Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive72

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 4 January 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>, <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>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, (new)(back)

Karajou Returns[edit]

Wives weep, goats tremble, men defecate... trouble is a'brewin'. NorsemanWassail! 00:37, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

While I'm sure many others like myself are disappointed in his return (we had a small ray of hope in the gloom of CP for a bit there), is anyone really surprised?--BoredCPer 00:57, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
3 blocks straight off the bat. \approx\pi 01:01, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
4 now. I'm sure he gets as "excited" doing that as Ed does by being a complete jerk. Still, folks get their jollies in all sorts of ways. I'd be happier if they paid for theirs by the hour tho... --PsyGremlinWhut? 01:16, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Yup, Karajou has thrown this type of shit-fit before. "I'm leaving and never coming back! For reals, you guys." Get buggered, Karajou. Stile4aly 01:18, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Naturally, the first thing to do when you un-retire from a wiki is to seek out the guy who "supported" your retirement and dish out a petulant revenge block.--Bayes 01:59, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Karajou didn't get the coward-bully-jerk reputation for nothing (Why isn't that on his resume? BTW: how is his studying up to be a security guard at walmart coming?). Of course he came slinking back. Of course he is going to do something shitty to celebrate his return. That's how he is made. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 08:29, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
He returns, and with a message... PJR, you have been WARNED: I won't take more crap from you. JJ4evote 09:26, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Where is that? I see nothing like that in his 9/4 contribs... ħumanUser talk:Human 14:29, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
I think it refers to the last post on his talk page before he actually visited the parole board er, went fishing er, retired. ("You heard me. if you don't like it, then leave Conservapedia") Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 14:43, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
And of course he threatens Kettleticket, telling him he'll have his powers stripped and him banned. Does Karajou really think he has that much sway with Andy? DickTurpis 12:56, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Maybe. We'll see. I'm not trying to provoke him, just like I don't try to provoke anyone elseexcept Ed... I don't like Ed. I will bring up the same case with Andy if he does strip me down and tie me to the banhammer. Keklik 12:59, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Kettles, there's no need for you to take it up with Andy. You have block powers -- and so does Phillip -- so, despite his bluster and projected spittle, there is nothing Kowardjou can do to either of you. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!</font>Make me a bureaucrat! 13:03, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
For some odd reason I thought he was a bureaucrat. Keklik 13:13, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
If he was, he would have demoted PJR and permabanned him during his tantrum. I don't think even Andy would trust him with user rights powers. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!</font>Make me a bureaucrat! 13:15, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Just keep poking him with a sharp stick I want to see what he will try and do :) --BoredCPer 13:27, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Andy doesn't trust anyone else but CPWebmaster and SharonS with bureaucrat rights. Not trusting the Praetorian Guard is a sure sign of paranoia. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 14:04, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
P.S. Does Karajou know who NathanG is or does he think he's just another privileged editor like Jinx hi Jinx! or Bungler?

Dammit, dammit, dammit! Why did Karajou have to come back and derail Conservapedia's grim death march towards sanity? Couldn't he just stick to bullying his comrades in arms at the veterans of unpopular wars club? --JeevesMkII 17:45, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

I added more to the WIGO entry regarding Karajous and NathanG. I'm guessing it was the "support" block for 6 months that set Karajou off? Either way, he pissed into the wind, got non-bureaucratically owned and then pissed on himself. Good jawb, Nate! NorsemanWassail! 20:03, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Jinx and spelling[edit]

Jinx hi Jinx! wants us to pay attention to him again so we shall as I am bored and wish to make fun of his stupidity. He has added 3 word to the list of misspelt words, including remembrance which he misspelt differently. The bit that is funny though is that the list is alphabetic and he has just shoved them in at the top. No wonder he can't spell he doesn't know what the alphabet looks like. \approx\pi 01:34, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

To be fair it does say "No need to alphabitize alphabetize them". ħumanUser talk:Human 02:08, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
EC) If Jizz had bothered to insert his entrees in alphabetical order he would have noticed that mispelled⇒misspelled is all ready there. What a stupid jurk ect. he is. However, the insturctions do say there is no need to alphabitize them, making it that much harder to find any particular word - only at CP! Jollyfish.gifГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 02:15, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
There is no reason I posted this other than to try and make him come around and throw one of his usual tantrums he has when he can't outsmart us. \approx\pi 02:18, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Well the idiothi Jinx! has still inserted a duplicate entry. How long before he reads this and CHA with an attack on irrational ones and mouth-breathers. Jollyfish.gifГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 02:25, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
(though detailed ones, and good spellers, mouth breathers all).--Waiting for Godot 11:32, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
  • gasp* *gasp* --Kels 17:47, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

New Values articles[edit]

In case Liberal values, Hollywood values and San Francisco values (not a CP original but they claim it anyway) we now have Fashion industry values. Mock as you will. \approx\pi 02:06, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Where is the chart of these? \approx\pi 02:08, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
User:Sid/CP_Article_Matrix. --Marty 03:06, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Ah yes, that reminds me... moved to Conservapedia:Article matrix to be officially editable by all. --Sid 07:10, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
That chart is genius. And it reminds me that there is still work to be done. Bjones 09:40, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Dr. JosephR, I presume? Editor at CPLiar at RP! 11:24, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Actually, no. Some fellow mouth breathers are beating me to it. Bjones 11:42, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
And now Bohdan has deleted professor obsession and San Francisco tools. Shame. DickTurpis 12:21, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Reminds me, we can *ahem* tick off a few new ones on the article matrix.Armondikov 13:13, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
I think it's been updated (except the deleted ones above). I'm a bit surprised professor obsession was deleted, it was pretty much in line with their standard faire: obsession with atheism, sex with students, and liberalism in general (I think). San Francisco tools was a pretty obvious joke though. I don't think there's any way we're going to get the entire matrix filled. DickTurpis 14:15, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
We won't, but Andy will. I really think he's playing the Googlewhack game, so he'll eventually create all the ones that have few enough Google hits. He comes right and says these are terms that Conservapedia has created whole cloth, i.e. "we're in the business of cranking out neologisms". --Toiretni 14:45, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Oh come on.... Has to be a parodist that made that edit... Armondikov 15:10, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Richard Jensen[edit]

I would ask very kindly of all of you to NOT attack Richard Jensen, cz's new arrival. He was bullied away from citizendium and was one of, if not the best authors there. He is conservative but is no bully like the rest of conservapedia's crowd. Plus add in the fact that he is a retired history professor who deserves respect on those grounds alone. — Unsigned, by: 86.45.210.35 / talk / contribs

Don't worry, we won't do a thing. However, I'm willing to bet he gets blocked within a week by Ed/Bugler/Karajou. --PsyGremlinStill no RWW entry? 12:06, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Haha, he claims to be a retired professor? What peer-review process did he go through to get retired? REAL history professors would not make deliberate errors in dates of United States' Presidents!
Seriously though, he's at the whim of the CCCP administrators whose idea of "fair" is "blocking them quickly to lessen the pain".
Less seriously, RealLife® merit has nothing whatsoever to do with the Meritocracy that CP claims to be. CЯacke® 12:13, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
I see his credentials being questioned by ASchlafly (who as a Lawyer, has added a masterful knowledge of history to his already impressive resume) and his motives questioned by Ed and Ken. Shortley thereafter, Karajouwelcome back you prick will run a checkuser and see that the IP range he's using was also used by a vandal sixteen months ago and won't be fooled by the vandal's deceit. SirChuckBBoom Goes the Dynamite 12:18, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Unfortunately, the first debate with Andy will involve Andy telling the prof a) Andy's taught more teenagers than he has, b) they don't fall for fake liberal qualifications at CccP ooh, I like that, c) because of professor values, "Prof" Jensen must be deceitful and d) Schlafly Rearguard block (I bet by Bugler). Insert "Statsman" for "Prof Jensen" and it's already happened. --PsyGremlinWhut? 12:23, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
On the conservative encyclopedia, conservative isn't good enough, you have to be Conservative. Armondikov 13:10, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
No, but you must be as smart and reasonable as User:Conservative. Editor at CPLiar at RP! 14:37, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Any links to any of this stuff? ħumanUser talk:Human 14:40, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Are you basically saying that anyone can be a CP editor if you lower the bar far enough? Armondikov 15:11, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Are you able to lower the bar SO far? Editor at CPLiar at RP! 15:16, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Human, I haven't seen any edits by this famed Prof yet; then again, I'm not sure what nick he's using, which doesn't help. --PsyGremlinWhut? 15:26, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
This is Liberal Deceit. You know well that the object of controversy is User:RJJensen, who was clearly vandalizing by inserting a 1900 date instead of a 1800, and rightfully got a permaban for his parody. Unfortunately, he was then freed again. Editor at CPLiar at RP! 15:38, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
(EC)He's RJJensen, you know, the guy who got into crap with the local sycophant Learn Together for (obviously accidentally) adding some wrong dates, though I don't know exactly what attacks bunchanumbers means. NightFlarei haz a talk page. 15:38, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Ooh him... I was looking for an unblocked user *penny drops*. Well, in that case I assume it's safe to say he's already been bullied away from CP too. --PsyGremlinWhut? 15:41, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
He could be invited to visit us. Editor at CPLiar at RP! 15:51, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Indeed he could, but... how? I don't know if his email his enabled. still he could join our small but growing number of actual real life academics, if he can stand the goat jokes and general silliness... Totnesmartin 16:07, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

