Conservapedia talk:What is going on at CP?/Archive90

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 19 November 2008. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:
<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <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>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>
, (new)(back)

A new award for smilin' uncle Ed[edit]

We've already given him the Conservapedia's biggest idiot award for stellar achievement in field of idiocy, but from his recent antics I think he deserves another award. Edmund Poor, Conservapedia's biggest idiot and Conservapedia's most hateful bigot. He really is disgusting. --JeevesMkII 08:58, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Agreed. I don't know what's going on with the biggest idiot award thing for Conservapedia Day (it seems to have ground to a halt). But I really think the awards should include one for Ed in recognition of his homophobic bigotry & one for Andy for persistent chivalry/misogyny. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 09:38, 14 November 2008 (EST)
How about classifying them by mental disorder: Andy:Paranoia; Ken:Arrested development; Ed:Bipolar; Karajou:Auhority complex - etc ... ToastToastand marmite 09:44, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Operation Closet Homosexual[edit]

Does Ken have a list on CP of all his stupid search ranking missions and their names? Crundy 09:31, 14 November 2008 (EST)

They could be entirely random for all we know. Cataloging stupidity can be fun sometimes, but in Conservative's case, it might be too much. --Toiretni 10:45, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Try this. You've got to pick out the wheat from the chaff, but they're all there. ToastToastand marmite 14:59, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Even better. --Marty 23:43, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Funny Names[edit]

I signed up with the username ChrisPeacock, which didn't seem to arouse suspicion, so I posted a message on Andy's talk page. Still nothing. Eventually I got bored and did some quick vandalism. Might try Hugh_G_Rection next time or something. Crundy 10:13, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Not bad, considering Dessip got banned on site with "don't think we can't read backwards". Attempts to sock up and claim it was a real name (which I'm sure it is somewhere, like "Drop_table;students") failed miserablyArmondikoVmoral 10:17, 14 November 2008 (EST).
They probably had suspicions, but didn't want to ban straight away in case it was a real name :-) Crundy 10:24, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Some people are better than others at figuring out the more subtle names. I bet Bugler would have caught on in a heart beat. You've got to give the man credit, he knows every subtle reference on the planet. (Plus: Crispy Cock? It's a little bit of a stretch anyway.) JazzMan 13:00, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Well, it's just one of those things where it's very easy to pass it of as legit providing no one makes an attempt to read it out loud. E.g., There is Norfolk and Chance of CP ever gaining respectibility. ArmondikoVmoral 14:44, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Can we not talk about stretching crispy cocks please? I'm just about to have breakfast and now I can't eat any type of flake. Matt 15:40, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Plus "Dessip" violates the No Commonwealth English rule. 06:48, 15 November 2008 (EST)

If Ed's a Muslim, then I must be a Christian![edit]

If Ed's a Muslim because he's submitted to God, then I must be a Christian instead of an atheist, because I believe the Christlike ideal of treating others as you want to be treated, but then that means that Ed is not a Christian because he treats others like shit. But wait, why does Ed say he's a Christian then? Christians burned people at the stake for not believing what they do, so maybe I have the whole Christian thing wrong. I'm so confused. Please am you teaching me how I is going wrong Ed... Jimaginator 10:43, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Lol! Clever!--MAstEr oF pUPetStalk! 21:51, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Outbreak of sanity[edit]

What's with the sudden outbreak of sanity? PJR and ChrisS pointing out how ridiculous Conservapedia looks because of the Obama article, ChrisS noting Conservapedia isn't so trusworthy, and now BethanyS chimes in.

Fortunately, no matter how many trusted users complain, Andy will keep the lulz-inducing content at maximum, while simultaneously complaining that Wikipedia is the one that ignores users' input. --Toiretni 11:39, 14 November 2008 (EST)

I applaud the effort of CPAdmin1 to get some of the more blatant insanity off the main Obama page, but does anyone really think that even if every single user on the whole wiki, Ed and Bugler included, came out in support, Andy would entertain for a moment moving it off the top of the page? --Kels 12:06, 14 November 2008 (EST)
No. It is the will of lAndru. Jimaginator 12:46, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Don't worry, just when we think sanity might be lurking, Smeg Ed dusts off his encyclopedic masterpiece, cp:Dihydrogen monoxide. The man is a complete numpty; I'd actually forgotten how much I dislike him while he was away. --PsyGremlinWhut? 13:20, 14 November 2008 (EST)
I know, I had forgotten just how much of an idiot he is. Gawds man. -Smyth 13:57, 14 November 2008 (EST)
That hurt. There's now a large keyboard shaped bruise on my forehead. Some of this stuff should come with a severity warning. ArmondikoVmoral 14:42, 14 November 2008 (EST)
It's CP. Remember your helmet. --Kels 14:48, 14 November 2008 (EST)

"Equal Billing", Conservapedia Style[edit]

This brought a smile. DRamon: "We're not biased, because we show both sides of the issue - we show why our side (creationism) is right, and your stupid, idiotic side (evolution) is wrong to the point of being evil. --SpinyNorman 13:17, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Lets make it easier on ourselves[edit]

and redirect the WIGO page here. The man is a walking WIGO! StarFish 13:59, 14 November 2008 (EST)

I wish they'd change the name of that page. "Contributions" seems rather...inaccurate. --Kels 14:38, 14 November 2008 (EST)
It seems that Ken's been quiet(er) over the last 24 hrs or so but Ed's stepped up to the plate and delivered some fantastic gems. ArmondikoVmoral 14:40, 14 November 2008 (EST)
He's such a flaming idiot. It's nice to be reminded why he got the award, I had kind of forgotten while he was away. Smyth 14:46, 14 November 2008 (EST)
The "revenge" article was simply golden.-caius (soldier) 14:48, 14 November 2008 (EST)
The starter stub WTF? ħumanUser talk:Human 15:35, 14 November 2008 (EST)
"need some help here" <-- Yes, Ed, you do. --Sid 16:23, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Argh, reading Ed's talk page makes me want to bathe in bleach. --Kels 17:45, 14 November 2008 (EST)

It is getting a bit out of hand. Ten of the last twelve WIGO items are Ed-related. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 18:16, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Ken, Bugler, The Assfly, PJR, Karajou, Crock o' Shite. They all have their own special little area of idiocy. Ken does Hitler and How Are You Gentlemen?!? Assfly does the Godspeed and bogus statistics, etc. But Ed, well, Ed is the Renaissance man of stupidity. He can apply his ignorance and bigotry to any subject to achieve a result fit to make a grown man weep, or at least facepalm. It's a gift. --JeevesMkII 19:50, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Helpjazz again[edit]

Is Ed actually saying that they still trust him so little that they need to monitor his every contribution, just to make sure he's not going to slip some liberalism in somewhere? Now that's paranoia! --Kels 15:09, 14 November 2008 (EST)

That's the price one pays for having a different point of view there: complete, and utter scrutiny. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 15:29, 14 November 2008 (EST)
I don't really have that different of a POV, is the sad thing. And I never push my POV; I stick very closely to the Commandments. JazzMan 16:16, 14 November 2008 (EST)
See, there's your mistake right there. ;) --Sid 16:22, 14 November 2008 (EST)
I tried breaking the rules, but I'm not very good at it. I'm weird like that, I guess. JazzMan 17:08, 14 November 2008 (EST)

My theory[edit]

And it's my theory, had by me alone, without any help all mine I made up my theory it is.

As I exclaimed in shouties above, and please to discuss: BUGLER IS JOHN CLEESE! ħumanUser talk:Human 15:50, 14 November 2008 (EST)

He's not nearlt as clever as John. EternalCritic 15:57, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Of course not - characters can never be smarter than their creators, can they? But doesn't Bungler strike one as being a bit of a pythonesque parody of an old-school British conservative? ħumanUser talk:Human 16:24, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Ah, but is he small at one, big in the middle, and small at the other end? Researcher 16:37, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Absolutely! ħumanUser talk:Human 16:50, 14 November 2008 (EST)
If anybody hasn't seen this clip already, this is John Cleese airing his opinions about Bush, Obama, Biden, Sarah Palin, Fox News & Rupert Murdoch. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 18:58, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Love that guy :D 19:03, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Theory dead on arrival, apparently :( ħumanUser talk:Human 23:18, 15 November 2008 (EST)

More PNAS[edit]

A little bit on the PNAS/Lenski saga. Lenski did three experiments. Two with a few batches of bacteria (72 and 340), one with loads of batches of bacteria (2,800). The small experiments produced 4 and 5 mutated strains, the much larger experiment only produced 8.

There are three ways of combining the results:

1.Do not weight them at all
2.Weight them on the basis of the numbers of mutated strains 4:5:8
3.Weight them on the basis of the batch sizes 72:340:2800

Lenski did 1 and 2, but not 3. Andy thinks this is “dishonest” in that it does not apply the concepts in a paper by Michael Whitlock. Well Brossa has posted an extract from an email "the appropriate weightings should be 4, 5, and 8, the sample sizes.” The email is from Michael Whitlock. This was 18:10 13 November, no reply from Andy as yet.--Toffeeman 16:45, 14 November 2008 (EST)

There are rather a lot more than 3 ways of weighting the results if, like Andy, you don't know what the hell you're talking about and just want to make shit up:
4. Weight them by the number of cultures per replay times the number of cells per culture
5. Weight them by the number of cells per culture only
6. Weight them by the length of time that the experiments were run, in your choice of units
n-1. Weight them by (the color blue minus how big they are)/how a Muslim pronounces 'Lenski'
Well, duh. After all, the numbers from the Monte Carlo simulation depended on the number of Cit+ colonies found, not on the number of repetitions or cultures in the experiment.--Neon 23:41, 14 November 2008 (EST)
FWIW, Andy still hasn't said what the correct weighting should be, because he knows he's totally out of his depth. He's going on pure bluster.--Martin Arrowsmith 18:18, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Bah, Whitlock knows nothing about Whitlock's paper! Andy is expert in all subjects, and knows such things much better than the guy who actually wrote it. --Kels 17:05, 14 November 2008 (EST)
So Mr. Whitlock -- if that is your real name -- do you really expect us to believe this liberal wighting claptrap? I doubt that you believe in school prayer; I'd calculate a 0.0001 percent chance of it. So take your professor values elsewhere. Here at CP, we don't hide the truth behind statistics. Godspeed. -- Simple 17:42, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Was Whitlock's paper properly peer reviewed? I doubt it! By the Schlafly Standard, any paper that doesn't support Andy's position needs peer review by experts from WND and Townhall for at least six months. --Sid 18:02, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Deleting things you don't understand[edit]

If that's not a metonym for Conservapedia, I don't know what is.-caius (soldier)

Your post has been redacted because I don't understand what "Metonym" means. Please keep your edits to an appropriate level of comprehensibility understandability Ed-speak, please. -SpinyNorman 17:34, 14 November 2008 (EST)
LOLZ. I might have used it improperly: an example where the part stands for the whole, I believe, is what it is... I think? Don't tell me I'm wrong or I'll block you.-caius (soldier) 17:37, 14 November 2008 (EST)
You and I had a semi-correct definition. The correct one is:
metonym - a word that denotes one thing but refers to a related thing; "Washington is a metonym for the United States government"; "plastic is a metonym for credit card".
Had me wondering, though, what an appropriate metonym for CP would be. --SpinyNorman 17:57, 14 November 2008 (EST) TOO MANY BIG WORDS. STOP HURTING MY TINY BRAIN!
So close! So does that work then? "Deleting things you don't understand is a metonym for Conservapedia?" Or is "emblematic of" what I'm looking for...-caius (soldier) 18:15, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Hmm. "Emblematic of" works quite nicely, I'd say. "Ignorance" would be my choice for metonym. --SpinyNorman 18:40, 14 November 2008 (EST)
I believe the term you're looking for might be "epitomizes". --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 20:02, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Show-off. --SpinyNorman 20:57, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Synecdoche, bitches! Which is apparently pronounced "sih-neck-duh-key", and not "cynic-douche", which is what I am.--Martin Arrowsmith 21:44, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Shubenacadie? I grew up really close to there. (trivia: the map is missing a river) --Kels 21:53, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Let us not forget Schenectady, pronounced "skin-neck-tiddy". DickTurpis 22:19, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Come to that, Ken would have loved where I grew up. The next community over was called "Gay's River". --Kels 22:39, 14 November 2008 (EST)
I see your Gay's River and raise you Queer Road, one block over from me. --PsyGremlinWhut? 03:11, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I had a customer who lived in Bumpass... ħumanUser talk:Human 15:40, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Hooray hooray hooray![edit]

