User talk:HeartOfGold/Archive007

We are more than half way to communism.

Communism is succinctly summarized as "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." In the United States, income tax is based on the amount your earn (your ability to pay), and while we haven't quite figured out how to redistribute the fruits of labor, liberals are making "progress". While this might sound like a gag to the liberal left, the fact is, liberals and radicals love and work toward command economies, while bemoaning "McMansions, gas guzzling SUVs, and urban sprawl." Heart♥Gold ^tx 10:34, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Cool. Can I make random pronouncements from my talk page as well? --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

Would you like to silence me? (Typical liberal behavior). Anyway, it wasn't random, it was in response to another thread's tangent. Yours is a tangent to a tangent. Heart♥Gold ^tx 10:34, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

That's still a tangent. Watch -

Tangent A - (imagine some graph line that this is from)

     /
    / 
   /
  /
 /
/

/

A tangent to Tangent B would also be this -

     /
    / 
   /
  /
 /
/

/

because a tangent to a straight line is either impossible, or the line itself.

(and I'm well aware that this is a third tangent; but still a tangent).

On a serious note, what exactly is wrong with 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'? I've always thought that it was a great idea. --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר ^{שְׁלֹום!}

It seems to be working quite well in godless Europe, and we don't even need a patriot act! MiddleMan 11:15, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Robbin hood economics. What is wrong with stealing? Am I a free man, or does somebody else own the fruits of my labor. I don't want to be a slave nor a serf, thank you very much. But if you want to, just go start a commune. Heart♥Gold ^tx 11:47, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Who gave you the chance to work? When you were sick as a kid, did you pay the doctor's bill yourself? Did you pay for your entire education (including the salaries of you highschool teachers)yourself? Do you build your own highways?

So it seems even you "stole" from the government and your parents' hard earned money, now suppose that some other kid doesn't have rich parents, or doesn't have parents at all, should we just leave him to die? MiddleMan 12:23, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

I see somebody with the name Locke posted, I presume a reference to John Locke. Interesting writings....you should read some.

Meanwhile, you seem to come from a world view that thinks that not only is religion bad, but that the government should take on the role of traditionally religious and private tasks, viz., charity. You also seem to think that one program is just as good as another government program.

How was the rate of poverty affected by the War on Poverty, anyway? Do you have data? How was the rate of babies born to unwed mothers affected by the sex education programs? Let's look at some objective data. (Let alone the rate of conception). How much more educated (as opposed to trained) are current high school graduates compared to 8th grade graduates of the mid 1850s. Liberals want to use science only when the field not a hard science and already infiltrated by liberals and their useful dupes. Heart♥Gold ^tx 13:45, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

All I know is that I'd be sweeping floors right now, if my government had never set up the scholarship program that enables me to go to college.

I also know that my sister is on life-saving medication that she would never be able to afford in a pure free-market economy.

The right to have an education and affordable healthcare are just that, rights, and frankly I don't expect the church to pay for my education, are today's kids better educated than the 10 or so percent of kids in the 1850's who's families could afford to send them to school, I don't know. MiddleMan 14:47, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

10 percent? Hmn.

Scholarship programs are often privaely funded, no? And earned, no?

Think about this: Food is a much more immediate need than eduation. Yet, we don't give food to the middle class. We do have food stamp programs for those who prove they have a need, but we don't just hand out food. Why do we just hand out education? Education *should* be required (just as you are required to feed your child) and arguably, education stamps should be made available to those who can prove that, before their cable bills, jet skis, etc., they cannot afford to send their own children to school. Free public education is welfare for the middle class. Mandatory education should exist, but it should be free in only rare circumstances.

Same goes for healthcare. Doctors make too much money anyway. If doctors want less stress, they should refuse most third party payers (from insurance to government programs). Negotiate prices with the patients directly, prices will come down, stress will subside, and life will be better.

Nice stories about your (earned) scholarships, and your sister's life saving medicine. But if *your* family is poor, it doesn't mean everybody should get a free ride.

In China, during the cultural revolution, they made all mass transit, including long distance trains, free. Guess what happened? Disaster. Guess how they fixed it. They rationed it.

Universial free healthcare will result in rationing, euphemisms for euthenisaia (already a euphemism), and increased dealth and poorer health care, unless, like in Cuba, you go all the way toward your communist Utopia. Then you'll have to build a fence to keep people *IN* your country. Heart♥Gold ^tx 19:02, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

"Scholarship programs are often privaely funded, no? And earned, no?"

Not over here, the government distributes them to anyone who shows financial need.

"10 percent? Hmn."

Probably even less, in those days most kids were illiterate and worked in the mines, factories or on the fields from age 7. Luckily some unions and liberals eventually did something about it.