(undent) I dunno, our premiere academic seems to be AWOL somewhere, likely making a movie fiddling with his blog or something. --Kels 17:45, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Someone should tell him not to remove quality lulz. Unless it is a part of a plant to insert better quality lulz. Then I'm fine with it. Bjones 17:54, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

More Schlafly Wackyness[edit]

Another great piece of wisdom from Andy: "Bad ideas will be suggested to you by nearly everyone, including yourself, except a bad idea will never come from both your parents."--Antifly 20:04, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Great. Well, any human being can be a parent, therefore all human beings are infallible. Well that sorted that out. Shall we solve world hunger next? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!</font>Make me a bureaucrat! 20:18, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
He's Oedipus Rex of Conservativeland, and fair Phyllis is his red hot momma. --JeevesMkII 20:18, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
First thing that comes to mind: Ed Gein. Second that comes to mind - a local father was arrested for accidentally killing his 15 year-old son, because he wanted him to "have fun" and use cocaine to get high, dying from an overdose. NorsemanWassail! 20:24, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Well, he did say both your parents. Just hope they aren't both meth-heads. Or both American Taliban. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:56, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Fair enough, though I read somewhere that Ed Gein's father was an abusive alcoholic of some sort. NorsemanWassail! 23:43, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

There once was a man named Oedipus Rex
You may have heard about his odd complex
His name appears in Freud's index
Because he LOOOOOOOVED his mother!

Can you rephrase that as a limerick? Otherwise, it phails...

thr onc ws a mn nmd O(dip us) rex
U mai hv hrd abt hs odd cmplx
One Andrew Schlafly
Says your 'rents to obey
And now hs nm apprs in Frds ndx! ħumanUser talk:Human 22:20, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
You dare call the revealed words Holy Saint Lehrer "phail"!? Philistine!! --Kels 22:35, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
Why do you not worship my lolspeak as teh genius it is!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Palistine! ħumanUser talk:Human 23:54, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
"I'm not worthy, I'm not worthy!" Philip Stein.
I just read this after editing the Nobel Prize page to add a jibe at Kissmyassinger. What a... Coincedence... -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 06:37, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
Kissinger's greatest crime against humanity was making Tom Lehrer stop making music. --Kels 08:41, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
I think his album covers rever to it as his "so-called" music or was that his voice? Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 12:34, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
Followed closely by Operation Condor and that stuff. -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 08:48, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

@Jellyfish: The statement seems to imply that all ideas are good, because ideas come from people, and all people are infallible. However, there is one idea that it rules out. Gay people can "never" be married, therefore, nobody will ever have two legitimate parents who are practicing homosexuals. (well, unless both your mom and your dad come out of the closet after having you, or you live in Massachusetts or California, but clearly you're doomed to live a life of sin in those cases anyway) --Toiretni 12:12, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

That's not completely true - in some gay couples, one takes on the role of the 'father' and the other the 'mother', even though they're the same gender, especially in couples where, say, both partners are male, but one is both gay and a transvestite, and I would certainly argue that the true 'parent' is the one who does the parenting, even if this is different from the one who supplied the sperm and/or ovum. -Zmidponk being too lazy to sign in

(undent)

Why not just go for the most lulzy example - what's a child to do when he's contemplating becoming a Christian and his atheist parents keep trying to convince him not to? --SpinyNorman 00:35, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

I dunno, suck Andrew Schlafly's enormous cock to obtain salvation? </being really gross> ħumanUser talk:Human 00:44, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

heres a bet[edit]

I bet that after this comment there will be a blocking by Ed Poor with a message (edit summary will read "advice from a senior administrator") about "You do not decide what consitutes high standards here". Or something. Ace McWickedwhisky 20:27, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

It's a sad lookout for politics in a country where the ability to make a speech without reading from a teleprompter is considered a sign of intellectual might. At least my local MP comes round to my house when soliciting my vote, so I can tell him to get fucked in person. I seriously don't understand why you should vote for any politician who has speeches written for them. Surely, if you're looking to elect someone with the drive and leadership to do something for the country the very least they could do to demonstrate those qualities is to do their own writing. Otherwise, you might as well hand the country over to the bureaucracy and admit that Yes, Minister wasn't so much a comedy as a documentary. --JeevesMkII 20:38, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
It's a sad lookout for politics in a country where the ability to make a speech without reading from a teleprompter is considered a sign of intellectual might. After Bush 43, the oratorical bar is so low that most people can't even see it anymore. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 20:44, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
I actually thought she delivered her horrible speech fairly well, once she got rolling (the family album was kinda gross). I don't care how she achieved that, by memory, notes, teleprompter (hell, I know I'd want my notes and prompter under those circumstances!), but the main page news item is simple deceit. It misquotes the source it is footnoted to, in order to utterly distort the meaning. Now Schlafly is "reversing" into "She didn't use her notes as she spoke." How the hell can he know that? ħumanUser talk:Human 20:51, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
How is that a good argument anyway; if he's right then it casts doubt on the credibility of the rest of the quote.

Wabbit Season[edit]

Not really WIGO-worthy, but in my sleep-deprived state I still found it lulzy. Ed decides to make much ado about nothing by creating a debate where there really wasn't one. The smiles come in the next-to-last paragraph, when I could just picture Mel Blanc doing the voice of Ed:

Liberal POV!
Conservative POV!
Liberal POV!
Conservative POV!
Conservative POV!
Liberal POV! Shoot the Conservative! Shoot him now!

--SpinyNorman 00:58, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Wow, nice catch... Ed pwns himself??? Apart from sounding vaguely full of bagels? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:39, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Stone the blasphemer![edit]

I haven't lived in the UK for ages, so I might be talking out of my arse... but laying a charge of blasphemy with the local Mr Plod? Surely that's not still on the statue books? What next - rounding up doddery old ladies for a bonfire? --PsyGremlinWhut? 06:33, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

I think the blasphemy laws are still there. Although the way the British legal system works, it has plenty of ancient laws that just go unenforced and out of fashion. There isn't a strict constitution to work with so it's just a combination of precedent and tradition. I wouldn't be suprised if witchcraft was still technically on the books. They introduce so many laws that the police just can't enforce, something has to give at some time.
Also, I used to live in Northumbria before moving to York so it's quite strange to see the place get a mention on CP, I know exactly where they're talking about. Armondikov 06:56, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

I thought we had just repealed the blasphemy laws? It happened this year I think. I remember the people who were very upset about Jerry Springer The Opera were even more upset about that. Charles SubLunar (mr) 07:02, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Ah, just looked at the story on CP - she's actually laying a charge of outraging public decency, so it comes under a different set of statutes than the blasphemy laws. Charles SubLunar (mr) 07:08, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
The Witchcraft Act was abolished in 1951, making it ok for Wicca to begin. The Blasphemy law was abolished last July, making it ok to eat babies criticise religion freely. Totnesmartin 07:10, 5 September 2008 (EDT)


The Baltic Centre has a long and noble record for cutting edge art - well, OK, maybe not that long as it hasn't been open that long but... They were central in organising a Spencer Tunnick installation which I took part in. 1700 naked people in Jordyland - it was fantastic. Silver Sloth 07:38, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, it was one of those laws that was still on the books essentially because the commons couldn't be bothered to table a motion to scrap it, since it was thought nobody in the modern age would actually invoke it ever again. Then the idiot fundamentalists got all uppity about Jerry Springer the Opera (and lost, and the idiot who brought the suit was bankrupted. Couldn't happen to a nice bloke, especially since he winged about how unfair it was.) --JeevesMkII 08:54, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
Actually, I had a quick look at the Christian Voice website to see if he was bankrupt and homeless yet, and discovered that Stephen Green is such an odious little shit that he needs his own rationalwiki article. Must write one. --JeevesMkII 09:09, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
Wasn't he featured in a Channel Four Dispatches documentary (In God's Name I think it was called) a couple of months ago? Got very upset when a bird shat on him and they carried on filming. There was also an Andy-like female lawyer who lobbied Norman Tebbit for a reduction in the abortion time-limit. In the UK you may be able to watch it again on the C4 web-site. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 09:49, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, I missed it on TV but saw it on youtube later. It was pretty funny. Do you reckon it would be too petty to grab a pic of the incident and add it to the article with a caption along the lines of "God demonstrates to Stephen Green's prophetic ministry exactly what his opinion is"? --JeevesMkII 09:59, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
I think we can now actually embed utubey type things. I have no idea how, but I think we can. So if you can figure out how, do it, why not? ħumanUser talk:Human 23:52, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Steinem, Phyllis and Palin[edit]

Teh Assfly quotes Gloria Steinem, who said that "Sarah Palin is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger." And hotter. JJ4e1yearASaRAT 11:05, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Don't forget Assfly thinks his mum is hot. Courting her seems his prime motivation in life. --JeevesMkII 11:08, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
I just puked a little in the back of my mouth. Thanks! --Jdellaro 11:17, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
So, does cp:incest redirect to Phyllis yet? Armondikov 11:48, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
I wish I had been first into print with the P. Schlafly comparo. I only wrote it on a piece of paper :( ħumanUser talk:Human 21:18, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Win a free goat![edit]

a free (virtual) goat for whoever can get this inserted into CP somehow. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 11:56, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Spotted it earlier this morning and thought the same thing. I'm sure Andy's been fooled too many times by the Onion to think it was a valid source though. -Lardashe

