User talk:BillOhannity

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, BillOhannity! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

Wow. The most anti-intellectual site on the internet banned you for anti-intellectualism. Not sure if that's a compliment or the worst insult ever. DickTurpis 15:10, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Yea, I think the common use of the term "intellectual" has a liberal bias. I've been trying add some comments about that in my user page but it won't let me at the moment. --BillOhannity 15:14, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Welcome. Do you mind if I copy the question you left at "help" here to your talk page? I've tried editing your user page as well, and keep getting "fail" as you did. You might want to simply wait a bit, since there are some server problems slowing things down today... human 16:28, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Sure, and thanks for the quick response.--BillOhannity 16:29, 3 December 2007 (EST)

I deleted it and recreated it, it seems to work now. And you're welcome. Have a field day! (I hope) human 16:31, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Yep it's working, thanks. --BillOhannity 16:33, 3 December 2007 (EST)

No prob. I left your question over at help in case anyone else runs into a similar problem. human 17:03, 3 December 2007 (EST)

As Hunter S. Thompson once said about being banned from the Republican National Convention, there are definite advantages to being on the Ugly List in a place like that. --SockOfGulik 19:52, 8 December 2007 (EST)

I'm glad you came to us: with the boycott in effect, we wouldn't have known you'd jumped out, and wouldn't have been able to sock up and deliver you an invite... sad...-αmεσ (soldier) 16:34, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Apparently it's not ok to point out that citing Adam and Noah as eyewitnesses to the creation of the earth 6000 years ago does not qualify as evidence. Who knew? And apparently its ALSO a bad idea to point out that assuming the bible is true to begin any discussion about science is close-minded. Oops. --BillOhannity 17:07, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Hey. Like the Dr. House quote. I remember seeing that episode and thinking that quote would go great on my RW page, but forgot what it was by the time I got to a computer. Also nice to see you like the liberal pseudo-intellectuals. I have to admit about half of them are parodies that I added, but Andy seems to like them. DickTurpis 02:09, 11 December 2007 (EST)

When I heard it I thought that it was meant specifically for CP. And I love the liberal pseudo-intellectuals for so many reasons. First off, its an almost arbitrary list of people that Schlafly doesn't like. Second, some people he lists reasons like "never won the Nobel Prize" and then later goes on to say that the Nobel Prize doesn't mean anything. Third, Jon Stewart is on the same list as some of the greatest physicists to ever live. And maybe my favorite: "priveleged youth, weak student at Yale, no original work", which sounds like an EXACT description of Bush, actually refers to John Kerry. So by the same logic, Bush is also a liberal pseudo-intellectual. --BillOhannity 11:07, 11 December 2007 (EST)

Quote on your userpage

No, I wasn't the user to make that edit on CP, but I doubt that person "wrote" what they posted. That's actually something I ran across on the internet several (three? four?) years ago. After finding it, I edited it extensively, added in a few of my own greviences, and mailed it to the White House (not bad for a 14-year old, if I do say so myself). I have a copy somewhere... I'm going to go look for that now. Г☭длессЛиберал 19:13, 24 December 2007 (EST)

I'm assuming you didn't get much in the way of a response from the White House? I think it raises some good points for those who keep saying that we should read the bible literally and follow it word for word. --BillOhannity^godvelocity. 22:51, 24 December 2007 (EST)

Nope, never heard back from 'em... But if we're going to quarantine the homos based on Lev. 18:22, why can't I execute my neighbor for planting two crops in the same field? Same book of the Bible. Г☭длессЛиберал 23:00, 24 December 2007 (EST)

Ah, but most of those laws are "guidelines", but killin' the homos is "non-negotiable". Seriously, these points have been argued by homophobic editors (who, by the way, have best friends that are gay) in our essay space. human 23:14, 24 December 2007 (EST)

Of course they have "best friends" who're gay...Do you know how hard it is to kill someone by throwing rocks at them from thirty yards away? They simply move outta the way. If they're standing right next to you drinking a beer, anytime you feel God's love guiding your hand to that nice red brick you can whack them a good one before they sees it a-coming. CЯacke® 01:36, 25 December 2007 (EST)

Isn't that why the bible says everyone should own firearms? Much easier to hit people at long range. --BillOhannity^godvelocity. 16:00, 26 December 2007 (EST)