Looks like someone over there is a Marx Brothers fan. --Kels 19:59, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Linky? --SpinyNorman 20:58, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Not yet, wait 'til they've been blocked. --Kels 21:20, 14 November 2008 (EST)
I couldn't find it. I guess I need to bone up on my Marx Brothers, which is a task I just might enjoy a little bit. JazzMan 23:33, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Hmm, may have gotten it slightly wrong. Not saying it's wrong, but it's not an exact match like I thought. Too long since I've seen Animal Crackers, I guess. --Kels 23:45, 14 November 2008 (EST)

He's a real Canadian artist, if that's what you mean...? --Marty 01:50, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Well, I assumed it was the African explorer, but I made a mistake on the first initial. So I guess it's my loss. --Kels 08:50, 15 November 2008 (EST)
At least HelpJazz has learned a little bit about Groucho Marx from this little exchange. ;) --Marty 18:24, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I learned a lot about Groucho, actually, and I got to see a couple of clips on YouTube! If it weren't for all the fake information, I wouldn't have blocked you; you write a good article. JazzMan 18:52, 15 November 2008 (EST) <-- PS: What are the chances you'd tell me if I missed anything?
Zero, generally. But just for being a good sport, I'll tell you: You missed something. --Marty 15:51, 16 November 2008 (EST)
For one thing, Harpo Marx's original real name was (no foolin'!) Adolf. He changed it in the early 1940s, for some obscure reason. --Gulik 18:42, 17 November 2008 (EST)
True, but he did change it to Arthur. Anyway, no hints! This puzzle is for HelpJazzMan! ;) For those playing along at home, there are at least two obvious falsehoods left, plus a moderate amount of snark and bullshit. --Marty 03:33, 18 November 2008 (EST)
This is freaking HARD. I have some guesses, but no will to fact check right now. The problem is, except for certain facts like the guy's name, not everything is easy to look up if you aren't an expert. For instance: if the subject of Duck Soup was subtly wrong, the only way I would know would be to read the script or rewatch the movie. Had I deletion powers, I probably would have just deleted the thing and started over (and I probably would have earned myself a WiGO as well!). JazzMan 03:45, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Gentlemen, in regards to the new article "homosexual obsession," the first vandal to redirect "homosexual obsession" to "user:Conservative" gets a handshake. Call it Operation Closet :)! Guess away![edit]

Gentlemen, in regards to the new article "homosexual obsession," the first vandal to redirect "homosexual obsession" to "user:Conservative" gets a handshake. Call it Operation Closet :)! Guess away!-caius (soldier) 21:37, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Congratulations to:
The page is still unlocked so if you would like to have your socks name featured here, please carry on. - User 08:29, 15 November 2008 (EST)
UPDATE It is now locked.

Dimetrodont's userpage There was time to do all sorts of stuff and even write and edit a userpage before teh blockie came down.

Dimetrodont also broke the 10 minutes limit for scoring in [Conservatroll]. Barraki 15:41, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Obama and the "renegade" codename[edit]

The assertion that Obama chose the codename "Renegade" because it comes from a Spanish word that means a Christian convert to Islam conflicts with Conservapedia's article on Obama, since the article asserts that Obama was a Muslim from birth who never truly converted to Christianity, not a Christian who converted to Islam. I just thought that was funny, because it looks like that Andy's so desperate to try to paint Obama as a Muslim that he ends up contradicting himself in the process.--ParisianBlade 00:47, 15 November 2008 (EST)

But, renegade is from spanish which is from latin re + negare. Negare is the present infinitive of nego which is "I deny" or "I refuse, say no." Since the Romans were pagans, that must mean that Obama is a pagan that will veto all the time! --Shagie 01:16, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Your logic is flawless... ArmondikoVmoral 06:54, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Also, "re + negare" is an anagram of "negro are +". Deny that and lose all credibility. Etc 16:35, 15 November 2008 (EST)

there is no O in re + negare. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)Approach the Presence 14:34, 16 November 2008 (EST)

We're trying to build an encyclopedia here, don't waste our tile with your liberal "spelling". --Kels 14:37, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Boo, no Anthony![edit]

Wandal inserts grammatical fixes along with the information that Susan B. Anthony and Ben Stein were separated at birth. Aschlafly reverts. CSGuy points out that wandals are better than Aschlafly at grammar. Aschlafly reverts.

(While I'm blowing Massoch's own horn, I might as well ask if anyone else agrees that this version of the cp:Spanish-American War article is "punchier" than the current one. I think that's an awesome picture of an exploding ship. But probably this bit of image-related tomfoolery came too close on the heels of HITLER MEGAZOID and Liberacebot to go undetected.) --Marty 01:00, 15 November 2008 (EST)

It's long been known that Andy is too lazy to use anything but "rollback". You make 300 edits and then put something he doesn't like on edit 301? *Zoop* back to the drawing board sucka! This is why he can't leave an edit comment when reverting. (To be fair: in this case he was probably objecting to the fact tag, not the edit comment). JazzMan 01:28, 15 November 2008 (EST)

He's back...[edit]

Teh TK Strieks Agian!

Just in time for more infighting, its our favorite ex-sysop.[1] Will TK and Bugler double team PJR? or will they fight between themselves for who is the biggest ass. Place your bets. Note: TK and the guy running Bugler in deep cover are not allowed to bet as they may influence the outcome. Just in time for Consevapedia day too. --Shagie 01:52, 15 November 2008 (EST)

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH. Seriously, though, I think I remember reading somewhere in a prophecy that TK had a role to play, for good or evil, before the quest was done (bonus points for lotr reference?). Call it the Conservapedia endtimes: I think they're upon us.-caius (soldier) 02:08, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Ames, my friend, I forbid you from TK interactions! It is for your own good... tmtoulouse 02:11, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Tmt, ahem, so long as TK could be watching, I don't know who this "Ames" kid is. I'm just regular old Caius. I will tell you, though, that any person named Ames is probably intelligent, well-liked, witty, and a stallion in bed.
On a related note, does anyone else think it's odd that Smilin' Ed came back just days before TK did? Recall that he and Ed were BFFs for quite some time: talked frequently and such. And then TK's first message is to Ed. Hmmm.-caius (soldier) 02:23, 15 November 2008 (EST)
  • about zero growth! --TK/MyTalk"Lowly" editor 02:42, 15 November 2008 (EST)

What on Earth does that mean? Please tell us, Lowly Editor. Proxima Centauri 05:32, 15 November 2008 (EST)


--מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!

Ahu. The Ghost Of CP Past is early. Didn't expect him till Christmas ;)
Since I'm too tired for wild speculation or panic, I'll just leave a minor Red Telephone note for TK here: Hey, TK, you might want to read up on how to use References in MediaWiki. And now excuse me while I hunt for caffeine... --Sid 07:16, 15 November 2008 (EST)

IT'S THE SECOND COMING OF EVIL JESUS! AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 08:55, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Wow, Andy's totally forgotten all the havoc that TK caused over there before, hasn't he? --Kels 09:23, 15 November 2008 (EST)
What did Andy say to TK? Andy has since burned the evidence.-caius (soldier) 13:52, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Thanked him for adding some humour to the talk page, and hoped that he would keep in touch over the holidays. Pretty substanceless, but obviously happy to see him. --Kels 14:24, 15 November 2008 (EST)
WOW. TK is seriously laying it on thick. Aaaaaand that's the last I'll say about him.-caius (soldier) 00:54, 16 November 2008 (EST)
I'm actually unclear as to what he's trying to say there. (Also, I'm not saying TK is the Dark Knight, but he certainly gets things done the way Frank Miller Batman does...) --IN SOVIET CANUCKISTAN, BEAVER DAMS YOU!!!YossarianThe Man from the USSR 18:08, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Warning Conservapedia about TK and the mayhem he will cause there is impossible. Rationalwikiwiki triggers their spam filter as does Rationalwiki. Proxima Centauri 07:30, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Ed and Jinx's Law[edit]

Do you think Ed could do with some help from Jinx here? - User 06:54, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Also how come it has taken Ed 5 edit to make this shitty (categorized) one line stub, which is a repeat of an existing article? He truly is a idiot. - User 07:12, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Wow. The disambig page is roughly three times as long as the specific "article" about the metal. Concise! --Sid 07:22, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Brass... that's metallurgy... that's metals... that's chemistry... that's science. BURN THE SCIENCE! ArmondikoVmoral 08:44, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Palin, Africa and Fox News[edit]

I know the answer to every question in Sunday school is "Jesus," but is the answer to everything at CP "liberal media bias"? There is a perfectly plausible reason to call bullshit on the claims about Palin (campaign infighting), but they have to go with the old standard, even where it requires them to make implausible claims, such as Fox News (or maybe the Rovroids who worked for the McCain campaign) being liberal.

Personally, I doubted that she though Africa was a country, but then saw an interview where she was asked about it and gave some nondenial denials, so I'm currently on the fence. Godspeed 07:01, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Whaddya expect when "liberal" becomes a mere synonym for "bad"? Bluefish
Yeah, "Goat's peed" (if that is even your real name) I thought it was a crock (albiet a tasty one . . . . mmm. . . Palin is so stupid jokes . . . ) as well but then in the interview a couple of days after the story broke she did not deny the Africa gaffe, nor was her denial of the shopping spree terribly convincing or specific. This leads me to beleive the smears had at least a kernal of accuracy to them. However, there is a huge caveat: These accusations come from some recently laid laid-off and professionally disgruntled workers of a fear and smear factory . . .
Bonus: To my mind her performance during her denial interview was nearly as bad as her performance in the Couric interview. WTF? Where are her handlers? Is she going through a Britney Spears melt down? Is that the real Palin? Does flighty, incoherent and dumb really appeal to the Republican base? Is she vying for Fey's spot on SNL? Any Palin afficienados care to weigh in? Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 11:48, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I think it's a symptom of how far right Conservapedia has pushed itself that they can even look at Fox News & see liberal bias. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 12:10, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Homosexual obsession[edit]

Apparently, the gay agenda is "constantly pumping" them. No subtext there. Godspeed 07:10, 15 November 2008 (EST)

It'll be locked soon enough... ArmondikoVmoral 08:43, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I did the maths in between watching episodes of John Safran Vs God.
  • Wikipedia: 2,621,000 articles. Search results for Homosexuality: 9017. Percentage: 0.0034%
  • Conservapedia: 27,274 "probably legitamate content" blog entries articles. Search results for Homosexuality: 468. Percentage: 0.01%
Ergo 2.9 times as many "homosexuality" results per number of articles. Judging by the amount of crap on CP and the shortness of articles, if I could redo the figures by something less subjective than articles say, by no. of kilobytes, I'm sure it would be higher. ArmondikoVmoral 09:01, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Incidentally, for RW it's 0.08% of pages flagged up for "homosexuality". Restricting it to mainspace (i.e., get rid of all the Conservapedia and Homosexuality type things and talk, WIGO etc.), it's 0.03%. ArmondikoVmoral 09:07, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Yes, but we love the gays. Plus, some large percentage of RW's homosexually oriented references are going to begin with some variation on "Can you believe what CP wrote about homosexuals . . ." Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 12:22, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Clearly, we suffer from homosexuality obsession obsession. Etc 16:29, 15 November 2008 (EST)

You know I think we've just discovered some value in reparitive therapy. All of this time they should not have been using on gay people but rather the homophobes and the homophobphobes and possibly the homophobphobphobes. I could do this all day. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 17:30, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Gotta feel bad for the guy[edit]

What's the patron saint of lost causes again? --Kels 10:29, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Notice how the Schlafly Statistic (less than 1% of Muslims ...) has now become a fact - no-one has questioned it for ages. (poor Tim) ToastToastand marmite 11:01, 15 November 2008 (EST)
It's doubly funny, since neither of Andy's sources for that 1% nonsense actually use that figure. In fact, one of his sources say the conversion rate in Africa alone. So to use his logic, that's about 1.4% annually. Quite a bit higher than what he's been saying. Of course, since Obama never grew up in Africa in the first place, that figure only applies to his father, not him. That's the father who had no impact whatsoever on Obama's schooling, having left the kid's life when he was two years old, and before he moved to Indonesia in the first place. In conclusion, Andy's a moron. --Kels 11:12, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Oops! Tim's really going for it now. (Bye bye Tim?) ToastToastand marmite 11:20, 15 November 2008 (EST)
(EC) Extra WTF power: Going by this source that he gives to support the 1% figure, it looks like "African Traditional Religions" are dropping sharply, at least in Zimbabwe, while others seem to be picking up. The only 1% I can find on that page is the number of agnostics in Florida, of all places. --Kels 11:21, 15 November 2008 (EST)