Someone protesteth to mucheth me thinketh[edit]

Aggie, Aggie, Aggie, surely you knew this could only end one way. You're barking up the wrong tree. Many brave sockpuppets died to make the Obama article as utterly ridiculous as it is today. Do you really wish to dishonour the work of those brave souls who gave so very very much? The proxy ip addresses stand as gravestones now. Please respect their work. DickTurpis 12:22, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

May the goats of the Old Herd forever graze upon the unknowns that have given their efforts to supply the freedom of lulz we appreciate today. NorsemanWassail! 12:35, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Ok, it's nitpicky, but the proper quote is "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." It's one of those that just constantly gets butchered. Stile4aly 01:09, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

I feel you Stile, Andy and his Shakespeare mangling always angers me.... Because he quotes Shakespeare to intimidate people and prove that Andy is an intellectual. But he really reveals himself for a complete fool. SirChuckBBoom Goes the Dynamite 01:12, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Tobacco[edit]

For gods sake Andy, again with the fucking tobacco.Ace McWickedwhisky 14:03, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Weren't those tobacco companies run by, and defended by, Republicans? And aren't most of the tobacco fields in red states? --Kels 14:15, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Helpjazz[edit]

I wonder if he got as excited as I did when I saw a congratulations from Andy. Alas, it's just for passing, no night-edit rights just yet... --PsyGremlinWhut? 14:33, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Soon to be followed by a "we aren't easily fooled by false claims of accomplishments from liberals!" no doubt. DickTurpis 14:40, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Nobs01[edit]

Does anyone know if Rob Smith was wp:user:Nobs01 at Wikipedia? His userpage links to this arbitration case which he compares to a Nazi concentration camp. Does anyone one know who and how many CP sysops have been dragged before the arbitration committee and found to have acted like a complete wackjob before being thrown out and becoming worse than what they despise Wikipedia for? \approx\pi 23:19, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Yep, same person. Secret Squirrel 23:21, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Asians and native Americans have different blood types and interests?[edit]

I would love it if somebody could pin down Andy on this. He's probably thinking in terms of enormous, blatant stereotypes regarding interests and doesn't seem to want to further describe his opinions (no wonder). The blood type thing may very well be true, but he doesn't reveal any sources. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 23:52, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Considering that you got blocked and that Dirk is on the best way to be blocked, I think this is a suicide assignment. Andy's been in Stonewall Mode Alpha straight from the beginning for some reason. But that "Different interests" bit is hilarious. Instant classic! Just add water! --Sid 23:58, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
It's blatant racism. Maybe I got blocked immediately because I just got off a two week block (it's so tempting when he says such things right before I become unblocked) but it seems like he realizes that he said something really, really ridiculous. He's probably sitting around thinking about tomahawks and Pokemon cards. Or maybe Pearl Harbor, who the hell knows. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 00:03, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Mode Change: Schlafly Shutdown (as per Interiot's Night Edit Mode Log tool). --Sid 00:18, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
My understanding of it is that Asians & Native Americans have a common ancestor - one lot crossed what is now the Bering Straight and the other migrated southwards. So to say Native Americans are descended from Asians is patently wrong anyway. And what's with the blood types? If he means groups (A, B, etc) then he's barking mad - everybody has those. Hopefully the fact that he doesn't cite any of his claims will lead others to take them for what they're worth - but I'm sure the loyal nutjobs over there will sadly gobble it up. --PsyGremlinWhut? 02:43, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Corrected typo, and who would have crossed the strait but Asians, or their distant ancestors? PS, Yup, AS is barking mad. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:49, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Didn't we all have a common ancestor? Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 03:08, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Well the big give away that American Indians are related to Asians is they have the same syllable structured language that the Asians (particularly Japanese) do. I am not really to sure where Andy is going with this other than maybe it does not agree with his view on the Babel myth. \approx\pi 03:12, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Ideally, this will result in another Assfly joynt: "liberal history" or some such crap. ħumanUser talk:Human 03:15, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I wonder if he doesn't occasionally throw these out to "cull" perceived liberals off the site. He thinks "I have too many libruls on here. So if say something plausible but insane, and going by the premise that if you disagree with me, you're librul and outtahere, I can thin the numbers." All the other admins except Bugler parodist! seem to studiously avoid these "essays" and everybody who does disagree ends upon the scrapheap. Just a theory, because a part of me really wants to believe that Andy himself can't seriously believe half the tripe he spouts. --PsyGremlinWhut? 08:49, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Horribly enough, this sounds extremely plausible: Andy wants to ban people based on ideology, but he claimed that nobody will be banned based on ideology. So what should he do? He'll just 90/10 everybody who doesn't 100% agree with his insane anti-liberal ramblings. Of course, he drives CP deeper and deeper into the political propaganda area (and thus away from anything resembling an accurate encyclopedia), but in Andy's eyes, this is just an added bonus and not a problem. --Sid 09:20, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
...except that his current claim isn't even consistent with his "conservatism." According to his own site's ideology, there WAS a common ancestor, and within the last four thousand years at most. --Phentari 09:31, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Man Kills for God[edit]

I wonder if we will see this on the CP front page haha --BoredCPer 02:33, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

No, because he wasn't killing for their god. (OR WAS HE?) ħumanUser talk:Human 02:51, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Well if there was any hint he was Muslim than Fox News would mention it no matter how baseless, so maybe they have evidence he was Christian and so are not mentioning it a la Andy. \approx\pi 03:14, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
If it were atheist, CP would be all "see what atheism does?!" and users would point out "Well, he was mentally deranged" and that's when Andy replies with "Atheism teachings result in mentall illness".
Of course, being Christian, it'll be "He was mentally ill", or "He must have had outside atheistic influences" or some BS. Will be amusing to watch them evade-dog the whole event with ad homs and insults to everyone disagreeing with The Powers That Be. NorsemanWassail! 10:08, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Three new sysops on November 21?[edit]

Okay, Croco and JM both edited cp:Conservapedia Day to add the claims that one or three new sysops will be appointed on Nov 21. Any bets? I guess that Jinx and Bugler will of course be rewarded for their constant ass-kissing and liberal-bashing. Any ideas for number three? --Sid 07:30, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

I dont know who will be sysop but I would like to crash their virtual party.Ace McWickedwhisky 08:02, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Bugler suggested this, didn't he, so he's the most likely bet. Andy's probably been weighing up for months whether or not Bugler is for real, but Conservapedia day thing has probably tipped the balance. Bondurant 09:18, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Who else is there who isn't obviously a sock and isn't already a sysop? --Phentari 09:32, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I've got Z$1 on my sock. Jinx & Bungler are certs. Maybe Helpjazz? --PsyGremlinWhut? 09:44, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I see the whole CP Day thing as Bungler's bid for power. He worked his way up from being a conservative editor focussing on Oxford University to blocker, ass-licker and imitator, then suggested the CP Day thing to appeal to Andy's vanity. (CP is vanity publishing taken to its most ludicrous excess.) Has anyone else noticed that in general when editors become sysops they cease to actually create new articles? Of course there are some exceptions, Joaquin keeps churning out his art fluff while obsessives like Ken and Rob work solely on their pet articles and use their powers to lock articles and block alternative points of view generally ignoring anything else that is going on within the project. Although Ed claims to create stuff, there probably isn't a single thing on CP that Ed created which is worth keeping. One could perhaps appreciate his concern for maths articles if he actually wrote a lot of them himself but all he does is destroy the work of others.
As for other sysop candidates there are Deborah, BrianCo, NathanG as well as any of Andy's homeskollars. Taj and Tash used to be significant contributors but it looks like they have been driven away. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 10:01, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I'd love to see Nathan promoted. Especially after Karajou's attempt at intimidating the poor guy. Karma's a bitch! :D --Sid 10:08, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, but Nathan's in such a weird place. He can get away with saying things nobody else could, but the fact remains that he does disagree with site orthodoxy on a lot of issues and on a fairly regular basis. I really think he's in the same category as most difficult adminsitrative quandaries for Andy: just look the other way and pretend there's nothing there. --Phentari 10:13, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I specifically requested that of Andy in not so many words--it was kind of implied by the, "Hey" *head nod*... "I'll trade not being a sysop for site immunity" Keklik 12:56, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Mai Bet - Bugler, Jinx, and... Foxtrot! NorsemanWassail! 11:06, 6 September 2008 (EDT) I wager 4 goats

Bugler mentioned a poetry competition, so poets can go head to head in a Conservapedia poetry deathmatch in the Octagon. Maybe we should have some poetry appreciation of our own about Conservapedia! We can compare lascivious limericks, sonorous sonnets, and, uh, haikus! CorryI've made a huge mistake. 11:38, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Walking the doggrel? --Kels 11:53, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I'll try my hand at an acrostic. What words begin with V? Vat, vet, uhh, vindictive, villian, vandalism, VVikipedia? Keklik 12:56, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

