn will get tired of fame and fortune and find his new calling debating nobodies. Occasionaluse (talk) 13:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I never got a reply from the Archbishop of Canterbury when I challenged him to a debate on the divinity of Christ. I guess I shall have to declare the divinity of Christ refuted, and the Catholic Church nothing but a coop of chickens. DickTurpis (talk) 13:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC

Well, you could, but the Archbishop of Canterbury hasn't had much to do with the Catholic Church for a few years. Something to do with a silly spat about moving out and not being appreciative of where he had been raised. I'm not really sure of the details, but it's something like that.-- ^{Jabba de Chops} 15:22, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Ya, the Archbishop of Canterbury is a big deal in the Church of England, and as a result in the wider Anglican Church. The Anglican Church is a catholic church (it claims to be a successor to the original Christian church and that's the relevant meaning of "catholic" in this context), but when people say "the Catholic Church" they usually mean the Roman Catholic Church which doesn't much care what the Archbishop of Canterbury thinks about stuff. 82.69.171.94 (talk) 17:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Mea culpa. Teach me to post on RW before I'm fully awake. Yes, I meant the Anglican Church. Either way, BMOC in major religion who obviously should be taking the time to debate random internet people if they don't want to be chickens hiding in a rabbit hole or some other mixed metaphor. I did actually send him an email though, and got a "we've received your email and will give it all due attention" form letter response form his office. But yes, no debate, therefore coward, and divinity of Christ disproved. Yay. I win. DickTurpis (talk) 23:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I think Penn Jillette should take time off from doing 15 shows a month at the Rio, a TV show, a daily radio show and podcasts, and his other businesses to debate a rude nobody with no qualifications who has a record of shouting people down and turning their mics off. This is exactly how atheists will prove they are not chickens. It is exactly how Christianity Will Once Again Be Triumphant On The Internet. Ole Ole Ole. Wow. Nate Keaton (talk) 13:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm looking at this chat room right now. I don't understand the point of this. Nate Keaton (talk) 14:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

John316 is Ken, he immediately recognized my SN from CP...Umichcynic (talk) 05:43, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

"I love the smell of Napalm in the morning."

"Christianity is spreading in Vietnam." How? Napalm, mother fucker. If there's one way to endear yourself to the Vietnamese, it HAS to be Napalm imagery. I'm sure they love it. Idiot. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 23:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure that next we'll be hearing about how the atomic bomb of Christianity will irradiate Japanese atheists--"Shut up, Brx." 23:53, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

The Christian Gojira crushing the infrastructure of atheist Tokyo! -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 00:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Dear Ken, maybe you could talk about throwing Polish evolutionary beliefs into a concentration camp. Or genociding Rwandan atheist dogma. Really, I know you are ill buddy, but c'mon. Either get some help, or think through your ideas. Carlaugust (talk) 01:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

This is an interesting game.

• Starving the malnourished atheism of Ukraine
• Christians raping atheistic Nanking
• Mark David Chapman shoots the atheism out of John Lennon

--"Shut up, Brx." 01:25, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

You forgot Cordoba. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 01:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Brx has lynched the fun out of this thread. Aceⁱ⁹ 01:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Next Tuesday, Christianity will fly airplanes into the towers of atheism. You're right Ace. This isn't fun anymore. But we can still all agree that Ken is an asshole. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 01:57, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

AMERICAN ATHEISM COMES CRASHING DOWN LIKE THE WORLD TRADE CENTER AFTER IT WAS HIT BY THE QUESTION EVOLUTION AIRPLANES! 9/11 9/11 OLE! --GTac (talk) 10:00, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I know the last two comments are supposed to be jokes but didn't Ken do exactly that??? ^{ONE / TALK} 10:58, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

That's the joke -GTac (talk) 11:56, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

We've done these parodies before. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 12:03, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

The US at the Paralympics

Should someone ask Andy why the US is currently sixth in the medal tally at the Paralympics? I mean, why the huge difference as between Olympics and Paralympics? In the latter the US is even below "increasingly atheistic" Australia. Are all the US Paralympic athletes gay or something? I'm sure Andy has a genuinely amusing answer. --Horace (talk) 02:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