(unindent) Page wiped/censored again to cover up uncomfortable pwning. :( AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 12:08, 15 November 2008 (EST)

BRichtigen recalculates the number from Aschlafly's source, suddenly it's 4%... LArron 12:11, 15 November 2008 (EST)
He's probably right. When I came up with 1.4%, I obviously wasn't using the World Almanac figures, which are probably the accurate ones. --Kels 12:31, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Andy, Harvard Law Review, and Obama[edit]

Interesting, they were both born in 1961, so technically they could have attended at the same time. It's very likely our little Andy actually worked under Obama during their times at Harvard. I can't find a single shred of evidence relating to the years Andy worked there (DECEIT), but Obama's is 1990 (when he became law review president). I find that rather amusing. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 12:08, 15 November 2008 (EST)

They graduated the same year (see Conservapedia:Barack Obama comparison) so it's pretty likely they were contributing at the same time. I would not be at all surprised to hear that Andy wrote for the review before Obama was its President, but quit afterwards, refusing to work under this uppity Negro. That might be why Andy refuses to talk about it, and threatens to ban anyone who mentions it (the new FBI?). DickTurpis 13:05, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Did anyone else see the excellent pre-election Frontline backgrounder on the two candidates ? Very good stuff. One of the interesting things I hadn't known was that after a very bitter political fight between Affirmative Action types and Conservative types, Obama won the Harvard Law Review Editor-in-Chief position as essentially an appeaser, a centrist who would listen to both sides. After his victory, he was expected to appoint a number of African-Americans to the panel of senior editors. But he didn't - it seems he pissed off the black community who elected him, making only one black appointment while giving the conservative Federalists three, and in fact continuing the power bloc that had dominated the publication for years. His Change was, it seems, not so Changey. The melodrama of student politics apart, it would seem that the precedents he has set in his own career are to do his own thing and not really collapse under mob pressure. But if that's the case, and Obama turned out NOT to be Affirmative Action Man, why wouldn't that have made Andy Fuckwit think more positively of him? I wonder if Andy was pushing for that one position on that editor panel, and forever feels he lost the position to Affirmative Action? As others have suspected, I'm sure his hatred of Obama is more personal than Andy is letting on - their circles of movement were too close to not have crossed paths. DogP 13:34, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Cherchez la femme. Nods.gif --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 13:40, 15 November 2008 (EST)
[edit conflict] The connection has been mentioned before, yeah. BTW, Dick, would you say there's a 90% chance that Andy quit when Obama became president of the Law Review, or a 95% chance? It's important to give specific percentages when making up crap in order to smear somebody you dislike.
Anyway, this blog post advertising a talk by Andy on "ABC" specifically claims that Andy "was on the Harvard Law Review with Barack Obama", which I take as a confirmation. I don't know how to find out exact dates except to find a friendly source who was on the Law Review with them and ask. --Marty 13:41, 15 November 2008 (EST)
93% certain, to be precise. There is little doubt they were on the HLR together, and I'm sure Obama worked for it for at least a year before becoming its President. But was Andy still on the staff after Obama was President? Obviously we don't know, but Andy's refusal to talk about it is telling. Sort of like the gerbils in the ass. 90% certain on that one. DickTurpis 14:29, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I suspect that many of Andy's political and ideological tantrums and tangents are the result of some perceived personal slight. Over at CP when he get's pissy about some little thing he extends the object of his pissiness to everything he says for a while. I'm sure this habit of wild transference and seeing imaginary connections has helped him believe he is an expert on everything. He continually finds broad application for every little nugget of idiocy that occurs to him. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 13:52, 15 November 2008 (EST)
LawrenceA got ban-threatened for asking the same, btw.caius (soldier) 13:53, 15 November 2008 (EST)
This is actually starting to get interesting. We can roughly place them both on the Harvard Law Review at the same time, what we need is someone else that was on it at the same time who would respond to questions. tmtoulouse 14:03, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I can't seem to find a full masthead though, that would list Andy's position viz. Obama's.-caius (soldier) 14:31, 15 November 2008 (EST)
You'd need to find somewhere that has bound volumes of some sort, I think. Or at least (converted) microfiche of the physical issues. --Kels 14:34, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Verified Andrew Schlafly was on the Editorial Board the year they elected Obama the president of HLR. More to come. tmtoulouse 14:36, 15 November 2008 (EST)
This is the section of that Frontline film we need - there's lots of archival photos in here of the HLR board and footage, and I wasn't paying attention the first time to see if AndyPandy makes an appearance..... Frontline Section 3, 'The Choice' DogP 14:50, 15 November 2008 (EST)
OK, at 11:08 in that programme, we see Andy's name in the third column of the left page of the HLR Vol. 104 image. Andy is right there in the photo at 11:46 - back row, just left of centre, to the left of that poster. And the suggestion that Obama even socialised with the Federalists (conservatives) makes the mind boggle. Did Obama and Andy actually share beers? The forensics continue. DogP 15:06, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Yep, I just got to that point as well and saw Andy's mug. There is a story here. tmtoulouse 15:11, 15 November 2008 (EST)
No clear images of Andy protesting in that programme, sadly. But one suspects Bradford Berenson and Christine Spurell would be able to tell us EXACTLY what we need to know. I think it's now VERY clear that Andy's hatred of Obama stems from being on the opposite side in that HLR election. But what's most interesting is that while white, conservative Berenson seems to bear little animosity towards Obama, African-American Spurell does. This makes me wonder - was Andy so completely marginalised even then, that he simply couldn't bear to step across the aisle and work with Obama, since it's clear that Berenson does respect him? Or was there something else? DogP 15:16, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Andy obama.PNG

There we go. tmtoulouse 15:15, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Image:HLRmasthead.PNG masthead showing Schlafly and Obama from HLR. tmtoulouse 15:31, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Gentlemen - a conspiracy theory we haz! WOOOOOO! DogP 15:22, 15 November 2008 (EST)

What do you think the chances are that Schlafly tried to run? tmtoulouse 15:27, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Well, 95% obviously... Totnesmartin 15:58, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Fascinating stuff this is! Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 15:32, 15 November 2008 (EST)
OK, for the moment we can only speculate. But I'm going to. I suggest that Andy ran, but was considered too hatstand for even those on the Right. When Obama won, and worked as an appeaser, electing more conservatives to the Board than African-Americans, Andy felt doubly hurt, because those on the Right did not support him for those places either. So he feels jilted by both Affirmative Action AND the establishment, conservative Right. That's my theory, and I'm sticking to it until more research is done. DogP 15:35, 15 November 2008 (EST)

And for my own theory, does anyone see Assfly in the other group photo? The one after Obama is President? Until someone points him out, I'm going to have to make the unfounded assumption that he quit in protest, probably in a tirade of racial epithets. DickTurpis 15:34, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, the rez is too low to see that - I'm squinting, but can't be sure I can see him. You could well be right. DogP 15:36, 15 November 2008 (EST)
If you mean this photo, this is the best res I've been able to find. Still a little hard to make out, but I think Andy is the guy one row down from the back, far left, half hiding behind another guy. It certainly looks like it could be him anyway. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 15:42, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Yeah, that's Andy. Is this the "post election of Obama" photo? ħumanUser talk:Human 15:44, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Yeah, pretty sure that's our Assfly. Damn. My theory isn't holding up so well. Time to go into double Andy denial mode and really start grasping at straws. I'm sure he quit the next day. He just wanted to be in one more photo before he quit. His ego wouldn't let him do otherwise. DickTurpis 15:48, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Also, do notice that our Assfly is standing almost as far away from that repellant Muslim as he possibly can. Coincidence? DickTurpis 15:54, 15 November 2008 (EST)

For a second I thought I uncovered a separate conspiracy, as if you look at the yearbook photos at 11:33 you see the name Philip C. Berg. Then I realized that Philip J. Berg is the one who brought the lawsuit saying he wasn't a citizen. Damn. so close. DickTurpis 15:41, 15 November 2008 (EST)

How come I can't scroll around that video to wherever I want? ħumanUser talk:Human 15:44, 15 November 2008 (EST)
This is the relevant bit on You Tube. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 15:52, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Time for an article yet? tmtoulouse 15:49, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Shouldn't it all just go in the article linked at the top of this section? Oh, and also, I really doubt AS would have quit HLR over something like that. Or anything, for that matter. It's highly prestigious to be on it, in any position. ħumanUser talk:Human 15:52, 15 November 2008 (EST)
It could be referenced, but I think there is enough here to support a stand alone article. tmtoulouse 15:54, 15 November 2008 (EST)

No - we gotta dig deeper! Bradford Berenson is an attorney at Sidley Austin, and Christine Spurell is a public defender in Arlington, VA. Anyone know, or have contacts to either of them?

Pic of HLR after Obama is elected. Is that Andy on the far left second row? If so he doesn't look happy.--ScottA 16:08, 15 November 2008 (EST)
A black man is threatening Andy! Notice how Obama is pointing his staff of power directly at Andy. I think he is threatening him. Andy is mad at him because Obama used to pick on him at school! Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 17:25, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Surely the Harvard Law Review has archives? Even better, there must have been a student newspaper that covered the election and that must have archives. Does anyone live in the Harvard area (where is Harvard anyway?)--Toffeeman 17:06, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I find it intriguing that Andy never mentioned knowing Obama personally. What is he hiding? Where is his conservative insight about those bad old days? This sooooo ties in with my Andy's most feverish crusades are tied to personal slights theory. Perhaps he really didn't. know Obama Perhaps Andy was only appointed an editor because of his mother and wasn't active in publication. He could have just showed up at photo ops. I'm 99% certain Andy did not receive an editorship on merit but rather because of his association with one of the most influential good old boy networks in our great and noble nation. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 17:25, 15 November 2008 (EST)
With more than 70 editors, surely not all of them can have been equally involved in the editorial process. There's probably room for a bit of deadwood. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 17:39, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I think Andy's hatred for Obama and his refusal to discuss his past associations with him are basically summed up in our comparison of the two. It really highlights how the two of them were once basically in the same position, perhaps looking at similar futures, while one of them goes on to become President of the USA and one is teaching a few dozen less than terribly bright kids on subjects he himself knows little about. If Andy was one of the candidates for HLR President, it must be a completely sore spot for him. It marks the exact moment one of them pulled away from their previous standings as equals and took off for greatness, leaving the other far, far behind. I would like to find out of Andy did run. It wouldn't surprise me; clearly there were many candidates if they had to vote until the wee hours before someone was finally elected. (I'm thinking of the 1860 Republican convention here, to draw another irrelevant Obama/Lincoln comparison.) We need to get more information on this. DickTurpis 17:43, 15 November 2008 (EST)
There were 18 candidates total, that is all I have so far. 17:50, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Oooooo! Schlafly Statistics time! Since there are about 70 editors, if 18 of them were candidates then there is about a 26% chance Andy was one. That means even if he didn't run, we can still say it is 26% likely he actually did. you can't argue with figures. DickTurpis 17:54, 15 November 2008 (EST)
From the New York Times: "The election was an all-day affair with the ego-crushing drama of a reality TV show. Inside Pound Hall, the editors picked apart the intellectual and social skills of the 19 contenders, eliminating them in batches. At the last moment, the conservative faction, its initial candidates defeated, threw its support to Mr. Obama. “Whatever his politics, we felt he would give us a fair shake,” said Bradford Berenson, a former associate White House counsel in the Bush administration." tmtoulouse 18:13, 15 November 2008 (EST)
You know what would be great, what if Andy voted for Obama. tmtoulouse 18:15, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Wow. Is it a bit disturbing that Andy today looks exactly the same in 1990? AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 18:06, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Imagine what the painting in his loft looks like. Fretfulporpentine 19:14, 15 November 2008 (EST)
How did you know I have a nude painting of him in my loft? AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 19:27, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Okay- FWIW, Andy and Obama both are first listed on the Editorial Board of the Harvard Law Review as of November of 1989: vol 103, isssue 1, p 136. They both are last listed as Editorial Board members as of June 1991: vol 104, issue 8, p 1834. So they came in and left at the same time as far as I can tell. Scanning through HLR online, I don't see anything that indicates which editor contributed to which articles; there are invited commentaries that are credited, but the majority of stuff doesn't appear to have bylines. I didn't wade through more than a dozen articles or so, so I could certainly be wrong about that. I don't even see any particular mention of Obama being the president of the editorial board as of 1990- they don't seem to go in for that sort of show-offery there. Hey, here's a funny thought - maybe someone could ask Andy if he remembers which articles Obama wrote for the HLR before he was president, and follow that up by asking which ones Andy wrote. Think that you'd get a straight answer? Yeah, me neither.--Martin Arrowsmith 22:02, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Primer on law review work styles: students all "work" on individual author pieces (and there are some FAMOUS-ass names in the two issues Schlafly & Obama would've worked on), but they only work on them to the extent that they edit for structure, citation, and filling in holes in the substance of articles. Students only actually write Book Reviews, Recent Developments (our journal calls them "Comments"), and Notes. Notes are the longest pieces, but HLR notes are always anonymous; only the editor in chief can correlate title with author, unless someone does some real deep digging with people who worked on the piece, of course. I did a brief run-through of the Notes published in 103 and 104, and while there were a few that were notably conservative in their leaning, not any that raised serious Schlafly flags. If I remember correctly, someone DID find out what Obama's HLR note was, and it was quite good, if fairly left on affirmative action, I think. I don't have any contacts with HLR or I'd do some digging on Schlafly's note.-caius (soldier) 22:27, 15 November 2008 (EST)
[Johnny Carson] I did not know that.[/Johnny Carson] Thanks very much.--Martin Arrowsmith 23:55, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Don't thank me yet! I didn't know this but here - in Politico's take on Obama's article - they note that most 2Ls on HLR wrote case comments. Obama's appeared in the third 1990 issue. I'll page through the 1990 issues and see if one jumps out... tomorrow :)-caius (soldier) 00:12, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Great spade work, gentlemen. Curious minds demand that you keep on digging. Robledo 14:54, 16 November 2008 (EST)