CЯacke® votes: Ed Poor desysoped, resysoped x X times TIMES + desysoped, resysoped + desysoped, resysoped = three 3. (Wager:18 Quatloos)

Maybe night-time edit rights for HelpJazz? Oh, and I can't wait to see the poetry competition. JJ4e1yearASaRAT 12:30, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
The words "Conservapedia poetry competition" fill me with horror. --Kels 12:32, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Some say the world will end in fire
Some say from the homosexual agenda
From what I've tasted of those who profess
I say from the abortion of a fetus
But if it had to turn to null
I think I know enough of liberals
To know that liberal deceit
Infiltrates skulls
And will make Jesus turn on the heat.
-Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 13:06, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
CP Poetry sounds like an awesome idea. I might give it a try tomorrow. Well, either that, or I'll (finally) watch The Dark Knight. Ponder, ponder... XD --Sid 23:17, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Andy Schlafly's own
Edifice of achievement?
No. No. Dear God, No!
-CorryI've made a huge mistake. 00:22, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Sycophant[edit]

I'm determined never, ever to have an account on CP, so could someone sock up and add "sysop" to the list of synonyms here? Thanks ever so much. --Kels 11:51, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, I failed. Editor at CPLiar at RP! 12:17, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Aww, you're a good minion anyway. You deserve a biscuit! --Kels 12:30, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
'Sycophant,' 'bloviate,' and 'demagogue' in fairly rapid succession. Coincidence? --Phentari 12:21, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, coincidence...that's it! CЯacke® 12:26, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Yay, BillP! NorsemanWassail! 14:18, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
If you could get that to last more than 6 seconds I'd be dreadfully impressed. The only way I can imagine it working would be to wait until there's minimal admin/sysop activity and then have every sock account going spam the hell out of Conservapedia with realistic edits to knock it out of the "recent changes" log within fifteen-twenty minutes. 93.97.125.111 17:41, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Besides, they read WIGO (see block reason) and someone should have waited some time, instead I did it right after Kels' request. BillP had already had enough of CP. Editor at CPLiar at RP! 18:15, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Minor Lulz[edit]

Looking at TerryH's screencaps - what the good Conservative surfs - CreationWiki, WorldNetDaily and Metapedia...--PsyGremlinWhut? 12:28, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

I'd never heard of Metapedia before. It's chilling. Hitler's invasion of Europe was merely "aggressive foreign policy?" Hicks burning crosses are scary. It's much more scary, though, when they drop the hoods and put on suits. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 12:46, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
DinsdaleP just removed TerryH's invitation for students to visit the site (even though linking to it from CP is banned). Think a block's on the way? --SpinyNorman 15:50, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
So many conflicting thoughts... pro: he uses firefox and, apparently, linux... con: claiming to be the "author" of a screenshot? and being such an idiot. ħumanUser talk:Human 16:08, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Is it a sign of something when Metapedia's article about Obama, while still a bit nutso, is more sane than CP's? --Kels 18:18, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Um, vicious racism is less damaging to the brain than Assfly's brand of fundamentalist Christianity? yipe. I suppose you have to deny a much narrower slice of reality. --Robledo 18:55, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Although I do like that instead of being allegedly born as on CP, over at MP he's allegedly married. --Kels 18:56, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Atheism dropping![edit]

Looks like CP's atheism "article" has slipped, at least in JM's Google. So we're now treated to the amusing sight of Ken running frantically around trying to figure out how to increase it's rankings, mostly by fiddling with related articles and begging for translations. It gives me warm fuzzies to think of Ken panicking and consulting all his Google optimizing guides the moment any of his pet articles lose even one place in someone's rankings. The poor boy's gonna give himself an ulcer. --Kels 13:37, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Looks like them Cubans have a sense of humour, eh? -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 13:46, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
What that idiot Ken has yet to realise is that google results differ from person to person, because they customise them based on your previous search history and habits. Ken likes reading drivel like his atheism article, therefore for him his atheism article is highly ranked. This is not necessarily the case for the average man on the street. (Incidentally, for me in JM's link it isn't on the first two pages.) --JeevesMkII 18:39, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
So, lets assume he gets a spanish translation of his manifesto. Does he think it would be a good idea to put it on Conservapedia (an american website)? What happened to the guy who put up other languages before... didn't he get banned? And what will it be put in as? cp: el ateismo? cp:spanish:atheism? Or maybe he will stick it at the bottom of the existing article. Maybe they're looking for es.conservapedia.com? That will be funny... Hey Joac, could you translate all the rest of the articles too? Maybe someone could create an article athéisme (french) and hand it off to Kenny... with some amusing "mistranslations" to see if he can get a better ranking in Canada? I've got no clue what is going through that boy's mind. I await seeing his article on homosexualidad or λεσβίες (that one you should be able to sound out - the english is from greek too). --Shagie 01:10, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Marge[edit]

Dang edit conflicts. I was going to say "Thank you, Marge. You are indeed a Godsend", and was beaten to it. --SpinyNorman 16:09, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Sorry! --PsyGremlinWhut? 16:16, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Don't apologize, it was very WIGO-worthy. That Marge is quite they sharp one... --SpinyNorman 16:18, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Interesting post from her. There was some debate here as to whether or not she was a sock, but up until now, her posts have been fairly normal (I speak under correction here). Good to see Andy's driven another user away. Worth dropping her an e-mail, I wonder? --PsyGremlinWhut? 16:24, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

So, Psygremlin, you think Marge's "My husband forbids me to edit CP" comment was for reals? I assumed it wasn't, but who knows. Anyway, I just want to point out that, like me, Andy hopes to have MargeryCampbell's children. --Marty 17:34, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm going to plead Poe's Law on that one. Given some of the entries on there regarding the role of women it's sadly not beyond the realm of possibility. Then again, if she was/is a sock, it's a strange way to call attention to yourself. --PsyGremlinWhut? 17:47, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

I had sent her an email some time ago after she had come back. While I cannot reveal details, she did mention she was no longer bound to Mr Campbell's "rule" as he decided around Easter time that he'd rather rule the church secretary, a one MISTER McGill. Real or parodist? I dunno. CЯacke® 18:59, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Code Pink[edit]

jpatt's been editing this a little lately, so I had a look. Good heavens, what a raving, drooling hit job of an article that is. First sentence or so is pretty good, but then suddenly does a left turn into Crazyland, accusing them of everything from eating babies to the fall of western civilization. It's really amazing, and almost entirely the work of jpatt and our bestest buddy Rob Smith. Go have a look, I'll wait here. --Kels 18:16, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Ye gads! You can almost picture them foaming at the mouth as they typed that. I like the wonky English in the opening sentence: "...shortly after the 9/11 attack by Jodie Evans..." - and all this time, I thought it was Bin Laden... --PsyGremlinWhut? 18:28, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
No wonder McBush says he can bring in the one responsible. He just has to drive out and pick her up! --Kels 18:32, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Ooh, it looks like someone has an admirer! --Kels 18:50, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Aar matey! That be us sailors RW'ers - a girl in every blog. --PsyGremlinWhut? 18:59, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
It's hilarious to see how many "CP Editors" are actually RW socks (errrrr... I mean... Great Conservatives Who Only Monitor Us And Never Would Join). Foxtrot merrily references RW in his tag-for-deletion spree, Jessica magically fixes something pointed out here... how long until the others slip? Will Dirk and Chip soon bitchslap each other by pointing at our Blatant Plagiarism section? --Sid 19:02, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I'd guess they all watch us - some out of curiosity and others Hi Jinx! like a hawk. We sort of function as 'proofreaders once removed' - unless it comes to inserting logic or truth, of course. --PsyGremlinWhut? 19:11, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

According to the CP main page...[edit]

An "In the news" feature on the main page, the way it's worded, currently states that signs contain the ability to "cry." What great English they use on that site. MIP 18:51, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

That is, in fact, perfectly acceptable English.--WJThomas 19:50, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Damn, and here I am attempting to make CP look bad. I'll go back in my hole again :P MIP 19:54, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

On the same subject, should someone tell Conservapedia that the flag issue is currently a "he says she says" matter? (or tell Conservative that bullfighting is banned in Cuba?) 24.22.24.138 20:03, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

They are nicely rapped up flags for something being thrown out. \approx\pi 20:25, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
That's what I thought, too. Who would throw away these things? All patriotism and flag worship aside, it doesn't make any sense from an economic point of view (unless the cost to transport and store the flags exceeds the sales price, but that's highly unlikely). --Sid 23:04, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Delete the Matrix[edit]

I see Croc is busy deleting and protecting the liberal/atheist matrix. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than seeing Poe's Law in action and he trashes Andy's "contributions" too. --PsyGremlinWhut? 19:43, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Dammit. Was so, soooooo close too. Armondikov 19:53, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
I cant figure why they have kept Liberal Obsession. Its is an obvious parody in that I admitted to creating it as a parody. Idiots. Ace McWickedwhisky 20:17, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Poe's Law says they keep only the ones known to be parody. :) cp:Lieberal is one of mine. --Marty 23:07, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
That was pretty good. I love how the DM against Annie involved deleting just about all of her(your) edits, including valid spelling corrections, except for bullshit like lie-beral. Poe's Law, for sure. It's the Landover Baptist Church that anyone can edit! CorryI've made a huge mistake. 00:11, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Conservative's memory[edit]