"education stamps should be made available to those who can prove that, before their cable bills, jet skis, etc., they cannot afford to send their own children to school."

That's pretty much the way it works in my country.

"If doctors want less stress, they should refuse most third party payers (from insurance to government programs). Negotiate prices with the patients directly"

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

"Nice stories about your (earned) scholarships, and your sister's life saving medicine. But if *your* family is poor, it doesn't mean everybody should get a free ride."

I never said that, but without government regulation I'd be sweeping floors and my sister would be dead: large corporations don't give a rat's ass about the common man, if they can make more profit by increasing the price of medication tenfold, they'd do it, even if that meant a lot of people would die (we've seen this happen in Africa), luckily we have an elected government that stops them from doing so.

"Universial free healthcare will result in rationing, euphemisms for euthenisaia (already a euphemism), and increased dealth and poorer health care."

Where I live it's not free, but affordable to everyone (as in no children dying of treatable diseases), and that's only because the government pitches in, cause if it were up to the insurance companies...

MiddleMan 20:08, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Middleman, I thought I wrote this before, but I must not have. When you nentioned your scholarship, I assumed it was merit and not need based. Sorry about your sister. I support affordable health care, and there are many ways to work toward this. I argue for reducing standards to become a doctor and for med. school accrediation, reducing third party payers first, and starting (or continuing) to import MDs from India, Cuba, etc. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 17:26, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

(off topic intervention: I was so offended when the US refused Cuba's offer of a boat full of doctors (basically) during the immediate aftermath of the Hurricane Katrina Disaster human^{be in} 20:09, 14 July 2007 (CDT) )

Cuba's offer

I was not aware of that. Maybe the Cubans were just trying to send more spies. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 16:17, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Quick two cents

First, I can personally attest that most doctors are not overpaid, especially given the vast amount of their income that must go to pay off their med school loans, given that in the US, medical education is not heavily subsidized.

Second, health care is very expensive. Sure, it would be great for me to be able to negotiate a price for my services when someone comes in with a cold, but what about when they have sepsis and are in the ICU? How does the individual pay the doctors, nurses, resp techs, hospital, etc? Inevitably, if we want great health care, we will have to pay through the ass...as a society, and as individuals, but not only as individuals. Meanwhile, insurance companies suck out a huge percentage of health care costs for no particular reason. HG, the health care system is broken for a number of reasons, but you definitely do not understand it well enough to come up with solutions yet. With any costs as big as health care, the individual cannot ever cover it...it has to be some sort of societal decision, like roads, etc. --PalMD^{-yada yada} 22:42, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Oh, and to explain for MiddleMan, if I participate in Medicare, Blue Cross, etc, then I do not get to set my own prices, they are essentially centrally controlled, no matter what happens to my expenses..that is what HG was talking about.--PalMD^{-yada yada} 22:44, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

A quick note on overpay & professional schools. First-year attorneys are payed $165,000 or so, which is way over our value. However, it does help us recover from what will be (for me) $120,000+ of debt in getting to that point. We also work our asses off that first year, and all subsequent years: 12-hour days are not uncommon, so we earn the money.

I suspect it's the same thing with doctors. They are payed very well right out of medical school. But consider how long it took to get there: 10+ years off of the prime of your life, and a good deal of that time spent on 2-4 hours of sleep (during residency). Coupled with loans and still-longer days, I think it's fairly clear that if doctors weren't payed as well as they are, then, without that light at the end of the tunnel, we might not have any doctors in society. They might all become lawyers. And God help us then.-αmεσG 22:57, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

I am not sure who said most doctors are overpaid, I don't think it was me. They are paid well. Even P.A.s are paid well.

I do agree that insurance companies are skimming too much. It is a consequence of third party systems. In China, if you need surgery, you had better be sure that you bring gifts for the surgeon...i.e., even though they had "universial health care" it was still a third party system, the government still squeezed the doctors, and the doctors ended up squeezing the patients who had money stashed away.

"HG, the health care system is broken for a number of reasons, but you definitely do not understand it well enough to come up with solutions yet."

PalMD, I think you and I agree on a lot, and you'd be surprised at my level of understanding. I pay attention to a number of issues, and how third party payer systems (don't) work is one of them. I ask questions from those who do billing to those who negotiate with insurance companies to those who provide medical advice to those who work at insurance companies...all informally, but nevertheless, to inform myself with primary sources. My doctor (a very good doctor) claims to be one of the "inventors" of the HMO (and I believe him), and he regrets it, hates how they work, and the way healthcare insurance works in general. (Incidentally, he now buys into more wholistic approaches, including spiritual approaches, i.e., he gives credance to what others call quackery, but I don't agree with everything this MD does, but he has a good heart and is a good general practice doctor.) He is not Dr. Ellwood, but from what I understand, Dr. Ellwood regrets the HMO too.