I can't find anything on whether Andy ran for president. I did, however, find this. Does Andy's kid go to Harvard Law too? Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 18:47, 15 November 2008 (EST)

That would probably be cp:User:CollegeRepublican. Seems to be keeping up the family tradition of not winning elections. DickTurpis 19:15, 15 November 2008 (EST)
You shouldn't talk about one of CP's most hardworking and industrious sysops like that. --Kels 19:24, 15 November 2008 (EST)
It's gotta be. Sysop-ed after zero edits and not blocked for inappropriate name. Keep losing, losers! Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 19:27, 15 November 2008 (EST)
That's undergrad, by the way. So do I have to go to Cambridge and dig all this crap outof their libraries, or is EV Debs closer? ħumanUser talk:Human 19:31, 15 November 2008 (EST)
If you can wait until March, I'll go. Probably going to Boston for St. Patty's day. That'll be a nice diversion from binge drinking. Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 19:34, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I think Trent might be digging through the McMaster library already, he might find some stuff. Yeah, Boston's a pretty bleak and dry town on March 17... ħumanUser talk:Human 19:36, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Also interesting: look who won the election. Fuel for Andrew "Chivalry" Schlafly's crusade against men being embarrassed by women?-- Antifly Now with 50% less retirement! 20:40, 15 November 2008 (EST)
If Junior's got the same Charisma Quotient (-98) as Senior, it's no wonder he lost. ToastToastand marmite 15:59, 16 November 2008 (EST)


I note that this isn't mentioned on Wikipedia at all. Even the internet barely knows of it. Wikipedia and Conservapedia would both be enriched if they included these insights. --Toiretni 14:01, 15 November 2008 (EST)

CP, perhaps. Putting it on WP would waste the time of the wrong people. Pseudomonas 14:17, 15 November 2008 (EST)



Come to think of it, I've never seen McCain dancing and less than 1% of people who refuse to be photographed dancing have no secret religion to conceal. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 15:35, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Conservapedia vs. Wikpedia[edit]

I just googled this: Conservapedia versus Wikipedia I'm not sure how seriously WP takes this threat. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 17:39, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Doubtful most people on Wikipedia even know about CP. Glad the word is getting out though. It has brought me so much joy. Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 18:14, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Even better, there's no mention of any of Ken's articles in the whole piece. That's gotta hurt. --Kels 18:18, 15 November 2008 (EST)
In reality, CP is a speck on the internet and it will commit suicide well before most people take notice. Many people are aware of it, but only in the context of "oh, this blog I read posted some real funny shit from this website". ArmondikoVmoral 09:37, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Oh certainly. Page views notwithstanding, the idea that CP is an actual encyclopedia that is in any danger if taking Wikipedia's business is a farce. I imagine they all know it too, but will never admit it. DickTurpis 09:47, 16 November 2008 (EST)
I'd say the same applies to RW (even more so, to be honest), but no one here tries to claim that it's an encyclopedia at all so it can't be farcical! ArmondikoVmoral 05:57, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Something for the fundies to think about[edit]

Right after California bans gay marriage, God burns down the state. What does this say? Anyone want to burn a sock to get CP's take on this? DickTurpis 17:56, 15 November 2008 (EST)

The thing you have to realise about God is that when he's pissed about something, he doesn't necessarily smite people who have anything to do with the offence. You see, if he's pissed about his chosen people pulling out of Gaza, he might for example drown a lot of poor black folks in New Orleans. If people are having too many abortions, a couple of planes might fly in to the world trade centre. That's just the kind of guy he is, capricious and illogical. I dare say if something is on fire, it's probably another hideous case of cracker desecration. That seriously annoys the LORD. --JeevesMkII 18:06, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I'll get you next time, PZ! You can't run forever! --The LORD
Who says God did it? JazzMan 18:15, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Open your mind and abandon your naturalistic views that demand there be non-supernatural explanations for events. Obviously God had a purpose in sending this fire, presumably against gays, evolutionists and atheists. --Kels 18:21, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Our nation just elected the anti-christ! Naturally. God is a bit miffed about it. He's probably not going to let Jesus come back now 18:42, 15 November 2008 (EST)
But Jesus and I was gonna hang out! It's not fair, I tells ya! --Kels 19:08, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I made a promise, Miss Kels. A Promise. "Don't you leave him Jesus." And I don't mean to. I don't mean to. Lotrofurfagfan 19:26, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Jazzman (If that is you're real name) your overly rational views on this matter will not be tolerated here. We do not partake in petty thought on this wiki. Godspeed! Pinto's5150 Talk 19:20, 15 November 2008 (EST)
That's what I always suspected. JazzMan 13:49, 16 November 2008 (EST)

I've got a sock that's slightly tainted. I've tried. [2] . Proxima Centauri 13:52, 16 November 2008 (EST)

I like that short exchange. God even loves liberals. As Ghandi (the racist sorta kiddy fiddler that he was) said, "I like your Christ, not so much your Christians". ArmondikoVmoral 05:59, 17 November 2008 (EST)

"Tim is an interfering fool who should involve himself only ins (sic) such matters that his limited inttellect (sic) can cope with..."[edit]

And with that edit summary, Bugler takes it up a notch...PFoster 20:15, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Check out the crap he's slinging at Tim on his talk page, it's insane. Has he finally decided to blow his cover, or has he reached Untouchable status, and knows Andy is such a pussy he won't do anything about it? --Kels 20:19, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I say that with both Ed Poor and TK back in the space of a week, he wants to see just how far he can push it and reveal how poor a leader Andy is...PFoster 20:21, 15 November 2008 (EST)
He's as good as untouchable in this case, anyway. Andy won't help anybody who ever openly criticized him, which Tim and PJR (repeatedly) did. So picking on them is fair game, really. We'll have to see if the other sysops dare to step in, though. --Sid 20:28, 15 November 2008 (EST)
After actually looking at that "discussion", I have to say that he really is pushing it, though. Major WTF, and kudos to Tim for not taking the tons of flamebaits. How long until Bugler blocks Tim? --Sid 20:32, 15 November 2008 (EST)
I don't agree with a lot of Tim's positions, but he's a class act that can keep his temper. Exactly the wrong sort of opponent for Bungler, since it makes him look raving mad by comparison. --Kels 20:39, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Has Ed finally caught on? I mean, if his agenda wasn't clear before, his choice of editors to antagonize (PJR, HelpJazz, and now Tim) should make it crystal, at least to those who are capable of seeing it (meaning the rest of the sysops will remain ignorant). If he loses Ed, though, it'll be hard to keep the crazy vs. sensible war going, even with the air support known as TK. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 20:50, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Ed's still on his side. Notice how he tries to spread the blame of Bungler's abuse onto everyone in the conversation, instead of just saying "Bugler, knock it off". He's trying to look like the peacemaker without actually doing anything. --Kels 20:52, 15 November 2008 (EST)
He was looking for an excuse to lock the talk page in order to protect Bugler, even though Bugler was the one being insulting to Tim. Sort of backfired I guess when Jazzy pointed out all the examples coming from just Bugler himself, defeating Ed's awesome foolproof plan. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 21:15, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Uh, wow. I guess TK's jealous of Bugler being the only one to kick PJR around. It's getting kinda nasty over there, despite the love-fest. Cripes, even geo.plrd came back to welcome TK back to the fold, I'd almost forgotten that guy. --Kels 21:32, 15 November 2008 (EST)
gplrd turns up regularly on the IRC... he's more focused on WP these days I think. ħumanUser talk:Human 19:41, 16 November 2008 (EST)

(unindent)Through in special guest stars Jinx, maybe Fox, and the inimitable RobS and you've got all the makings of either sweeps week or a series finale! --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 21:38, 15 November 2008 (EST)

And in the midst of it all, Andy proves that there's no problem so big or complicated you can't hide until it goes away. --Kels 21:41, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Mmmm... Apart from being a master parodist, Bugly is cunningly poisoning the love & friendship among Conservapedians. Not that there is much over there, but exciting new developments are expected soon. Stay tuned! JJ4eAndy's writing makes my eyes sad 23:09, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Man, civility's just gone out the window over there, hasn't it? --Kels 14:26, 16 November 2008 (EST)

How things change[edit]

Funny, Andy didn't think Obama was all that bad back in March '07. US citizen, not a stealth muslim, senior lecturer. Sure, a liberal, and thus imperfect, but otherwise pretty nondescript. Makes me wonder if demonizing him was simply because he slighted Andy somehow back at Harvard, or if it's the nomination that made him into the Antichrist. --Kels 20:49, 15 November 2008 (EST)

I remember bringing this to attention awhiles back, somewhere in teh archives it will be but, yes, it seems that as Obama's stock rose, Andy maligned him more and more. I mean that diff link above is andy defending the Obama entry almost. Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 21:21, 15 November 2008 (EST)
My suspicion is it's at least one part jealousy, and two parts "defend my tribe (Republicans)". As Obama turned into a demon, McCain turned into a saint, but now that the election's over watch him not care what goes into McCain's article from here on in. But I don't think there was much animosity towards Obama before he became The Enemy. --Kels 21:28, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Yeah, Obama's the anti-McCain in terms of his treatment by CP. Hillary was always the demon they expected to be attacking in 2008, and I think Andy never had any reason to go after the guy until he became a serious contender. What's interesting is that with edits like that in 2007, it would even seem like Andy had an interest in not overtly negative about him, because you never know when you may need to try and use that Law School connection to network or ask for a favor down the road. That's old news now, and if Conservapedia wasn't seen as such a fringe site Andy would be flirting with libel charges at this point. --SpinyNorman 22:06, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Hitler and Dawkins[edit]

Ahh, comes the dawn! I assume Ken deleted this because it put the quote about Hitler in context, and context is the last thing he wants in a smear piece. I hadn't seen that much of the quote before, so now it's quite obvious that what he's saying there is "What's to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn't right? Obviously, there is something, and that something isn't religion." Ken, of course, doesn't want us to realize that in the quote Dawkins is saying that he believes Hitler was wrong. --Kels 22:46, 15 November 2008 (EST)

And he who changed the page was deleted for 5 years after making a lot of grammatical edits. 5 years eems awfully steep. Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 22:58, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Kenny's very protective of his lies. --Kels 23:20, 15 November 2008 (EST)

Aschlafly blocks[edit]

Aschlafly blocked BBuugglleerr for making this edit. Brendanw queried the block. Brendanw has been warned. Proxima Centauri 09:18, 16 November 2008 (EST)

This stayed over half an hour. I've copied it to Fun:Toilet paper. It's too good to lose. See here half an hour. The creator has my congratulations. Proxima Centauri 09:59, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Ken goes for it[edit]

I think Kenny's a bit jealous of the attention Bugler's been getting lately. What makes me laugh about this attack on Andy's stance on Obama is down at the end, where he asks Andy in bold three questions. Which he helpfully numbers, 1 and 2. --Kels 10:39, 16 November 2008 (EST)

I'd love to see Andy's response, if any. He usually replies with insults and talks down to the questioner, but he can't do so against one of his own. Conspiracy Theory: is it possible he's trying to fix the Obama article due to page views, thinking that he needs to correct the article so that his own pages aren't jeopardized by the sheer stupidity of others? He always has a motive for something, so he must have some sort of bigger plan for standing up to Andy like this. ♥♥♥♥♥ AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 10:58, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Holy cow, Ken is terrible at writing. It took him 70 minutes to produce that TL;DR. --Toiretni 11:43, 16 November 2008 (EST)
At about 2 edits/minute, too. USE THE DAMN PREVIEW BUTTON, MORON! --Kels 11:46, 16 November 2008 (EST)
I was like watching my five year old nephew crafting a present for his mother: it could be done better, he should have tried it before, and sometimes you want to rush in and help him, but he had to do it alone. At the end, we are all happy that he did it at all... --LArron 11:52, 16 November 2008 (EST)
F*** yes, Ken is awesome. There are so many things about his opening shot that are so terrible, yet so good at the same time. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!
Kenservative: speaking truth to power, one batch of 30 revisions at a time.-caius (soldier) 12:10, 16 November 2008 (EST)

But where there are vandals, they will cease; where there are edits, they will be stilled; where there are blocks, they will pass away. For we know in part and we edit in part, but when Ken speaks, the imperfect disappears. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!