Ken can remember Bodhan talking about Putin, but does he remember that Bodhan really didn't like him? Might be relevant, y'know. --Kels 21:59, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

HenryS doesn't seem too impressed. What the fuck is Ken on about. Ace McWickedwhisky 22:03, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
He was on his usual quest to pimp promote his vanity project articles at CP, and found some Russian guy's LiveJournal linking to a bunch of Ken's self-hating giveaways homosexuality articles. So of course he wants to know what everyone's saying about him, no matter where in the world. --Kels 22:05, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Isn't that the December 2007 most viewed articles list? That is one nearly every website that metions CP, everyone laughs at it. \approx\pi 22:49, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Yep. Check the posting date and the link to Boing Boing. I ran the main post through a quick machine translation, and it's pretty much the standard "Check this out: ...", followed by some musing about some other site not having such stats (or something). Nothing nice, but also nothing groundbreaking or uberlulzy, from what I see. I also briefly scanned some comments, which don't parse quite as well in a machine translation. However, I love the way this one by "kouzdra" came out:
"Tradition" funny, but Konservopediya - bleak shit.
It really sums it up, and I love the "Konservopediya" name somehow. XD --Sid 23:14, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
It sounds like something from a bad spy movie. "Amerikan, if you survive your visit to the Lubyanka, then you will rot forever in the Konservopediya. Hur hur hur..." --PsyGremlinWhut? 00:53, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Surely Ken can't have thought there was something complimentary (not complementary, Shabby) being said about that list. It is pretty obvious from the page names and views that it refers to the great homo article boost but the poor cretin imagines that there must be someone, somewhere saying something nice. Keep looking Ken, the Cubans are pissing themselves. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 12:47, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Don Hamrick[edit]

Did cp:User:Donhamrick ever make it to WIGO? He's old news at this point, but it's still kind of amusing (and kind of scary): a redneck who thinks the best place to kick-start his campaign for the U.S. Senate is on Conservapedia! His job experience seems to consist mainly of "unrepresented civil plaintiff"? I wonder what the story is behind the page's short-lived venture into mainspace. Anyway, I empathize with his concern of circumstances. --Marty 23:18, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

"Filing deadline for the petitions is by noon on May 1, and candidates have to submit signatures totaling 3 percent of the votes in the previous governor’s race cast in the district, or 10,000 signatures." Since he doesn't have many Google hits, I'll assume he didn't get enough signatures. But next time I'm running for office, I'll be sure to start my successful campaign on Konservopediya.
Also, that's a very sexy tie. --Toiretni 23:46, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Sound reasoning, but you should also consider starting on YouTube, just like this hilarious Japanese Lex Luthor reject anarchist did! :D (Also check the related videos - he once called for the destruction of Japan, I think...) --Sid 23:57, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
This guy's nuts, but I'd be all for bringing back privateers during a time of war (preferably one we didn't start). CorryI've made a huge mistake. 00:17, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
I think we did have a discourse on "Hamprick". Check out the article history on CP because if I remember correctly it actually got knocked back by a couple of editors. The original entry was a real vaniy piece. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 13:11, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Geoplrd[edit]

So: indigestion is caused by pain? funny, I thought it was the other way round.

There are 1000 milligrams in a gramme (not sic) because a milligram is 1000th of a gramme! A Nobel prize for this man. Marghanita Laski 01:30, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Crud, guys, I have abdominal pain! I'd better rush to the doctor before I get indigestion! -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 01:35, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Ed owes me another irony meter[edit]

This probably came up in the past, but I was reading Ed's Rfa on WP and his answer to the very first question made me spit coffee everywhere: "If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion." Obviously, that only applies when Unkle Lyin' Smeg Ed is on WP. The man is a complete yahoo. --PsyGremlinWhut? 06:23, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

I just wonder how many of the cons are actually RW editors. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 12:22, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Probably not many - Susan popped in and apologised for breaking protocol. One of the CPidiots did the same, and got blocked for it. When people comment on those things, if they don't have an editing history at WP, their "votes" don't count. I stayed out despite a few years on WP because of how I found out about it. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:18, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

PJR and Free Speech[edit]

Is it just me, or is the whole premise of the article "this is what free speech is, and this is why conservatives aren't hypocrites when they censor others"? --Kels 09:10, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

That's why I WIGO'd it - he's basically saying "It's our ball and we'll take it away when we want to. Oh, and you were offside, that's no goal, just ask the ref, who happens to be God my dad." All he's done (under the guise of being the most reasonable one there) is bury censorship in other words.
I like the way he goes about butchering the article of the week now that it's been published too - not like it's sat in the queue for months to be edited - and he's on the committee. Any bets who's going to have to create all the redlinks he's made - not him, that's for sure. --PsyGremlinWhut? 09:40, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
PJR definitely gives me that creepy secret police are a good thing feel. His M.O. is to take a reasonable principle and apply his gentle draconian methods to its application. This Christian dystopia is born. In some ways he is the scariest all CPers because his meek demeanor masks a hate machine that rivals any CPer you can name, but that, as I understand it from reading CP, IS the christian way. I like how he claims that people can express opposing opinions on CP when he has witnessed and been involved in so many block and burn episodes that had nothing to do with principles and everything to do erasing inconvenient gaps in CP "thinking." But of course, as he suggests, it is for the good tm of the project. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 10:49, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
In a way, this all reminds me of jpatt's recent "the Founding Fathers didn't want a theocracy, now here's why they wanted a theocracy instead" stuff. --Kels 11:13, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Is it an extension of PJR's logic to say "It's OK to argue in favour of teaching creationism, but that doesn't mean it's OK to actually teach creationism"? Just wondering, that's all. Matt 08:24, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Portion control is conservative?[edit]

Again, Andy takes an initially good idea and misapplies political labels to it. [1] CorryI've made a huge mistake. 09:23, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

LOL! Shorter Andy: "Sure it's been around for a long time, and lots of people use it, but if they don't word it exactly the way I do, I get to claim it's my invention." --Kels 10:15, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Andy is actually literally correct and completely wrong. Avoiding liberal portions and a conservative approach to shopping and preparing meals are good ways to lose weight. Then again so are exercising liberally and avoiding the conservation of energy as body fat. Note to Andy:' Many words have a variety of usages that alter their meaning in subtle ways. And as a writing tip you should not use words you don't really understand to try to bolster your prose. I think Andy's wife is making him cut down on his portions of meatloaf and that inspired him to include this. With Andy there is a direct line from trivial event that hurts his feelings to grand universal nonsensical principals. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 10:16, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
But surely leaving food on your plate is wrong ("Think of the poor starving children in India, they'd be grateful of that cabbage" etc), and if soomething is wrong it must be Liberal. Fretfulporpentine 10:25, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
It seems like a better website beat Andy to the punch. I am really impressed at the due diligence exercised before declaring that the idea of "portion control" was invented by Conservapedia. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 12:23, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Well everyone knows that an over-full plate is referred to as a liberal helping. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 12:26, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
I'm not sure where to look for a history of the idea, but wasn't Weight Watchers founded on the idea of portion control? --Kels 12:26, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
I'm sure you're right Kels. There's now a whole industry making relatively edible, portion controlled frozen meals... and restaurants also offer "WW approved", or at least "low fat" meals that help the dieter stay on track. "Leave fatty food in the fridge"??? Yah, Mrs. Andy spanked him for pigging out on teh cheesecake. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:26, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Is this a subtle dig at his brother, the would be hotdog eating champion of Coney Island? Ain't nothing more liberal than an eating contest. --JeevesMkII 12:29, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

So... by "hotdog-eating champion", are you referring to Roger or John? --Marty 15:45, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Portion control is a "conservapedia term"? Facepalm me, in the restaurant industry it means using consistent quantities of ingredients for both customer satisfaction and food budget management... ħumanUser talk:Human 18:15, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

It took me a while to work out where this is going. Andy is advocating the proven weight loss method as Conservative in contrast to Hollywood fad diets, Atkinson, grapefruit, lemonade ,cabbage and other woo based diets, which being Hollywood means they are based on Hollywood values and so are not conservative. Basically he is taking the only working, and scientifically proven, diet method and claiming it for his side as he continues to divide the world in to red and blue. It is Conservapedia term in that respect because nobody else is stupid enough to claim political bias on diet program. \approx\pi 21:09, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

"Sheep or Shepherd?"[edit]

That poses an interisting line of thought, Andy, but to be completly honest with you, I would rather be a wolf. Shepherds fear me, and sheep scatter before me. Javasca₧ Llamabean.gifLlamabean.gifLlamabean.gif

A sheep told me yesterday that the myth that sheep are all followers who would listen to anything is a myth. He also told me that the word 'sheeple' was horrible, and should be banned. -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 11:17, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
This is political correctness gone wild! --Kels 11:23, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Wolves are liberal, nobody denies that. NorsemanWassail! 11:28, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Why, me dear Norseman, of course wolves are Liberal, but Wolves also can be Conservative. To the same point, Sheep can be conservative, and liberal... I think I could make this into an essay... Javasca₧ Llamabean.gifLlamabean.gifLlamabean.gif