That's easy, if god liked Paralympions then they wouldn't be disabled. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Well obviously, but I'm not sure that explains why the US, in particular, has not managed to produce a result anywhere near its Olympic result. After all, surely America is God's favourite country (even if he doesn't much like its paralympians). --Horace (talk) 02:23, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

None of them are Tim Tebow so....Aceⁱ⁹ 02:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure he would just say it has something to do with Title IX or whatever. The US rewards achievement, not equality. You know, something very Christian of him. Hiphopopotamus (talk) 02:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

The USA being a christian nation under God obviously has NO TRUE paraplegics and therefore cannot do well at the games. Hamster (talk) 20:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Now that is the sort of insightful thinking I was looking for. --Horace (talk) 02:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

deja-vu all over again: idou and no end

Idou again^img:I hope that AugustO realizes that when Andy says: You make some good points, what he really means is: I'll ignore your points without arguing against them... larron (talk) 13:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

RW and CP in August 2012

• I updated RationalWiki:Active users, Conservapedia:Active users and Active users at Citizendium.

editors at CP

editors at RW

edits at CP (by namespace)

edits at RW (by namespace)

Some Observations:

• The numbers of editors at both wikis are comparable: 396 at RationalWiki, 322 at Conservapedia
• However, there are 2.5 as many edits here as over there
• the number of edits in the main namespace is less than 3,000 at Conservapedia, but nearly 4,500 at RationalWiki - though there is much more vandalism and reverting going on at CP.
• This August is the August with the fewest edits in the history of Conservapedia, but still - according to Andy Schlafly - the August with the greatest number of unique visitors.

larron (talk) 17:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't even know what "unique visitors" is supposed to mean, or what it means to Andy. --جئت ورأيت أنا القرف ^{gross, isn't it?} 18:01, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Redditors who go over to the page and laugh. The 15 Questions article got some major play in August, as did the Counterarguments to Evolution one because a wandal put up the reason, "r/atheism will be mad at you if you don't believe in evolution." -- Seth Peck (talk) 18:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Urgh, Proxie made 5% of RW edits last month? That's scary. ħuman 23:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

"Sandra Fluke sees freedom as having others pay for the condoms her dozens of weekly lovers use to please her."

This Bresciani is certifiable--"Shut up, Brx." 18:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Its times like these that I suspect all the other "contributors" on Lobanus's site are really just his schizophrenia manifesting in multiple personalities, all of which are even more hatefully stupid than the last Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 18:43, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

What a prick. What do you think the odds are the Michael was taking a trip to Palmsdale when he wrote that. But really...that man is a priest??? Do you think he sat their and thought "What would Jesus do?...yup, he'd call her a filthy sl*t" Carlaugust (talk) 20:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd be curious to be involved in know more about her sex life, even though it's nobody's business but hers...I don't understand why the pundits are so curious and so against having to "pay for her sex life"...after all, they probably have to pay for their own (zing!). My guess? Fluke probably has several dozen fewer encounters per week than the conservative cuckolds would like to suggest, and with as busy as she is, it's more likely to be zero. [Insert text here about how the idiots are against birth control medication that are used for treating severe acne, depression, PPMD, ovarian cysts, etc.] -- Seth Peck (talk) 20:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah man, that's fucked up. Aceⁱ⁹ 21:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I think even Terry knows that that sentence really crosses the line, given the way he tries to paint it as the author's inference. Can someone grab a full page capture of that before it disappears down the memory hole? My screen cap plug-in seems to have died like CaptureBot. Make sure the comments are included if you can. Do we have a US lawyer in the community? I'd be interested in asking a few questions about this. -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 22:36, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't have screen-cap but snipped the relevent section. Aceⁱ⁹

Nutty Roux is a US lawyer. 03:49, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

And Fergus Mason is a Brit. As I've read the article and been suitably scandalised by the allegations about Ms Fluke's industrial-scale fornication, does that mean she can make use of the UK's famously demented libel laws to reduce Bresciani to penury?-Fergus Mason ^{Thruppence I got for selling my coat, tuppence for selling my blanket. If ever I 'list for a soldier again, the Devil shall be my Sergeant.} 03:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