Mwahaha. If anything, Ken's finetuning orgies are hard to miss in the Recent Changes, so silently reverting them in the hope that nobody noticed the initial post won't work ;) --Sid 12:20, 16 November 2008 (EST)
I'd love to see Andy's face when he sees all that. But you know, all we're gonna get from him is some two line response putting down the validity of the source, and ignoring all the arguments Ken makes. Maybe a quick dig at Ken for believing in liberal sources or something, but nothing more. Remember, he's done it before. --Kels 12:37, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Surely Ken should get a 90/10 block for this? And what is the dear leader going to come back to? Ken in open revolt, a demand to do something about Bugler, Jarneal refusing to take it lying down, his PNAS posturing called. Is there anything material on that website that is not a problem for Andy? --Toffeeman 12:56, 16 November 2008 (EST)
If anything, TK's own designs on the site are now among its best hopes, as I doubt he'll be afraid to move against Ken directly. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!

Ken goes Googly on JM[edit]

Ken's now advising JM on how to up his google rankings. (And it only took him pipi edits) Ignore the top edit in the diff ToastToastand marmite 13:36, 16 November 2008 (EST)


The drama over blocking [3][4]. War 16:10, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Man, everyone's getting pretty hostile over there. Did someone spill a canister of rage virus or something? --Kels 16:19, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Bugler's just gone over the top - he's abandoning all pretence and is really showing he's a parodist! ToastToastand marmite 16:23, 16 November 2008 (EST)
And why are they arguing about whether the block should be infinite or 5 years? Even if CP is still running in 5 years, it's highly unlikely the user will return then. Etc 16:26, 16 November 2008 (EST)
During this block war, Bugler blocks HelpJazz with the reason Interference and sabotage. [5] War 16:32, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Ugh. Silliest wheel war ever. I think that the whole "We never clearly defined rules and don't enforce them, either" mindset of the sysops is coming back to haunt them now. Originally, the (newer) Block Right accounts were only meant to block open vandals, but by now, Jpatt and Bugler have silently promoted themselves to sysop authority. --Sid 16:38, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Unless you read something I overlooked, this isn't about the length, but rather about the block parameters: "Account Creation Disabled" vs. "Autoblock Disabled". Jazz wanted to do the "I block you, but you can use this IP again to create a new account" routine used for "Use your real name" blocks while Bugler/Jpatt wanted to push full IP bans. --Sid 16:35, 16 November 2008 (EST)

It's not just Bungler, jpatt's being hostile at Jazz, Ed and TK are both running around being huge jerk, even that RodWeathers guy snapped at MikeR on the main page over not much. It's like everyone decided to be short-tempered all at the same time. --Kels 16:41, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Well, Jazz could have avoided blocking User:Drunk. Offering an olive branch is a blockable offense now? Editor at CPOh, Finland! Why? 16:48, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Wow, they mucked up Liberal myths quite nicely by the time they were done with the pissing contest. Way to go, Ed Smeg! ħumanUser talk:Human 20:13, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Critical mass has been reached?[edit]

TK, Ed, Jpatt, Bugler. And they all pick on HelpJazz and PJR (while Rearguarding each other), like zombies chasing the last humans on Earth. I think that, without some sort of intervention by Andy, those two will pack their bags before the end of the year. I can't see Jazz and PJR taking more than a month of this constant abuse, really. And with those two gone, there will be practically nobody left to oppose the rampant hate, lying and revisionism pushed by the others. --Sid 16:31, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Maybe. My money's on TK overreaching and getting himself blocked again, though. --Robledo 16:48, 16 November 2008 (EST)
He left voluntarily last time. If they don't manage to get a nobody such as Bugler blocked, I don't think they'll block TK either. I'm curious, have TK and Bugler already interacted? Editor at CPOh, Finland! Why? 16:54, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Keeping in mind that Bungler can unblock himself, while TK can't. But TK is under Ed's protection and Bungler, for some reason, is under Andy's. So they're both untouchable. --Kels 17:03, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Not quite. He humiliated himself with this incredibly overwrought Shame! Shame! rant and was blocked for 6 hours by PJR. He didn't return after that because he knew he'd totally fucked up his plans for getting rid of teh awesome Rayment. Robledo 17:18, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Right. What I was saying is that he wasn't blocked for 6 months or more and probably won't this time. Editor at CPOh, Finland! Why? 17:26, 16 November 2008 (EST)
As I recall, TK would scream blue murder about his human rights being infringed if you blocked him for an hour, let along half a year. --Kels 17:37, 16 November 2008 (EST)
  • Well, I guess that your sniping via email would justify that, eh? I have always supported the original goals of this project, it's just the bureaucrats failing in anger to make me an administrator. Rational, my ass. --TK/MyTalk
Slightly too short, not vitriolic enough, lacking trademark "LOL". 4/10. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 18:33, 16 November 2008 (EST)
I was working from memory, memories that thankfully were 6 months old. You expect me to dredge up more? --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!
No. No, don't worry about it. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 18:49, 16 November 2008 (EST)
The less said about your ass, the better. --Kels 18:19, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Haha, and in the midst of all the chaos, Fearful Leader ignores it all and goes to work on something else. You're an inspiration to us all, Nero Andy! --Kels 17:13, 16 November 2008 (EST)

And in the meanwhile, here and here we have the historical meeting, the close encounter of the third kind, the start of something big? Editor at CPOh, Finland! Why? 18:34, 16 November 2008 (EST)
It is the beginning of the end. I hear the flight of prophecy out of the northern mountains. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 18:49, 16 November 2008 (EST)
I amar prestar aen.
The world is changed.
Han matho ne nen.
I feel it in the water.
Han mathon ned cae.
I feel it in the earth.
A han noston ned gwilith.
I smell it in the air.
--IN SOVIET CANUCKISTAN, BEAVER DAMS YOU!!!YossarianThe Man from the USSR 11:51, 17 November 2008 (EST)
17 minutes. That is more than enough time to log off, change proxies and log on again. You are going to have to try better than that TK/Bugler. Also if Bugler had no previous knowledge before joining, how did he find out about "some people" so quickly? - User 21:02, 16 November 2008 (EST)

TK's history[edit]

With TK's return, could someone please explain to me TK's history on CP and RW? I hadn't found either then, and want to know why he left, and what he did. Phantom Hoover

There's a reasonable precis here. ToastToastand marmite 16:39, 16 November 2008 (EST)
For somebody who went out in a blaze of crazy TWICE, he really seems comfortable bossing people around on CP. CorryMaybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb. 17:32, 16 November 2008 (EST)

TK doth murder Shakespeare. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי שְׁלֹום!

So is TK a parodist, or just a compulsive troublemaker? I mean look at this: responding to a formatting dispute by raw pasting a huge excerpt from a self help website. Wtf.gif weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 20:22, 16 November 2008 (EST)

He's a troublemaking shit stirrer who works to one agenda alone: his own,ToastToastand marmite
Definitely compulsive troublemaker. I think he feeds on it. Bugler and Ed caused enough trouble recently that he smelled the blood in the water. Just a hypothesis, of course. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 20:50, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Think you've hit it Arcan, he spied fertile ground & jumped in to muddy the water (metaphor mixing - my speciality) ToastToastand marmite 20:56, 16 November 2008 (EST)
TK is just a troll. CP works for him because there is not much difference between trollish behavior and being a good acolyte. He seems to have used parody over at CP as a device to get admin priviledges and as fodder for his pot stirring. Over here, he has been a vandal and a malcontent, but again seemingly only to serve his trolish ends. He has seemed willing to invest quite a bit of time and energy to his little past time. Overall, I'm glad he's back. He might dance for us. Dance for us, TK! Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 21:13, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Either that or he's the Devil himself - mention his name and he shall appear. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 21:11, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Nah, he's just a jerk. Nothing so dramatic. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 21:13, 16 November 2008 (EST)

This edit summary makes me feel like I'm caught in a time vortex and the last year of my life never happened. PFoster 21:16, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Because RobSmith declared it, a year ago, makes it absolutely true. /snort! HelpJazz owns him in a reversion later on though. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 23:07, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Atleast one established user's threatening to leave over TK nasty. At least while TK's in the Vandal bin that won't happen here. Sorry if I'm belabouring a point that's already been made. I may need to justify putting him into the vandal bin vandal group. Proxima Centauri 14:05, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Please, I don't know how to use capturebot[edit]

So can anyone save this before it is deleted ? Barraki 18:34, 16 November 2008 (EST)

You don't use Capturebot. I think it's (ctrl+ Prt Sc) on windoze & then save the screenshot. But I don't really think that Ken's crap is worth it. ToastToastand marmite 18:43, 16 November 2008 (EST)
One of Ken's more boring attempts, too. He's probably spending all his crazy points on the Obama debate. Although it's funny watching Bungler's attempts to argue just bouncing off him. --Kels 18:51, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Ken is shielded from the bombast of Bugler by the shield of arrested development. ToastToastand marmite 18:55, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Capturebot can only be run manually by Trent on his home machine, since it has to operate in windows - and on a box with Perl installed. So it's erratic. Due to the way it has to run, there's no way to "activate" it manually with a command on the wiki. And, yeah, shift-print screen puts your entire screen on the clipboard, then just open any image editing program and control-v to paste it in. Crop, and save as png, and upload with a pithy name. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:21, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Too late in this case. I doubt that it contained anything notable, but I see from the title that the flying fortresses have been upgraded. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 20:44, 16 November 2008 (EST)
(Screengrab addon for Firefox lets you get the whole page - more than's on the screen) ToastToastand marmite 21:00, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Any image editing software will do (I use good ol' Paint and it's fine!); saving as PNG rather than JPEG is best for clarity. Totnesmartin 05:22, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Or just copy/paste the text into notepad. Or if you're really flash, copy the source so all the (lack of) formatting is retained. It's not as good as a screenshot as proof that it was there, but it gets the info. It's an obvious solution, I assume people get so distracted by shiny bots and pictures they forget about the basics :P ArmondikoVmoral 05:54, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Well, actually it was not something from Ken but a parody from a vandal. Anyway, thanks for your answers. Barraki 12:45, 17 November 2008 (EST)

The Second Sequential Biggest Idiot on Conservapedia (and other lesser honors) Awards[edit]

Our Story Thus Far: So we got together once and voted Ed the biggest Idiot on CP. We more or less decided to hold an expanded version of the contest on or about CP's birthday at the end of November. We bickered a bit about categories. That discussion has wound down. Let's get our shit together and make this happen people! Linky Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 21:25, 16 November 2008 (EST)

I thought we were waiting for the generic sliders. Does anyone know how that went? - User 21:32, 16 November 2008 (EST)
They are working fine.
no votes
Is it a unique name for each slider (poll=)? - User 22:30, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Yes. 22:51, 16 November 2008 (EST)
What is the "Consensus" supposed to represent? Pseudomonas 06:35, 17 November 2008 (EST)
"Average"... which I would suggest changing it to, since a consensus is something quite different. I don't even think it's appropriate to speak of a consensus when voting on something. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 11:46, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Wahahaha, I cheated and voted 999. Owned. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 10:08, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Would that be why the average is currently 999? Pseudomonas 12:19, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Liberal deceit --Kels 14:05, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I voted -99, so now the average is slightly less. :) JazzMan 19:32, 17 November 2008 (EST)


Dear Conservative,

I know you read this site fairly frequently, and I'd like to dispatch you some help in your quest to prove to Andy that Obama is not a Muslim. I for one greatly appreciate your commitment to truth in this matter; it's so rare on Conservapedia.