A sheep, a shepherd and a wolf are on one bank of the river. There's a boat with only place for two. How will a goat make them cross the river? Editor at CPLiar at RP! 12:15, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Wolves must be liberal, otherwise Republican guvners wouldn't go round shooting them from airplanes. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 12:31, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
She really missed the point on that one, didn't she? In Xtianity, the peeps are the fucking sheep and Cheesus Bear is the "good" shepherd who watches over them. And, yes, the wolves are teh evil liberal atheistic public schooled prayer-censoring Hollywood professor deceivers! Oh, I forget judicial acitivists... ħumanUser talk:Human 18:28, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Its probably better not to examine these metaphors too deeply. Remind me again, why does a shepherd look after sheep? --JeevesMkII 20:04, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
I have three answers! One: Don't ask me, I'm Welsh. Two: To get three bags full of wool? Three: Yummy shepherd's pie!!! ħumanUser talk:Human 20:17, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Must be fun to be a Christian, always guessing if your lord wants to shag, sheer or slaughter you. --JeevesMkII 20:22, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken's Grand Plans[edit]

I dont' know if I'm reading this wrong or not, but doesn't this look like Ken admitting he doesn't give a flip for Andy's blog, and that His Masterpieces are actually his to do with as he pleases? It certainly looks like he's quite happy to shop them around elsewhere without much concern for CP at all. --Kels 11:25, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Actually, it looks more like Ken is admitting he didn't follow the link to see the translation in progress. What's a Spanish (-speaking, I assume, unless Ken is really going to go to Spain) pastor going to do with a Japanese article? Sandman 12:06, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
True, true. Although I was focusing more on the fact that he's interested in getting the article(s) hosted somewhere besides CP, presumably to get more attention for His Articles. --Kels 12:09, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
I think Ken was more concerned that CP simply won't host the translated versions, so they'd have to post them on... RationalWiki! ħumanUser talk:Human 18:31, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
But but but Kenny doesn't own the copyrights to "his" articles no more. He waived his right to own them by posting on CP. CЯacke® 12:20, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Of course, just pointing out some additional humor in the conversation. It would be interesting to see if Andrew J. Schlafly, Esq., would use his ruff-n-tuff lawyerin skillz to get CP's articles taken down from a alternate site. Sandman 12:26, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
He tried that here, didn't he, and Ames sent him packing. --PsyGremlinWhut? 14:02, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Has Andy ever actually spelled out what 'rights'/licence/whatever CP uses? --Gulik 16:08, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
No. Andy has too much trouble spelling his last name to bother with that. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:31, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Ouch![edit]

How did this slip through the cracks? Have a read of Andy's replies when Benp says he's taught about 1000 kids. "You've taught about a thousand teenagers??? I bet quite a few of them ended up becoming addicted, imprisoned or depressed, after adopting Hollywood values." The man is an insulting pig (with apologies to pigs everywhere), no more, no less. --PsyGremlinWhut? 13:03, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

It seems like this pushed two of Andy's buttons: the "You're a public school teacher, therefore you're scum" button and the "Nobody can have an achievement more impressive than mine" button. 1000 students isn't even a whole lot for a public school teacher; most will hit that total in less than 10 years. --Phentari 14:51, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
"...please tell us how many ended up becoming addicted, imprisoned or depressed. Hundreds?" Wow. Andy really got cowpie on his loafers with this one. For the forty-second time... ħumanUser talk:Human 18:34, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Daily grind[edit]

I was going to do a wigo about Andy getting home from a rousing sermon at church to partake of the Christian practice of insulting people who make constructive criticisms, but it's such an ordinary thing over there, what's the point? --Kels 13:42, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

I didn't think the original insult was WIGO-worthy for the same reason, but seeing Andy gleefully move to immediately create an article on "milquetoast" so readers would understand exactly what his insult meant prompted me to do it. Does the man actually get more mean-spirited on Sundays? It would be interesting to sample the tone of his posts based on the day of the week and see if there's a correlation. Maybe for Andy, Sunday worship serves as a vaccination to give him a booster shot of conservative self-righteousness. --SpinyNorman 13:49, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Fair play to him, I did learn a new word today... one I'll probably never use, unless it's preceded by "Darling, would you like coffee with your..." --PsyGremlinWhut? 13:58, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
You don't listen to enough Tom Waits. --Kels 14:08, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
I lurve Tom Waits - musta missed that one, will crank up "Closing Time" again - any excuse. --PsyGremlinWhut? 15:17, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Good heavens. Andy, as usual, buggers beggars the imagination. --Kels 14:37, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

That was incredibly predictable. Andy's always quick to drop the "feigned offense" line when he's called out like that. --SpinyNorman 14:56, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Oh, and we can start the block countdown now after this, and especially this... --SpinyNorman 15:03, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
And 5 minutes later Andy's sock blocks you for a month BoredCPer 15:09, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Yep - rearguarded by Clark Kent while SuperAndy was, umm, on a secret mission. Yeah, that's it! --SpinyNorman 15:15, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

It is grimly funny that he was blocked for "Insulting behavior" when Andy was the rude asshole, though. --Kels 15:45, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Notice that it never said he was being blocked for HIS insulting behavior. That said, I'd say it's true. The block is PART of the insulting behavior. --Phentari 15:47, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Dirk, Dirk, Dirk. Going to Bugler directly to ask him to reconsider a block is like putting your request on a post-it note, and then trying to affix it to the cheese on a mousetrap. Thanks for the effort, though. --SpinyNorman 16:32, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Guess we'll have to wait for Andy to finish editing his A.H. Lecture #2 before Bugler replies. --SpinyNorman 16:34, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Saddest part of all this is it still qualifies as ordinary routine around CP. --Kels 16:56, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Reverting[edit]

I know it's just referring to the skateboarding term, but I found it amusing that Conservapedia lists cp:Reverting under cp:Category:Sports. :) --Marty 15:05, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Surely... I know typing this here is gonna ruin it, but surely there should be an entry on the football (US) term "blocking"? ħumanUser talk:Human 18:41, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Edit war[edit]

Watching the edit war going on in Heavy Metal is kinda funny, especially now that they've both gone running off to Andy, who, as the Great Leader will do... nothing. --PsyGremlinWhut? 16:12, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, he'll get right on that, as soon as he finishes reading the "should CP Ban Atheists" debate so he can respond as requested. --SpinyNorman 16:27, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Metal is an 'anti-xian' genre? Guys, you realize that the commonly recognised 'first heavy metal band ever' (as well as totally awesome), Black Sabbath, didn't actually make anti-xian lyrics? Well, perhaps this song, as something of a parody, but nothing especially anti-xian. It would be way easier to paint them as liberals for the hundreds of pro-drug songs they made. And come on, are you trying to say that Iron Maiden or Warning are anti-xian? Morons. Also, did anybody tell them that their citation for metal being anti-xian is hilarious? I'm favoriting it. Also, they've obviously never actually listened to The Number of the Beast. Crud, most of us metalheads don't even consider that album their best. I'm half-convinced that it's a parody. Fortunately, they mention Mudvayne, which makes it obvious that they can't be taken seriously. The devil's horns ( \m/ ) isn't originally because of Satan at all. It was originally used as a sign to ward off the 'evil eye' by the guy who made it popular (and is still a brilliant singer at 65). It's usually used to mean 'METAL'. And yes, I felt the need to say this. Hopefully someone from there looks here and decides to do some research. -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 08:37, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Those Evil, Anti-Puritan Liberals[edit]

You learn something new every day on Conservapedia. Today, I learned that, not only are there apparently still Puritans kicking around, but the Salem Witch Trials are taught in a concerted effort to embarass them. --Phentari 16:57, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Oh, yes: also that Massachusetts is now morally the opposite of what it was in the 1600s...meaning that they don't burn old women alive anymore...and that this is, in Andy's eyes, a bad thing. --Phentari 16:59, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Typical Liberal Misinformation. The Salem witches were HANGED, not burned. Except for the one who died under "Enhanced Interrogation". (Crushed to death under rocks.) --Gulik 17:34, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
"More weight", as I recall. --Kels 17:43, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
The official punishment was hanging, it was much more civilized than the old methods. SirChuckBBoom Goes the Dynamite 18:08, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
What is this non-sequitur doing in the middle of Andy's rant: "Note that while a few Puritans did own slaves in early times, they did not split slave families."??? Oh, I get it - Tituba's husband was jailed along with her, out of respect for family values? ħumanUser talk:Human 18:45, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
I want to take part in the debate, and argue that the thing that was wrong with the salem witch trials is that the proceedings weren't memory holed. History preserved the proceedings thus providing evil liberal playwright Arthur Miller with a setting for his scurrilous critique of McCarthyism The Crucible. --JeevesMkII 18:56, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
I especially like the logic by which he concludes that the whole thing was caused by that silly, irrational (liberal, no doubt) slave woman. --Phentari 19:06, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
"Debate: What was precisely wrong about the Salem Witch Trials?"...my god he disgusts me...--Purple George!YossieSpring in Fialta 03:39, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
WEll, duh. women were not rightly returned to thier positions as owned property, were not silenced by society as should clearly have been done, and not enough witches killed! isn't that self evident? (wfgodot, too lazy to sign in).