"Statements falsely suggesting that a person is sexually promiscuous or sexually licentious are generally actionable as defamation.[11] Restatement (Second) of Torts § 569, comment f ("It is actionable per se to accuse in libelous form either a man or woman of any sexual misconduct ..."); King v. Northeastern Publishing Co., 294 Mass. 369, 370-371, 2 N.E.2d 486 (1936) (upholding verdict for plaintiff because the challenged publication could be reasonably understood as charging her with unchastity or fornication)" Stanton v. Metro Corp., 357 F. Supp. 2d 369 (D. Mass. 2005). 04:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Nutty. A couple of questions if I may. Who holds liability if it's deemed defamation? This idiot vicar? Terry? Both? Which courts would it go to, state or federal? This might be obvious to Yanks, but I'm clueless apart from the excellent education I've had watching imported courtroom dramas. Is there a statute of limitations for beginning action? -- Iscariot ^{Andy Schlafly for Congress 2012!} 10:13, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh sorry somehow the other questions didn't register. The speaker is liable. I don't know whether someone publishing and then ratifying would be liable. State courts are courts of "general jurisdiction," meaning they'll hear most any controversy subject to the limits set by statute or the state constitution. Federal courts are courts of "limited jurisdiction," meaning they'll only hear cases of a few types. The relevant one would be "diversity of citizenship," in which parties are from different states and the amount in controversy is greater than $75,000. Got me on whether the amount in controversy requirement would be met in a case like this. So who knows whether this could be in state or federal court. I'd be happy to lecture on subject matter jurisdiction but somehow that seems like too much to peck into this silver fucker when I'm this drunk and nobody really asked. 04:24, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

All that said, Terry Hurlbut says some absolutely horrible things about public and private figures. I'd very much appreciate someone taking him to school for that. That Fluke statement is only marginally less creepy than the horrible lies he tells about President Obama. That "kingly power" article completely misrepresenting a statute reorganizing advise and consent, with the balance being toward preserving it, was appalling. When a commenter called him out he refused to edit or withdraw the article. That's dishonest. 04:28, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

• In case anyone's interested, this isn't a huge mystery under New Jersey law. I admittedly didn't spend a lot of time on this research, but it's reasonably on point.
• In the New Jersey case of Too Much Media, LLC v. Hale, 413 N.J.Super. 135, 993 A.2d 845 (N.J. Super., 2010), a blogger was alleged to have made a number of defamatory statements imputing criminal and fraudulent conduct on individual plaintiffs.
• There are two separate discussions in the case. The first is largely irrelevant, though sort of interesting in this context since Terry continues asserting that he is a "journalist." The question was whether a blogger is a journalist and can therefore avail herself of New Jersey's state Shield Law to prevent disclosure of her alleged sources. The court noted a number of tests employed around the country and concluded that the defendant was not a "newsperson" for purposes of invoking the Shield Law. Whoever the person is who wrote that vile essay on Terry's site may or may not be a journalist. I don't know how a New Jersey court would hold.
• The more relevant question was whether imputing criminal and fraudulent conduct on someone in writing, rather than orally, is defamation per se, for which there is no requirement of showing actual pecuniary loss to be able to proceed with suit, or whether the plaintiff must show some actual harm. NJ law considers orally imputing "serious sexual misconduct," as of a kind with the misconduct alleged in Too Much Media under the Restatement (Second) of Torts. The court noted that only certain specifically listed slanderous statements are susceptible of being considered defamation per se. A plaintiff alleging libel statements of exactly the same nature must show some actual harm. Even if she can't show pecuniary loss, she may nevertheless show some other actual harm, such as "impairment of reputation and standing in the community, personal humiliation, and mental anguish and suffering." Id. at 168. Showing damage to reputation in the context of Too Much Media might take the form of third party testimony showing an existing relationship had been seriously disrupted.
• Note that Massachusetts law considers written defamatory statements accusing someone of serious sexual misconduct as defamation per se for which damages would be presumed. Differences among state law like this are obviously potentially a big deal.
• It's also important to note that if the plaintiff is a public figure, he must prove that the defendant was motived by "actual malice" and knew the statement was false or recklessly disregarded its falsity. See, Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 350, 94 S.Ct. 2997, 3012 (1974). Sandra Fluke is probably a "public figure" subject to Gertz because she "thrust [herself] into the vortex" of an existing public controversy.
• In any event, stating "Sandra Fluke sees freedom as having others pay for the condoms her dozens of weekly lovers use to please her" may be an "opinion" subject to some other privilege. I've only dealt with commercial defamation cases in which nobody asserted that a statement was an opinion so I'm not up on that law.
• @Iscariot: I have no idea what the New Jersey statute of limitations for personal actions like this or whether New Jersey law would even apply. It's a choice of law problem I have no interest in spending any time researching.
• 16:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Terry A. Hurlbut: For your information, I practice abstinence. I have had no relations of that kind with any woman since my wife died. No kidding, Chucky? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 22:45, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Terry. Glad to hear it. Aceⁱ⁹ 22:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Notice he only denied having sexual relations with woman..... Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 22:55, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Gap analysis wins again! -- Seth Peck (talk) 23:13, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