Some key talking points for you, then:

  1. All the FDR crazy bizness went on in a VERY different era. The mainstream television media did not exist back then, nor did the politico-paparazzi that continually dog politicians today. FDR, Wallace, whoever, could not keep a similar secret in this day and time.
  2. Andy's argument assumes that Obama was "recruited" at some time to be a major sleeper agent. This "recruitment" would have had to take place LONG before his Senate career began; perhaps in his early youth. Thing is, back then, we were on the side of Radical Islam: the enemy of the day was Russia, and they were more than willing to help us. Even if there's a chance that Radical Islam would have wanted to start a "sleeper agent" on the path to the presidency, in Obama's case, he would have had to have been "turned" long before Radical Islam was singlemindedly focused on being anti-America.
  3. Andy's argument is nonfalsifiable. The more he proves he's not a Muslim, the more Andy's convinced. That's not rational.

Hope this helps.-caius (soldier) 21:29, 16 November 2008 (EST)

It is nice to see Ken expanding his interests, the change will do him some good. - User 21:33, 16 November 2008 (EST)
It's like an intellectual field trip. Well, except for the intellectual part. --Kels 22:14, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Also remember, regarding FDR, that the press corps knew his secret, but kept it under wraps and only photographed him in the right positions. These days, the press corps would throw their own grandma under the bus when they start to see pulitzer's flashing before their eyes. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 22:56, 16 November 2008 (EST)

The question to ask Andy is how will he go about this whole rumor-smearing campaign of his if and when he's finally proven dead wrong. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 23:02, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's been proven dead wrong on, well, almost everything he's ever written. And still he continues, as if it never happened. Although going head-to-head with a rhetorical brick wall like Ken, I almost feel sorry for the man. Or a would, if he wasn't an enormous flaming asshole. --Kels 23:11, 16 November 2008 (EST)
Very true, however most of his other shit just gets forgotten like his essays or gets archived. This article is a true gem because Barack is teh win and will get more and more popular, so the article won't just "go away" and will continue to keep getting a spotlight shined on it. When he's proven wrong on something (example, using Koran for his swearing in), he has to fix it. The only way I can see him keeping his head above water is deleting the whole article and the talk page and just starting over. He won't be able to avoid humiliation so easily this time around. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 10:22, 17 November 2008 (EST)
He's not going to give in. He's convinced and he's paranoid. A balanced and accurate article on Obama just is not going to happen unless there's a major coup and Schalfly goes. ArmondikoVmoral 11:11, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Schlafly will never go as long as he owns the mediawiki licence. If I was rich and mad I'd pose as a conservative and offer to buy him out. perhaps someone should consider doing this - even if it fails the lulz would be brilliant. Totnesmartin 14:51, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Andy overwrites[edit]

I have been notcing Andy overwriting comments more and more often these days. Interesting. Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 22:21, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Once the taboo of not removing and over writing comments was broken on the PNAS reply talkpage, Andy now feels it is okay to do it where ever he wants, especially usertalkpages (not even necessarily his own). - User 22:32, 16 November 2008 (EST)
That's preposterous. I did notice him deleting things from other people's talk pages. Doesn't that seem sort of invasive? Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 22:44, 16 November 2008 (EST)
The fiorst time I saw him do it blatantly was when he overwrote someones comment to lay out his whole "Absence of dancing" gibberish. Ace McWickedThe Liquid Room 22:50, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's replies are far more factual than those dirty liberal opinions, so he writes over them. After all, he's right so their wrong answers don't need mention! AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 22:58, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Wow, virtual palimpsests, cool! --LArron 02:17, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Conservapedia Day[edit]

Al while back there was some discussion on what to do for Conservaedia Day, which I believe is very soon. I don't think there was ever any kind of consensus on anything, but some ideas were thrown around, including:

  • Mass reversions of everything Andy does the entire day (will involve many disposable accounts, and is somewhat juvenile)
  • Mass creation of articles on LGBT people (actually helps the project more than hurts it)
  • Getting drunk here (I think that's what we did last time)

I just had an idea I'd like to throw out there. What about a mass coming out of all our parodist socks? We can watch as Andy, in one fell swoop, loses a good portion of his active contributors whom he believed were like-minded fundies as they flip him the e-bird and leave. There are probably some which people might want to keep in deep cover (Bugler, while a parodist, is not one of us, so he's exempt. Though it would be great if he got into the spirit too), but it could be fun for the rest. I don't know exact numbers, but there are a bunch who are pretty obvious. I'd like to see Conservapedia thin its ranks on its big day. DickTurpis 11:09, 17 November 2008 (EST)

It would be fun to watch the tumbleweeds blow for the day since few true acolytes would be left, but in the end it wouldn't do much, because I doubt any of the parodist edits would actually be reverted. --SpinyNorman 11:52, 17 November 2008 (EST)
All the better, really. I just think it would be great for Andy to watch half his contributors disappear on his big day. DickTurpis 11:54, 17 November 2008 (EST)
If all the parodists came out on Conservapedia day it would probably be my favorite day ever. C'mon... you know you wanna! JazzMan 14:22, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I would be fucking awesome if all the parodist came out. Ace McWicked
I would also support all parodists coming out, and massive off-topic article creation ;-)-caius (soldier) 16:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)
As I recall, it will be this Friday. Let's at least all get drunk and wandalize the hell out of RW. Perhaps I will celebrate privately by trying to get blocked for a "short" time on CP... ħumanUser talk:Human 17:45, 17 November 2008 (EST)


Gentlemen, I propose the codename of "Operation: Parodist Rapture". Where once stood many editors, after the Rational Apocalypse all that remains are their empty socks - Left Behind. --SpinyNorman 22:38, 17 November 2008 (EST)

How about Operation: Parodists Joyous Rapture (or PJR for short)?  Lily Ta, wack! 00:26, 18 November 2008 (EST)
OK, so we need a flood of parody from as many people as possible to discredit the site on their second-holy day. What day / time (GMT) does it start? Crundy 18:16, 18 November 2008 (EST)

TK takes his ball and leaves (again?)[edit]

After being blocked by HelpJazz, and doing more damage to the man in death than he could in life, it looks like TK might be gone (again), to return for more havoc another day. A shame: I was hoping he'd initiate CP's headless chicken mode...-caius (soldier) 10:58, 17 November 2008 (EST)

What leads you to believe he's gone? DickTurpis 11:13, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Last contribs were before he was blocked. Remember last time he "came back," he was blocked for six minutes at CP, and took it as a sign that he should leave. And a comment on his talk page suggests he was thinking the same this time.-caius (soldier) 11:15, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I'll miss old TK. He's as bad as Bugler except TK is for real! I loved his copy / paste to Andy's talk page. Think he'll get a response? Nor do I. My guess is it will be deleted with a comment along the lines "Matter resolved via private e-mail". I hope he decides to stay. StarFish 11:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Shit-stirrer extraordinaire. Bugler is a complete armature in comparison. Ajkgordon 11:21, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Presumably that wasn't a typo (Armature: a framework used by a sculptor to support a figure being modeled in a plastic material) ToastToastand marmite 12:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Indeed. Ajkgordon 13:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)
He only just returned and after 2 days and picked up the victim-playing role from last time? Awesome. He even played the "shame on you!" game piece. He should know by now nobody will help. The biggest irony of it all - he's realizing the system he's built has turned on him. AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 11:53, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Nah--he just pops in every once in awhile to throw us off from thinking he's Bugler (or that Buggy is he, whatever).--WJThomas 12:14, 17 November 2008 (EST)
TK and Bugler are not the same. Ajkgordon 13:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)
That's exactly what he wants us to think. (Like Andy, I try not to let facts get the in the way of good theory).--WJThomas 14:13, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Haven't we been over this? Americans here can detect a Brit trying to be an American a mile off and Brits here can detect an American pretending to be a Brit a mile off. All the cultural references point to Bugler and TK not being the same person. I mean, he could be an Anglo-American but then there wouldn't be the cultural ignorance that each one displays about their non-respective countries. Unless the ignorance is also faked... nah, don't buy it. Ajkgordon 15:07, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I always took the Bungler=TK thing about the same as the old Fox=sock gag. Amusing, possibly good to get some of the folks over there suspicious, but not terribly serious. --Kels 15:26, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I'll put up a $2π donation to RW that TK's gone for a couple weeks again.-caius (soldier) 21:26, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Pay up. JazzMan 23:56, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Goddamn TK... Spending my money...-caius (soldier) 00:01, 18 November 2008 (EST)
The Bugger was never TK in disguise, he's far too aware of Brit culture despite TK's claimed familiarity with the Sceptred Isle. Also Bugler never used an asterisk - TK couldn't start a line without one.  Lily Ta, wack! 00:35, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Lily's spot on with TK's 'sterisk "problem". PS, Caius (if that really is your name), it's time to cough up ten months credits so we can pay for an entire year of this slop! ħumanUser talk:Human 01:02, 18 November 2008 (EST)

REAL America is red[edit]

"Real America is red. Coastal elites can talk about "population density" all they like, but only 66 million votes were cast for BHO. Discounting those tricked by neuro-linguistic programming and all of the nuts from the tainted oak borne of ACORN, that's less than one out of every five Americans. Many real Americans are so disgusted with liberals they simply choose not to vote. Let's see Zogby ask that question. BHarlan 12:05, 17 November 2008 (EST)" (Main Page talk)

Comments please, Gentlemen and Ladies ToastToastand marmite 12:32, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Difflink would be helpful to put this in context. I assume he means Republican red, not commie red. But BHarlan is a known parodist &/or shit-stirrer, so I wouldn't take his views too seriously. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 12:40, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Ask and ye shall receive and yeah, he is probably the most obvious parodist over there right now.... Not counting Bugler of course, so don't take anything he says as truth. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 12:51, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I'm sorry if you are not counting Bugler (who I think is the best ever) then the most obvious parodist right now is Saxplayer --BoredCPer 13:25, 17 November 2008 (EST)

The reality that exists in Andy's head must be an interesting place indeed. Now he's using Obama's decisive victory as proof of how he has very little support. Really, Andy, are you that stupid? DickTurpis 13:40, 17 November 2008 (EST)

(backdating for debate clarity) I must disagree. As evidence of BHarlan's obvious parody, I submit exhibits A, B, C, C.5 D, E, F, and G. The prosecution rests, your honor. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 14:14, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Any chance you have a linky?--Sun mowse.pngEn attendant Godot"Such is life." 13:46, 17 November 2008 (EST)
(EC)I like how Andy uses the total US population (including babies) for his numbers. By his logic 22% of the population voted for Obama and 19% voted for McCain. Beyond that he just starts pulling stats out of his ass. Jrssr5 13:47, 17 November 2008 (EST)

(unindent) and poof, the link fairy appears and grants Godot's wish enjoy, my good lady SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 13:48, 17 November 2008 (EST)

I am still absolutely floored that Andy can say "Obama used mind control" with a straight face. That's loony even for him. --Kels 13:56, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I think it's just par for the course. Much the same as the thing about being a secret Muslim - it starts with a few vague insinuations & a few comments about it being an interesting little theory & then grows through repetition to the point where Andy & his cronies regard it as incontestable fact & anybody who even questions it must be a dirty liberal. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 14:13, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I was just about to say something similar. This is basic conspiracy theory madness. Start with an idea, and a couple of possibly-plausible notions, and move on to the crazier stuff to support the initial crap. After awhile everything starts to seem connected. Pretty soon, Andy will connect Obama to the JFK assassination.--WJThomas 14:23, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Obama was born the same year JFK was inaugurated. Coincidence or proof of conspiracy?? Jrssr5 14:27, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Uhm, its not mind control. It's neuro-linguisitc programming. Big difference. Now, go make me a sandwich . . . Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 16:07, 17 November 2008 (EST)

No. Awaiting xkcd reference in 3...2... Etc 17:36, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Notice how careful Andy is to not say that "Muslim=bad=Nobama," while not disputing such statements that some other editors make. This way he gets to take his phony moral high road about how "it's the libruls who have a problem with the Islam! I'm just giving facts!" And if you try to call him out... he blocks me you. CorryMaybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb. 17:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)

To Etc: Yes we can go make me a sandwich. 20:50, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Conservapedia terms[edit]

Once again, I ask, are we sure Aschafley is not a parodist??? Now we have "Scarcity worship", which not only is some political thing, but involves the NFL and the NHL. ogga booga.--Sun mowse.pngEn attendant Godot"Such is life." 13:17, 17 November 2008 (EST)