No comment here, but.....[edit]

Would it be considered appropriate liberal trickery to constantly post links to RationalWiki in the comments for that Obama Youtube video?24.22.24.138 17:51, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

I can't speak for anyone else, but I heartily endorse such action. Even though they will all be marked as spam. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 17:56, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
The trick when link-spamming is not to spam. That is, make an on-topic comment that the link you include supports or goes into more detail about. It's not only more likely to survive, it is much more respectful of the blog/forum/tubez where you post it. Which reflects better on us, den of slimemongers that we are. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:47, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Wow. Andy is a fucking bastard, everyone at Conservapedia is. To link over to that YouTube video where Barack Obama "admits" to being Muslim is lower than low. I don't care if they don't believe he was born in Hawaii, I don't care if they hate his guts, but to post a video that puts his comments out of context... wow. Congrats, Conservapedia, you have ruined my week. Go to hell - MIP 19:21, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

I can already see it - if Obama loses, CP's pages will be full of "He lost because we...<insert yahoo statement here>" --PsyGremlinWhut? 19:41, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
On the other hand, this is great stuff to drive moderates away from the Republicans with. So at least he's providing a service. --Kels 19:53, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
No, it's not great. The US (and by extension the rest of the world) needs the Republicans to be reasonable, rational and moderate. A Republican Party full of ideologically driven fundies who sell policy based on quote mines is a frightening image. Ajkgordon 05:46, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Andy's latest post[edit]

Andy has finally moved into the territory of make believe here. He is now accusing Obama of lying to advance Islam. Not only does he have the concept of Taqiyya completely wrong but he has violated his own previous policy of critics of a religion not being allowed to be used in articles, or does that only apply to what ever off-shoot of Christianity his sysops belong to? \approx\pi 00:19, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

ANDY RULES. Oh, wait, it's a "meritocracy". But since Andy is protected by his sysops from ever being contradicted... well, Andy must be right! Only in Andyworld. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:34, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I must say though the first page thing was well done. He never actual accused Obama of doing it, he mearly placed the news items in such an order that it made you think that is what he said. I could imagine Andy in court with that one. \approx\pi 00:36, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Best of all is that they now link to an obivously quite-mined video. I think Andy has changed it, but the first version was 13 seconds long and containted what seemed to be a very obvious cut.... Anyone who's seen the longer version, is that just bad camerawork by the network or was it a manipulated moment? SirChuckBBoom Goes the Dynamite 00:44, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I've seen the longer version it's on the ABC website. Stephanopolous is asking him about whether or not he believes that the accusations about him being a secret Muslim are coming from the McCain campaign, and Obama basically says that even though McCain himself hasn't talked about "his Muslim faith" that the accusations are coming from conservatives that support McCain. Stephanopolous tried to correct Obama with the "your Christian faith" comment, but in fact Obama immediately clarifies the statement saying that he's talking about the allegations that he is Muslim. About 5 seconds of internet searching could have found the real clip, but clearly Andy doesn't care about quote mining. Stile4aly 00:47, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I think PJR changed it. Imagine Andy in court? Keep in mind, the "other side" will have a "competent" lawyer... ħumanUser talk:Human 00:48, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
This is the problem in that Obama talks more poetically than people listen. He was not talking about the Muslim faith he poses rather his Muslim faith other people claim he has. He was mealy saying that McCain himself was not behind the attacks only pro-McCain bloggers. He was actually making a more general point that the Republicans were being hypocrites when blaming Obama for the pro-Obama bloggers attacks on Palin. \approx\pi 00:53, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Is it me or did that interviewer interrupt a lot and prevented him finishing statements that were connected? \approx\pi 01:12, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Yes, the interviewer was doing that. How else to become a famous "journalist"? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:53, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Unfortunately they are no long journalist they are now "TV identities". Television new reporting started going down hill when the networks started acting as though there presenters themselves were newsworthy. \approx\pi 02:58, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Isn't that what we already have. Besides, the whole damn country thinks Palin is great cause she didn't have an abortion AND cause she has a mentially challenged child. that's enough for any of us to vote for her, right? Right???--71.208.237.14 12:06, 8 September 2008 (EDT) (hiding till new polls come out)

What's not being said...[edit]

I just noticed that there hasn't been a word written on Conservapedia about the great US mortgage company bailouts. Wouldn't you expect proper conservatives to be up in arms about using public money to prop up irresponsible, failing private enterprise? --JeevesMkII 05:59, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

It's one of them pesky contradictions for the fundamental capitalist. Ajkgordon 06:07, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
They're not big on policy positions that take more than two sentences, except in the case of atheism, which requires pages of torturous effort to bypass logic.--Tom Moorefiat justitia ruat coelum 06:11, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
They'll probably spin along the lines of "the good conservative government bailing out the evil (greedy) librul organisations, thus sparing the hard-working, devout, middle classes... who are still basically screwed. Oh and no mention that it's an election year.
Actually in a way, I'm glad to see these companies suffering for their initial greed. I know innocent others get caught up in it, which tempers my glee, but whoever initially thought sub-prime was a good idea needs to be dragged out back and shot. --PsyGremlinWhut? 06:20, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
But they're not really suffering, not in any real way. If you or I made such a dumb decision, taking our entire pensions down to the casino and putting it on red, for example, we wouldn't get a government bail out. Silver Sloth 06:29, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
That the companies are suffering isn't really the point. The point is that if the companies collapsed then the US and world economies would suffer even more. This story is actually a condemnation of deregulated laissez-faire capitalism. Or rather deregulated laissez-faire capitalism ultimately guaranteed by the tax-payer. Ajkgordon 07:02, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I have to take issue with Psygremlin's comment above. It's not the companies that are suffering, it's the people who have been missold mortgages on the basis of over-optimistic economic forecasts. These people have had or are in danger of having their homes reposessed. Luckily, in the western world, the US is the only country with such poor financial regulation (not by coincidence, most US banks did not sign up to the Basel accord), but the effects have been felt globally by organisations that have invested in "structured investment packages" not worth the hard drive the information is stored on. Bondurant 08:26, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
NPR's "This American Life" did a terrific story on what happened and the types of people affected. You can listen to that here (there's an option to download it for a buck but you can stream it for free, I believe. I also suspect people here would be interested in this episode. )--Bayes 10:25, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I'm not sure how far back their podcast subscription runs, but you might be able to download both episodes for free. I highly recommend both episodes.-Lardashe
Modern American "capitalism": "privatize the profits, socialize the losses." ħumanUser talk:Human 23:16, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I highly recommend EVERYTHING at the This American Life site. Ira Glass is God. DogP 23:27, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Quote mined poll[edit]

Andy posts this on the front page, but forgets the bit from the original link that says "You could flip a coin and be about as predictive" Bondurant 12:29, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

I don't even know why they bother to take national polls. To get a halfway meaningful idea of how the election is going you have to compile statewide polls into something like this. Bjones 12:47, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Or FiveThirtyEight.com, which does more analysis on more data. --Toiretni 13:26, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Wow, nice site. Thanks for the tip. Bjones 13:38, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

photos[edit]

I'm sorry, but I just don't like the photo of the dead bull on the front page of Conservapedia. I was avoiding viewing Conservative's user page because he has that photo on his page, and another photo of a dead animal, but now they've put it on the front page too, so I can't look at the front page anymore, it just makes me feel a bit sick. Refugeetalk page 14:52, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

It is pretty horrible, isn't it? Probably why they banned it in Cuba (a fun fact you can learn on Google Cuba when you're not Googlestalking your own damn articles like a freak). --Kels 15:05, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
The bull pictured is (I believe) dying, not quite dead yet, (Cf Monty Python and the Holy Grail), and is being used by CP as a representation of atheism, which, would make the matador the representation of CP and conservative Christians: brutal blood-sport enthusiasts who will stop at nothing getting their god into the minds of all chil'ren. Keep up the good work, UserC! CЯacke® 15:14, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Ken gets owned by an atheist cow
The contradictory message of Conservapedia and animals is hilarious. Animal rights groups are insane liberals who don't know how to place the value of human and animal life in the correct context, but Michael Vick is a vicious abuser of animals and deservs everything he gets. The scientific and cosmetic testing of animals is justified, despite suffering, because it serves a greater purpose to society. But the ritualistic killing of bulls for the hell of it is fine as long as a picture can be used to mock our political opponents.... Classic stuff. SirChuckBBoom Goes the Dynamite 15:33, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Gotta love the way he not only makes CP look worse than ever, he almost never gives credit. Just uploads as a summary of the image itself. NorsemanWassail! 16:52, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
I do like "Fish". It's got that same sort of self-evident humour as "France". --Kels 17:42, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
"France"? Do share! --Marty 21:27, 8 September 2008 (EDT) (Long P.S. re SirChuckB's comment: For the record, my own position on animal rights seems to be basically identical to CP's: PETA are mainly crazies, Michael Vick is a douche, animal testing is justified by its value to science, and blood sports are pretty much okay "for historical reasons"; hunting and fishing are cool, but bullfighting would be obviously, needlessly cruel if there were no historical record to grandfather it in. I don't think the CP position on animal rights is any more hypocritical than most people's.)
Putting this here for the sake of continuing the discussion. PETA is crazy, but many animal rights activists no not think like PETA (an old friend of mine once referred to them as complete media whores) I support animal rights to a point, and I'm not going to live in a tree and eat wheat germ(gurm?) for the rest of my life. I don't support what Vick did (obviously, I love dogs) but he shouldn't have been singled out for such nasty treatment because he was a celebrity (and the animal rights nuts showing up with Murder Vick really didn't do themselves any favors) Animal testing for science (drugs and such) are extremely justified. Cosmetic testing is not. Bullfighting may have "historical value," but so does throwing people to the lions, we don't accept that. Bear baiting has "historical value," but no one advicates that. Fact is, most people give bullfighting a pass because they don't understand how brutal and stupid it is (not saying you, just many people. I see no reason for hunting and fishing myself (I've long said that if you want sportmanship, go after game with a spear and a loincloth, like my ancestors did). In conclusion, I think they're positions are incredibly hypocritical for many reasons, too long to detail as extensively as I'd like... but if you create a debate page, I'll follow. SirChuckBBoom Goes the Dynamite 23:44, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
France! --Kels 21:43, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Oh! That France! :) --Marty 21:55, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Ken: Legend[edit]