...And Bresciani sees freedom as a threat to his control over his congregation. TheLateGatsby (talk) 23:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

"I have had no relations of that kind with any woman since my wife died." So, when he says, "I have had no relations", he means no woman will let him go P in V, obviously. But, when he says, "no relations of that kind", that's legalese for "I have, unsuccessfully, attempted to jerk off to Japanese-scat-porn", right? Two additional questions; 1) Isn't masturbation a sin? 2)Are PED drugs a socialist conspiracy allowing for dozens of lovers per week? Hiphopopotamus (talk) 07:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I like the fact that Lobarse has no problem claiming Ms Fluke has dozens of lovers but was so upset that someone called him inconsistent he called on god to damn them. I guess he really is inconsistent. rpeh •T•C•E• 11:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

"Inconsistent" is probably the worse thing you can call a conservative, worse even than homosexual. They pride themselves on sticking to their guns more than anything--"Shut up, Brx." 12:11, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Right! And you know what right-thinking people hate most of all? Generalizations without any evidence! Phiwum (talk) 14:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I wish conservatives were consistent; then they'd be arguing for all the weirdo laws in the Old Testament. "Corn subsidies encourage the harvesting of the corners of one's field, which is a sin! I refuse to pay taxes for it! Why are these farmers using my tax dollars to stick crops into their orifices??" Carlaugust (talk) 13:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Whenever something like this happens it always leaves a bad taste of, 'I am angry that she is having sex! I should be having sex!' in my mouth. It's a very specific flavor of slut-shaming that always makes me uncomfortable about the people angry at the girl.±KnightOfTL;DR^{going galt: the literal crazy train} 14:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

sex in your mouth, eh? Line forms to the left, folks...--Martin Arrowsmith (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Slingcolon flavour humour, Kara officially declaring war on facts and the racist, babykilling DNC

Does anyone else suspect andy and his joyboys are getting a wee bit panicky over the DNC being less facepalmworthy than the Republican one? (forgetting of course the fact they are all supposedly RINOs now)

First of all we have Kara, who is now deciding that facts are liberal, and also condemns the democrats for being racist, and for refering to Jesus and Jerusalem at one point (despite Terry whining about them not having it in their platform barely 2 days beforehand) before pontificating how this will be the deciding factor in the election

Similarly andy lets forth his rage over the DNC allowing planned parenthood to speak there

And finally we have this wonderful example of christian wit as Peltshitter fumes over a single throwaway bit of snark from obama, and links to his boytoy's rant over how family unfriendly the DNC was and how offensive and insulting democrats are being (in an article which happily tries to slutshame Sandra fluke for her evil whorishness among other things)

I wonder what has rattled their cages? Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 18:43, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