"...obesity is a bigger problem in the world today than starvation is." In New Jersey, maybe. Andrew Schlafly, you are a stupid and ignorant man. PFoster 13:39, 17 November 2008 (EST)
A link for easy searching and My god, he has now lapped himself. Ames Caius, help me out... From a Psych standpoint, I can put forward several theories about his mental state, but would we have enough standing for a mental fitness trial. I think he's a danger to himself and others at this point. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 13:42, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Isn't scarcity part of the free market that conservatives worship? And yeah, I can't figure out exactly how sports have suddenly become liberal, although I agree they're more or less meaningless. --Kels 13:47, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Andy's team must have lost yesterday. JazzMan 14:25, 17 November 2008 (EST)

PFoster - you have to remember, in their bi-polar world, nothing can exist if the opposite exists. So, if fat people exist, starving poor people simply donot have any weight. get it, have no weight..sighs... I don't even know how a person who (supposedly) graduated from law school can manage to state something like that. It baffles the mind. Of course, given that Andy would have worked with/under/around/something Obama, yet can offer no personal anecdotes (good, bad or indifferent) I'm left to wonder if Andy LIED about that whole time on the Harvard Law Review.--Sun mowse.pngEn attendant Godot"Such is life." 13:50, 17 November 2008 (EST)

No, we have the photographic proof that he was on the Harvard Law Review with Obama. I guess you missed that discussion a couple of days ago - see further up this page. It actually makes the fact that he hasn't ever confirmed the connection or given personal anecdotes a lot more interesting. Obviously there's something about his time on the HLR that Andy doesn't want Conservapedia to know. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 14:09, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Andy has a strange unique view of the world. Perhaps its cause he is soo intelligent (two degrees and magna thingie on one) that he is simply incomprehensible to lesser minds ... maybe -- that or he's a raving looney 14:00, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Judging by his performance at CP and, I can only conclude he's lied about his entire educational career after elementary school. And I doubt he did very well there. --Kels 13:52, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I suspect that this essay is his way of setting up for the claim that the office of President is nothing but scarcity worship.-Lardashe

A WIGO Milestone is Reached...[edit] we hit WIGO entry number 666. I hope it's worthy of the distinction. --SpinyNorman 14:53, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Dear RW users: RationalWiki is temporarily off-line until further notice due to the sudden appearance of toads in the network servers. We hope to have the incident resolved early next week, barring locusts and plague. Kalliumtalk 19:13, 17 November 2008 (EST)
The number used to reset periodically, so we passed 666 numbered WiGOs quite a while ago. And the numbers have only been a part of it for a couple of months anyway. So no frog legs for dinner tonight :( JazzMan 19:23, 17 November 2008 (EST) Funny story: My chemistry teacher in high school (who was probably the reason I ended up doing ChemE in college) had a funny infatuation with the number 666. He would always be saying things like "Ok class, open up your books to page six............ six............................ FIVE!" Hrm. I feel a need to go back and visit coming on

Finally, "GodSpeed" Revealed for what it actually is![edit]

Kamikaze literally means "GodSpeed"! So that means that "Mr." Schlafly hates the U.S. Navy and wants to crash a plan into U.S. ships. That bloody bastard! I hope he does the right thing and turns himself over to the proper authorities immediately! Jimaginator 15:27, 17 November 2008 (EST)

And here i thought it meant divine wind EternalCritic 16:03, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Yeh, that's what I thought too, but WP says: literally: "God-wind", "god speed", "light wind", "spirit-wind" or "divinity-wind" ; common translation: "divine wind"). All variations on a theme. Just too good to be true. Andrew's hidden agenda revealed, hates the military, inciting people to attack. Kamikaze. Jimaginator 08:59, 18 November 2008 (EST)
You and your liberal Babelfish. --Kels 20:06, 17 November 2008 (EST)

A new parodist who make me smile[edit]

here Barraki 15:28, 17 November 2008 (EST)


Not important but they've banned someone called Fred there as well. Proxima Centauri 15:47, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Created to plead the de-blocking of his other username and the edit is what we'd all like to do to the Obama article. Aboriginal Noise Theist, barely hanging by a nail 16:11, 17 November 2008 (EST)
You're right. I'm sorry for him. He's one of the many that get blocked for writing something sensible. Proxima Centauri 16:48, 17 November 2008 (EST)
How long before teh blockie comes down? Proxima Centauri 17:04, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Aschlafly reverted it but Nora remains unblocked so far. Proxima Centauri 17:14, 17 November 2008 (EST)
It's on her userpage now. Teh blockie! Will she survive? Proxima Centauri 17:21, 17 November 2008 (EST)
A man's userpage is his castle... right? Anyone? ArmondikoVmoral 07:01, 18 November 2008 (EST)
A userpage is his castle, unless he's using it to insult other users. Sooooooooooo Bugler violated the only two rules CP has regarding userpages. JazzMan 13:01, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Two new articles[edit]

that made me smile. First is Ed Poor's cultural treatise on McHale's Navy:

and then there's BHarlan's though-provoking examination of US Presidential pedigrees:

It's an embarrassment of riches over there. --Simple 16:00, 17 November 2008 (EST)

BHarlan's piece is a masterwork. Stile4aly 16:44, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I can't even tell what's a parody over there anymore! Czolgolz 16:56, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Just do what I do... If it comes from Andy, Ken, Ed, Karajou, PJR (rarely), or TK, you can bank on the realness of it. If it comes from Bugler, BHarlan, Saxplayaer, RodWeathers, or a few more, it's parody, but it's established and recognized parody, so it points out the complete lack of administrative ability from Andy. If it's anyone else, write it off, it's parody. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 17:03, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Is Bugler really a parodist? Sorry i have to ask, heh -- 19:33, 17 November 2008 (EST)
He is a parodist, but not in the sense that we usually see, in which liberals insert crap into Conservapedia in order to discredit it. No, he's more like TK, a troublemaker who works his way into internet forums, makes friends, earns some degree of status, and then fucks with everything and everyone. It's not a political thing (who even knows what his politics are) he just likes causing trouble. CP is a perfect fit for him, as most places wouldn't stand him for so long. DickTurpis 21:48, 17 November 2008 (EST)
My edits aren't parody. I'm improving the encyclopedia to earn more Schlafly pointzes so I can get rights (and lefts). Human for rightful leader of conservapedia!!! ħumanUser talk:Human 22:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)
So, let me get this straight, for their example of a "hollywood values" president who's criminal, they choose a comedy (a shittier one at that if it's only 5.1 on imdb) by Chris Rock of all people. And for the "unqualified" example, they cite themselves. Right. My head is breaking, I should sue. ArmondikoVmoral 07:05, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's Letter to The Economist[edit]

Off-target on guns
March14, 2002 edition
SIR – After reading your article on guns and children (“Bang, bang, you're dead”, March 2nd), I dug further into the study you quote. The data merely show that rural states, with hunting and inaccessible emergency rooms, have the most deaths caused by firearms—of both adults and children alike. Also, the study uses adult fatalities to rank the states, so the only insight is that child-firearm fatalities are correlated with adult-firearm fatalities. Do we need Harvard to tell us that?

Andy Schlafly

Far Hills, New Jersey

Brought to you by CЯacke®

You have to have a subscription to read that, but apparently their security involves people not being able to type random eight digit numbers. A reasonable guess and two tries later, and hey! I'm an economist subscriber until 29th of January next year. Sometimes I wonder what goes through my fellow software engineers heads, if anything. --JeevesMkII 16:52, 17 November 2008 (EST)
For a Hahvahd grad, Andy's remarkably anti-Hahvahd, isn't he? I guess it's easy to be a spoiled rich git. What a numpty. DogP 18:21, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Goodness me! He's clearly breaking the Golden Rule here: "No matter how crappy your alma mater is, you never ever speak ill of it in front of outsiders." I'm positively shocked. Shocked, I say! --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 20:25, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Ahem, I had a letter too! So I guess I'm as good as Andy.

SIR – I must object to your usage of the term “the Dunkin' Donuts crowd” to refer pejoratively to “people who earn less than $50,000 a year and lack a college education” (“The end draws nigh”, February 23rd). A law student myself and a big fan of the goodies at Dunkin' Donuts, I have no plans to discontinue my patronage of the chain when my income increases. Moreover, this type of classist rhetoric is precisely not what American voters need from the media. Let's leave that to the political candidates.

Don't get between me and my donuts.-caius (soldier) 17:55, 17 November 2008 (EST)

That's freaking awesome! JazzMan 19:18, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Yup, yup. Andy really shows off his understanding of the nuances of American politics in his letter. What a knob. --Kels 19:59, 17 November 2008 (EST)
"...the only insight is that child-firearm fatalities are correlated with adult-firearm fatalities." How insightful. He loves that word. JJ4eAndy's writing makes my eyes sad 20:17, 17 November 2008 (EST)

So, Ames, you can satisfy my curiosity. I read these papers like the Independent and the Economist where all the letters are prefixed with SIR, which always seems painfully pretentious to me. When you wrote to them, did you add that to your own letter or is it an editorial thing? --JeevesMkII 20:26, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Of COURSE. The key to understanding how to get into the Economist, btw, is this - they'll take a number of substantive comments into the print edition every week, but generally they're from President/CEO of Subject of Article From Last Week, or from random guy pointing out plain errors in the study (that's Schlafly). They also take two snarky letter per week. Since I'm President of Nothing, and generally agree with their op-eds, I figured snark was my ticket. Win :).-caius (soldier) 21:21, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Odd, I have all issues of the Economist going back many years, and this is what Andy's letter says in my issue:

"Sir" , I've cleaned out the junk you inserted that violated the rules of this page. Furthermore, you don't back up your argument. You don't even cite anything worth reading. Clearly you're a spokesperson for the homosexual agenda and are trying to hurt this project. I can tell with 95% certainty what your positions are on classroom prayer and evolution. The 95% confidence level is all that science requires. I know your positions with greater certainty than I know what the weather will be like tomorrow. You even deny a larger tax cut for the wealthy prevents moral decay. I looked at your contributions and noticed you draw a silly distinction between sheep and goats (which I've reverted), so it's obvious to me you're lacking a largely defensive weapon of gun. Why don't you just admit it? As I've said before, this is not another waste-of-time blog, and it's not going to become one. In conclusion: are you credentialed in this field? If so, then state your credentials. If not, then forget about it here. Unlike Wikipedia, credential bullying is not allowed here. Read my posting below and contribute to this encyclopedia, or go rant somewhere else. Your account will be blocked if you simply continue to rant here.- Andrew Schlafly, Esq.

What issue do you have? DickTurpis 21:45, 17 November 2008 (EST)

You, sir, are clearly a charlatan. Nobody on CP knows the phrase "95% confidence interval". JazzMan 22:21, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Unfortunately "The 95% confidence level is all that science requires." is a real quote. I remember because I'm still waiting to get that hernia fixed. Kalliumtalk 10:55, 18 November 2008 (EST)
I have 95% confidence that the interval between my coming off a 90/10 block and getting the next one is measured in hours, not weeks or days. --SpinyNorman 22:33, 17 November 2008 (EST)
YER DOIN' IT WRONG JazzMan 22:38, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Is it worth sending in letters to various news outlets using nothing but the Schlafly generator and see which get picked as genuine? It could be possible that we've invented the first program that will pass the Turing Test! (okay, strictly speaking, it's not even eligable, but let me have the metaphore and the euphoria of the moment please) ArmondikoVmoral 07:09, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Soooooooo educational[edit]

As Conservapedia basically has a grand mal seizure, Andy spends his time making up bullshit and evidently channeling a twelve year old. Amazing. CorryMaybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb. 17:37, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Jesus Christ. Ajkgordon 17:49, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Lock-and-key cryptography, he could run a course on that. - User 17:56, 17 November 2008 (EST)
(EC) I didn't have any socks available and I'm still sitting out a day long IP block..... I wanted to point out that Andy's reply was full of the Liberal Style: overuse of mockery, dismissing claims as nonsense, and... something else I can't think of off the top of my head. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 17:57, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I came here after paging through to that diff. I have never seen him so sarcastic and mocking before, especially on such an innocent topic. Keep in mind that I had to write things like fourth of july and pledge of allegiance (as I recall)... Someone should block Andy for incivility for a few hours. Ed? ħumanUser talk:Human 18:29, 17 November 2008 (EST)
What a manchild. CorryMaybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb. 18:34, 17 November 2008 (EST)
I tallied the use of Liberal Styles #15, #21, #31, #34, #46, and #50 in Andy's petty sneer at JohnSmyth - possibly a record for a four-sentence response. Mama Schlafly must be sooooooo proud of her son's maturity and ability to portray conservatives as classy. --SpinyNorman 22:27, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Poor Bohdan[edit]