Sometimes CP makes me growl and gnash my teeth. Sometimes it makes me slap my head. Sometimes I want to cry. And then sometimes, just sometimes, it makes me giggle, with lines like this: "I promise to talk to a Spanish pastor about this within 15-30 days." Matt 22:52, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

Regular readers[edit]

Now that HenryS has outed himself as a reader of WIGO who else shows up. I have noticed:

Do we have any other regulars and do they need there own template? \approx\pi 02:54, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Not sure that PJR is a regular, but he's used the red telephone from his talkpage on occasions to refute things we have said here. Bondurant 04:17, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
I always assumed that the large number of regular readers from CP (Hi Jinx!) was the reason that some of the WIGOs which show CP in a particularly bad light have very low scores. I have anecdotal evidence - what CP would call hard data - that PJR is a regular reader. He has, on occasion, responded to events over here in very short order. Silver Sloth 05:14, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Then of course, there is Bugler, who is one unknown Rationalwikian's deep cover sock. Oops. Bondurant 05:23, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Karajou is certainly a RW reader, as he has blocked people on CP as "sock of RW vandal Jellyfish" (satisfyingly enough, that user wasn't really me). New3.pngPink(Astronomy Domine) 09:30, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Deborah has also made changes after WIGOs, and of course there was Fox, but he seems to be on his summer holidays. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 10:01, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Looks like we're they're dirty little secret. We may be banned and they try to pretend that we're irrelevant, that they don't need to check up on us, but that naughty little mouse keeps clicking on the WIGO refresh. Of course we're also useful for copy editing, fact checking, etc. Silver Sloth 09:51, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
That's one important reason not to point out obvious parody or vandalism here. Poe's Law guarantees that there's enough lulz from the regulars. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 10:01, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Of course, the evil me is now contemplating the game of "see-if-regular-users-can-get-blocked-due-to-comments-made-here". Just to sow an extra seed of paranoia over there and out who does visit der verboten zone. However, the good me says that would be wrong, and mean, and childish... but so much fun... --PsyGremlinWhut? 10:36, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
(EC)Yeah, it's pretty well known that just about all the CP higher ups and quite a few serfs Well respected, non administrative editors check WIGO regularly. Remember when all the TK related Wigo were shooting up to amazing levels in the polls and we had to go back and manually reset counters? I'm pretty sure all the leading brass check WIGO at least once a day, probably more..... SirChuckBBoom Goes the Dynamite 10:46, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
NathanG belongs on that list too - blocked an IP address last week based on a comment they made here. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 11:29, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Am I missing something[edit]

Andy says here that "reversions do not permit edit summaries." What is he talking about? If you undo a revision you can add an edit summary, right? Am I misunderstanding, as usual? Bjones 09:16, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

You get the option for a summary with undo but not if use rollback. Redchuck.gif ГенгисRationalWiki GOLD member 09:19, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Hehe, yeah, it's obvious from what Andy says that he was using rollback - probably never uses undo. I explained the difference to him... ħumanUser talk:Human 13:22, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Conservapedia, Atheism & Suicide[edit]

I’ve just been reading that awful Conservapedia article on Atheism. I note that Conservapedia quotes only male suicide rates.
(…)of the top ten nations with the highest male suicide rates, all but one (Sri Lanka) are strongly irreligious nations with high levels of atheism. It is interesting to note, however, that of the top remaining nine nations leading the world in male suicide rates, all are former Soviet/Communist nations, such as Belarus, Ukraine, and Latvia. Of the bottom ten nations with the lowest male suicide rates, all are highly religious nations with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism. [2]

Why is this? All the major religions teach that men should dominate and women should be subordinate. Therefore men have more to live for and women have less to live for. Incidentally low suicide rates don’t necessarily mean good mental health. People who are terrified of Hell aren’t likely to kill themselves.

Has RationalWiki already done a refutation of this article? If you have please show me where it is. Proxima Centauri 10:33, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Your comments make about 85% more sense when I replace phrases like "all the major religions" with "fundamentalist Christianity". We have a large refutation of the main atheism article already, so it probably wouldn't be worth doing another for what is essentially a companion page. New3.pngPink(Astronomy Domine) 10:41, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Please give me a link to this refutation. Proxima Centauri 10:46, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Behold! New3.pngPink(Astronomy Domine) 10:51, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Much as I hate to defend Conservapedia on any issue, I must point out that the reason they are quoting only male suicide rates is that they are citing an article originally from The American Journal of Psychiatry (but posted on Adherants.com) which quotes a World Health Organisation report on male suicide rates. I am sure there is a reason why the report is only on male suicide rates, but I do not know what it is. It is unlikely to be "fundamentalist Christianity" or other patriarchal bias on behalf of the AJP or WHO. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 11:46, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

(undent) Referring to the quote above, what the fuck could high levels of "organic atheism" mean in this context? High levels of carbon based atheism? High levels of atheism grown without chemical fertilizer? Bjones 12:19, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Don't be silly, Bjones. Everyone knows that atheists can't reach their full potential without a little Miracle-Gro (TM). Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 12:26, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
The problem with organic atheists is that, much as I disapprove of battery farmed atheists, the organic ones cost so much that it's gone from an everyday dish to a luxury item. Personally I compromise with the Freedom Farmed atheists. You're never quite sure about the use of growth hormones but at least they didn't suffer. Silver Sloth 13:14, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
But they're so much tastier... Totnesmartin 17:47, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
"Organic atheism" is basically the opposite of state-enforced atheism. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 17:41, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
And everyone knows that government-produced food is lousy :( ħumanUser talk:Human 17:55, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Quality encyclopedic redirects[edit]

Apparently, all these gems are not so obviously a parodist's creations that they merit immediate delition and Willard a block. No, instead they are given an AFD tag, and we know what what normally happens there (i.e. sweet FA) with AFDs. I call Willard a sock of Andy who thought, in his adolescent brain that this name calling is a right old laugh.

Now we need a few redirects for Andy, such as cp:Failed lawyer Andrew Schlafly and cp:Andrew Schlafly - spawn of Phyllis Bondurant 10:42, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm impressed. Really, I was beginning to get afraid that Deborah's 'Barack Odumbo' redirecting crap would go without response. I don't like Obama, but I'm not 5 years old either. -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 10:46, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

PNAS follow-up[edit]

Andy posts the PNAS reply to him. How long does it take? Where do they post it on their webcyte? /impatient >:u NorsemanWassail! 11:00, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm ammused because they (PNAS) will not do ANYTHING with this drivel. They will dismiss it as the quirks from a sick mind who knows nothing about science he didn't learn in kindergarden. But the RightyTighties will run around and say "see, we are vindicated. Science is frightened of us!" In a way, it's a "no win" for evolutionists who *care* what these freaks say. And for those who don't care what these scum unable to evolve into anything beyond women hating schills for lord knows what, it's a no-starter. Funny how politics is so like that.--Waiting for Godot 13:14, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
That reply (confirmation of receipt?) was put on the broken news at CP when they got it, a couple three weeks ago. ħumanUser talk:Human 13:24, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
But not the details. The print out posted shows its progress through the system. It starts of being sent to "Quality Control Review" (the day it was submitted). Suprise, suprise this review found that there was a "Quality Control Issue" (11th Aug). Quality controlled thought for a bit and passed it to the editorial review board. That was on 21st Aug, presumably they are still thinking "what do we do with this pile of shite?"--Toffeeman 15:09, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Will PNAS post it on their labyrinth that is their website, regardless of Andy's laughable cause, is what I wonder. NorsemanWassail! 15:38, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
I think they should hand it off to SciAm and let them run a nifty article about these YE creationist numbnuts. With pictures, so Jinx hi Jinx! can follow it. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:08, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
They do something annually for April Fools, don't they? I remember one year they ran an editorial on 1 April saying that they were giving up on evolution. CorryI've made a huge mistake. 18:02, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

The Hamster Not Been Fed Again?[edit]

Seems CP is unavailable. Even DownForEveryone says "Huh? doesn't look like a site on the interwho." --PsyGremlinWhut? 12:57, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Recentchanges and its links shows up fine for me...W PA USA comcast FF 2.0.0.16CЯacke® 13:01, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Odd it's back for me now. Ah well, (ab)normal service has been resumed. --PsyGremlinWhut? 13:05, 9 September 2008 (EDT)