If I had to guess, I would say they realize that Romney has a very real chance of getting completely blown out in this election and they are worried that they will be subjected to four more years of Obama's style of hard-left-wing communism (by which, of course, I mean moderate-to-right-leaning free market capitalism). Carlaugust (talk) 20:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

It's not quite so simple. The link in question specifically questions the fact-checking of political beliefs, as opposed to assertions (as in, the free market is good vs. free market policies have improved life for everybody in the past 20 years). One is a little more difficult to assess as a fact, while the other is more straightforward. --"Shut up, Brx." 20:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

On the other hand, 538 has moved 14 EV's to Obama's side since Mitt's speech, 4 just overnight. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

you forget that God personally steered that cyclone around Florida and aimed it at the sinful city of New Orleans. God must be a republican and favors Mitt Romney, a follower of the angel ? and the Gold tablets of mormonism. Hamster (talk) 20:47, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

What?--"Shut up, Brx." 20:56, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

"Slingcolon?" Really? We're moving up the digestive tract now? 66.45.252.90 (talk) 19:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I do not like any of the "euphemisms" for Dr Hurlbut with the exception of Lobarse, (which I found slightly amusing), since it speaks ill of those engaging in such juvenile name-calling. Matzosphere (talk) 14:50, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Classic Andy

And oldie but a goodie, all of Andy's best arguments....despite for some reason being badly formatted for some reason. Aceⁱ⁹ 02:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Conservative ungrammatics

Can a representative of the "Society for Eliminating Greengrocer's Apostorphe's'" please deal with [3] and finish off the sentence after Alexa; and rearrange the misdirection on Conspiracy theories. 212.85.6.26 (talk) 14:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure who this is directed towards. Good-faith users on CP -poor bastards- don't read this page, right? Anyone who corrects this error now will get banned. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Apostorphe's? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 16:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Tangentially related, considering Kendoll's new obsession with Quora, any bets that there'll be a certain number of "I'm an atheist, but I can't answer these 15 question for evolutionists! What denomination of Christian should I become?" type questions posted there? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 18:26, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

The "hilarious" troll has made more errors than Ken did. Pathetic. Sphincter (talk) 20:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm assuming the use of the Greengrocer's apostrophe in the name of the society for eliminating it is intentional snark, a joke some i guess didn't get. DickTurpis (talk) 01:20, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Something to do with the tradition of British greengrocers adding the unnecessary apostrophe before the 's' in plurals on their chalk price boards, such as "Apple's - £1/lb". Ajkgordon (talk) 12:53, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

It's a worldwide phenomenon. And not limited to transitory signs. Just up the road is a place that sells "Used Harley's". That said, the example in question is not a GGA. It's confusion over how "its" works. ħuman 00:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

And don't forget the clothing company, Lands' End. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 04:12, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Irony alert: Kendoll sez talk is cheap.

o rly, Kendoll? Considering your question evolution group (Or, you and your imaginary international friends as it is otherwise known) is currently about 0 for 10 or 20 when it comes to actually doing things you've announced you're going to do, I wouldn't be bandying that bit of hackneyed wisdom around quite so freely. Perhaps you ought to release that 100 page booklet you've been wittering on about for months. We could use a good laugh. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 03:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe I should help him on some of his pages? (I have a lovely word salad generator sitting on my hard drive somewhere..)64.180.242.74 (talk) 03:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Ken, you tosser. Just because something is stale and boring doesn't mean it's not true.Spud (talk) 03:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

The hipster teaching one of my new computer classes uses this for word salad. I imagine it's more interesting than whatever these QE pamphlets are supposed to be but nobody's seen one yet so who knows? Nate Keaton (talk) 13:26, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Most amusing. Brenden GregG pasted the link to Talk:Origins, and of course Conservative, who kept asking for evidence and to answer the retarded 15 questions, probably didn't even read the link and called it stale and boring evobabble. So to cement this, he makes a blog post about it, and then plasters it on the main page. Dance for us, Ken, for the puppet strings command it. Norseman^{Cyser Melomel} 15:12, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

"Talk is cheap. Now pay $20,000 to debate me." DickTurpis (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2012 (UTC)