I guess nobody told him, eh? Or maybe he's just kicking the dead horse to see how many flies stir up... AndyToad.gifNorsemanCyser Melomel 19:36, 17 November 2008 (EST)

It's Bohdan, so I guess he figured out the perfect way to yank everybody's chain simultaneously. Jazz will twitch (very lightly) because he is reminded of how his struggle for anything beyond his current rights is a complete exercise in futility, Andy will twitch because this is a very uncomfortable subject for him, and most other sysops will also feel somewhat uncomfortable (because they will side with either Andy or Jazz and may not really want to speak up for either side). --Sid 19:56, 17 November 2008 (EST)


  • I've just found some of the best ever. (There over 3 months now!) It's subtle, so I won't reveal it. That is all. -Master Bra'tacKree! 19:49, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Andy being reasonable?[edit]

[6], Andy removes the label of atheism from the Richard Lenski page because of something [7] on the talk page. Is this a first? Should we expect the seas to turn to blood next? Hactar 22:06, 17 November 2008 (EST)

I saw that, too. A sign of the End of Days. -- 22:45, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Bracing for the Banhammer[edit]

I'm expecting at least a week for this for some reason. EternalCritic 22:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Good luck with that. - User 22:24, 17 November 2008 (EST)
That humming sound you hear is the 90/10 plasma cannon energizing its coils. Shouldn't be to long a block, but the comments are sure to vanish. --SpinyNorman 22:31, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Andy's gotten to the point of self-parody now. That could have come from the random quote generator just as easily. --Kels 22:57, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Either that or he is just such a dumbass that it wasn't that hard to make the quote generator? As I recall, it's mostly made of his "catch phrases", and comes very close to believable. (OK, it's about 13% over the top, but how could we help that?) ħumanUser talk:Human 01:05, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Good luck on the Obama page, EC. Tomorrow I'm getting up early, getting a bunch of ropes, and keeping the sun from rising. Geocentrist? CorryMaybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb. 23:20, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Andy puts the F U in futility. EternalCritic 00:47, 18 November 2008 (EST)

W bomb?[edit]

I don't see it. Where does Philip mention Wikipedia? JazzMan 22:51, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Here, at line 235, under the heading "Was Barack Obama truly raised a Muslim or is he a Muslim?" CorryMaybe it was the eleven months he spent in the womb. 23:23, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Oh!! I only saw the first response. Thanks :) JazzMan 23:53, 17 November 2008 (EST)
That was example #2 of abnormally bitchy andy :)-caius (soldier) 23:54, 17 November 2008 (EST)

help, is this worth posting ?[edit]

What is Andy saying ? 23:25, 17 November 2008 (EST)

Is this what you are talking about in particular? - User 23:28, 17 November 2008 (EST)
thats the bit. I thought it was sort of funny , no idea how to post it though :( 23:34, 17 November 2008 (EST)
Andy lives in a world where everone lies. Therefore, the more "evidence" you offer to support the idea that something said on CP is wrong (see "obama is a dirty ol' mos-lum"), the more he says "that is *evidence* the left will lie about anything", or "ah, see the fact that he does X or Y just proves to me how much liberals choose to ignore". I don't know why people bother to argue with andy, for if he is a real person, he is a deluded person who simply cannot now, and will never be able to see anything outside of his construction.--Sun mowse.pngEn attendant Godot"Such is life." 23:42, 17 November 2008 (EST)
It's also an example of the new "bitchy Andy," who just debuted today. Seriously, he's like this girl I knew in middle school.-caius (soldier)
I just picture him pleading a case in court , doing that , and having the judge sit there mouthing WTF ?

In the same page:

TK quoted Tim Wise. Is TK a parodist or what? Tim Wise? I like the guy's work, but isn't he considered a liberal? Hactar 01:39, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Yeah, that pretty much explains it. He used to just be so right wing it hurts, now he's just gone off the rails with bitchiness! ArmondikoVmoral 06:54, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Is it just me?[edit]

I'm getting 5 7 "Network Error"s for every successful access. ToastToastand marmite 00:29, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I'm just getting blank pages. Which is annoying, as I was having fun watching Andy twist himself up in knots. (See above discussion) Hactar 00:32, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Somebody needs to feed the hamster again, or put the fifty pee in the meter. DogP 00:38, 18 November 2008 (EST)
I'll go pee in the meter... dang, now the needle is drooping! ħumanUser talk:Human 01:05, 18 November 2008 (EST)
They must run the bandwidth on a meter or something. Andy should top-up more frequently. It has accessibility problems at least 10% of the time, although it varies from place to place. ArmondikoVmoral 06:57, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Another question about TK[edit]

Since returning, he's been posting a number of apparently random essays pulled from various blogs and sites, such as this babble on the Obama talk page. Is this a previously established part of his modus operandi, or a new twist on the classic formula? 01:59, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It's new. And pulling from TexasDarlin is actually worse than pulling from WhackoNetDumbly.-caius (soldier)
(EC)A little of both. He's been known to copy/paste random non-sequiters into talk pages, but very very rarely. (Rare enough that I can't think of any examples at this time, but I'm sure he's done it. The usual response is "uhhhhhh". Or maybe I'm thinking of Ed? I think Ed does this too.) He has never added 5-10k full on copy/pastes before, and never with such frequency. I really have a hankering to {{hide}} them. JazzMan 02:07, 18 November 2008 (EST) <-- Or, since Ames (sorry, can't get used to Caius) said it's new, then maybe I was just thinking of Ed. Who knows I can barely remember what I did last week.
Jazz, look at the random cut and paste in the Libertarian Censorship talk page. What's TK doing? And can I point and laugh yet? Hactar 02:44, 18 November 2008 (EST)
(ec) Ed does it a lot as an "article," but, in my admittedly limited experience, I've not seen this kind of weird, super-lengthy, wholesale copy-paste talk post thing before at all. It is at least most certainly strange behavior for Mr. "I-bullet-point-my-talk-posts". --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 02:49, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Hacar: I have no idea what he's doing. He did it to the talk page of cp:talk:liberal myths. I said that I was frustrated that TK was making up rules and that Ed was protecting and endorsing those made up rules, then, once the conversation was done (read: TK and Ed ignored my pleas for explanation) he posts a whole big essay about... frustration. That got the ball rolling and then he spewed expounded on several other pages after that. I can't wait until Hsmom wakes up and sees all the copyvios. Good thing TK doesn't have block, or that would be the end of her. JazzMan 03:07, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Actually, that's probably it. The parodists / trouble makers have become very good of late in isolating a more reasonable editor and pressing their buttons to get them fired up, whilst at the same time making sure they have Andy on side. Bugler has done a brilliant job on Philip (and dare I say HelpJazz), and I reckon TK is trying to isolate and exterminate Hsmom. Matt 05:16, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Nah, Bugler I can deal with. His most common form of argument is "well you are just a maggot", and then when he can't come up with anything else he leaves the argument and I revert the page to the way it was meant to be. I think the only times he's "won" is when a page got locked before I could revert his edit. JazzMan 12:53, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Is that why you end up writing three words of rebuttal to every one of his words of provocation? Admit it, Jazz, you're his beetch. Hot angry lovin'! Fretfulporpentine 16:23, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Why the heck did Andy never permablock TK? Okay, aside from the fact that Andy never does a damn thing about ANYTHING, but I would think even he would call shenanigans on the shit-disturbing. Or is the Schlaf really that impotent a leader? --IN SOVIET CANUCKISTAN, BEAVER DAMS YOU!!!YossarianThe Man from the USSR 06:19, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Yes. --Kels 07:03, 18 November 2008 (EST)
(EC) Despite everything that has gone on at CP, TK still has several "friends" there. He has been careful to maintain cordial relations with Ed, Joaquin, Geoff Plourde and Dean. GP has been virtually invisible yet as soon as TK returns he posts a welcome. So by whatever back door communications they have they stick up for him despite his abuse of Andy. Andy is just too weak to overrule all of them.  Lily Ta, wack! 08:00, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Here's a clue into the mystery: he apparently insulted Andy in an email so much so that his sysop rights were immediately stripped away. I don't know what he said (and I'm not 100% sure I've seen it; my memory is getting weak at the ripe old age of 22) but I bet if you poked around enoufh you can find out what he said. But he was never blocked, and he never *really* lost any power. JazzMan 12:53, 18 November 2008 (EST)
I'm getting that whole "mind goes at 22" thing, too. Just a matter of time before they put us in the young folks home... --IN SOVIET CANUCKISTAN, BEAVER DAMS YOU!!!YossarianThe Man from the USSR 15:41, 18 November 2008 (EST)
I don't think he even insulted Andy - just casually dropped some foul language in. As I recall. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:20, 18 November 2008 (EST)

More on Schlafly's silly notions about a liberal[edit]

I recall the start of this but the full thing is nausiatiating. It's very close to our snarky story found in the Heretic article. ArmondikoVmoral 08:35, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Wow PJR demands an appology from Andy Impressive! StarFish 09:42, 18 November 2008 (EST)
PJR's in open revolt. Ajkgordon 09:49, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Comments about Beth's homework[edit]

Answer 2: very good, Andy. Now if the answer is completely out of topic but good in the topic it covers, 9/10.

I can use the word "Americans" referring to inhabitants of the USA, but please don't use "America" when referring to USA. Especially if you consider the USA which would have not expanded to the West. Barraki 08:27, 18 November 2008 (EST)

No. 2 " I believe imperialism is a good thing, in moderation." ? Everything is damned good in moderation!! ArmondikoVmoral 08:41, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Everything? Even ebola, erectile dysfunction, and Andy Schlafly?--WJThomas 08:53, 18 November 2008 (EST)
If the ebola only takes out the right people or if the ed keeps the right people from breeding yes they can be a good thing. :) Also Andy is a use full tool in teaching people just how stupid some of the far far right are. I mean if someone just told you about him would you believe them? No you have to see it for yourself. --BoredCPer 09:13, 18 November 2008 (EST)
3 was my WTF moment. Andy says: "Superb analysis, though I wouldn't agree that more regulation is desirable."
The only thing in Bethany's answer that touced on regulation was: "Laws against child labor and sweatshops provided better safety."
Did Andy just describe laws that prevent inhumane working conditions as unnecessary regulation? - User 08:46, 18 November 2008 (EST)
It shouldn't be a case of a teacher agreeing or disagreeing with an answer. It should be a case of this is a correct, well constructed, well analysed answer or a wrong, badly constructed and poorly analysed answer. Personal opinion doesn't come into it! But yes, he does seem to have implied that stopping forced child labour (well, they are forigners afterall! :S) is bad, either that or he's just reading between the lines. When the student replies "progressive movement was good", Andy's read "Liberals are good". And liberal = regulation... QED really. ArmondikoVmoral 09:32, 18 November 2008 (EST)
That was also my WTF moment but for a different reason. He's supposed to be teaching, right? And yet he marks her efforts with his own political opinion! Ajkgordon 09:43, 18 November 2008 (EST)
I don't know why these kids bother. You can get the same mark by answering "bad" (no capital letter, no full stop) as you can by writing half a paragraph of text. --JeevesMkII 10:10, 18 November 2008 (EST)
Well, as you point out, many of them don't bother. DickTurpis 10:34, 18 November 2008 (EST)

If you want to nitpick, you could point out that the answer to question one is wrong, and that the "corrupt bargain" was between John Quincy Adams and Clay, resulting in Jackson's defeat. But it's not like it's a real history class or anything...

Also, where did that bit about Coln Powell come from? Going on Meet the Press is the equivalent of trading support in the House of Representatives for appointment as Secretary of State? Godspeed 11:25, 18 November 2008 (EST)

It would be at least an understandable comparison if Obama had turned around and done something to help Powell out. But I haven't heard anything about Powell getting a spot in Obama's admin team, have you? Bluefish
there was some speculation that Obama would bring him in (as Sec. of Education) but Gen. Powell has gone on the record to say that he does not want and would not accept any position in the Obama administration. And after the Republicans threw him under the bus on Iraq, I can't blame him. SirChuckBPenguin Knight, First Class 12:50, 18 November 2008 (EST)

How long will he survive?[edit]

heroic to say the truth like this. Andy didn't bother to answer. Barraki 11:31, 18 November 2008 (EST)

More first names you can't use[edit]

If your name's Ryan, bad luck!--KrissAkabusiAwoogar 11:31, 18 November 2008 (EST)

What are the 20 most common names in the US? It'd be easy enough to work through them... Pseudomonas 11:41, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Popular American names can be found here. alt 11:51, 18 November 2008 (EST)