Be careful with the solutions you choose to advocate, unintended consquences deserve more attention. In a largely first party payer system, doctors spend more time with their patients, are willing to work pro-bono or on credit if necessary, and aren't so keen on setting up an efficient assembly line.

Regarding my understanding, I do understand, because I go out of my way to learn and think about such issues. You're right that I am not an insider, but sometimes better ideas come from the outside. Multi-third party payer systems do not work. Single third party (government) payer systems do not work (in China, Russia, and elsewhere. Cuba is an isolated counter example, which, though I hate communism, I do have to admit that Cuba is producing good results in healthcare and research, with a high ratio of doctors to patients, a long expected life ratiorespectable life expectancy--but if slavery is the price of slightly better (in many aspects) healthcare, I say give me liberity.)

In general, PalMD, you're not as arrogant as many doctors are, except in regard to the comment about me not understanding. I do understand that free markets work, and third party payer systems are not efficient even if they seem quasi-free market-ish. Heart♥Gold ^tx 23:14, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

My regrettable personal comment about your understanding referred more to figuring out how to pay for the high level of care that doesn't occur in offices, e.g. hospitals, ICUs.--PalMD^{-yada yada} 07:45, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Okay, I admit I could spend some more time thinking about ICUs and hospitals...Heart♥Gold ^tx 07:56, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Universial free healthcare will result in rationing, euphemisms for euthenisaia (already a euphemism), and increased dealth and poorer health care, unless, like in Cuba, you go all the way toward your communist Utopia -- Good Ol' Heart of Gold.

Yeah, it MUST result in euthanasia. All those supposed "hospitals" in Soviet Canuckistan? They're actually DEATH CAMPS. And since there's no GUNS in Canada, they can't even SHOOT the sick people--they have to BEAT THEM TO DEATH WITH HOCKEY STICKS!!!1one!~@!

Okey, that's my RDA of sarcasm. Here's another conservative on Stalinist France's "hideously dysfunctional" health-care system, and how it saved his life: A Conservative Convert To Socialized Medicine. (Honesty compels me to point out that the writer died earlier this year of cancer, but an extra six years of life without beggaring his family seems pretty good to me...)

I just know that if some uncaring bureaucrat is going to deciding if I live or die, I'd just as soon he NOT be considering that letting me die will probably be MUCH cheaper, and thus better for the Corporate Earnings. --Gulik 19:37, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

The only thing I know is that we have universal free health care where I am. That means when I go to see my doctor tomorrow, I don't have to worry about paying him. And it means that if I come down with multiple sclerosis or something on the way home, I won't have to worry about coming up with a couple hundred thousand dollars to pay for treatment. I definitely consider that among the simple pleasures of life. It may not be perfect, but it certainly beats any kind of alternative I've seen. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 19:43, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Where do you live, and does it cover dental care, too? I had to shell out 900$ today for a root-canal, and I'm not exactly cheering the miracles of free-market healthcare right now. --Gulik 19:51, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Denmark, and well - sort of. Dental care is covered to a certain degree, but much less than 'ordinary' health care. So for anything major, you basically pay through the nose for that. --AKjeldsen^Godspeed! 19:57, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Hey, would all you cool furriners please go to Universal health care and fill in factoids about your countries' health care systems? Then we Murkins (well, by residence, in my case) will show you why our system is best! human^{be in} 20:16, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Taxes = Theft

Very popular assertion with the more Libertarian/Plutocrat Conservatives, along with the ever-popular "Liberals are PUNISHING rich people for being rich!". The best counterargument I've heard yet goes like this:

1. Taxes are the rent we pay on civilization. If you don't want to pay taxes? Have fun living in a lean-to in the woods. A Day in the Life of Joe Republican
2. The Rich get more benefit from the government, so they OWE more to it. One of the many jobs of a government is to keep bandits from killing us and taking our stuff... and rich folks have a lot more stuff than the rest of us. They get other benefits, too, through corporations and such--when was the last time anyone offered YOU five years tax-free to move to their town?

Suffice it to say I'm very much of the Eat The Rich school of economic liberalism. --Gulik 23:13, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Prejudice is bad, except against the rich (and Christian).

Anyway, while I do agree that wealthy and powerful individuals receive more than their fair share of benefit in the U.S. by various levels of government, I am against this as well. All should be equal under the law, rich and poor. But it turns out that *most* rich are actually liberal, and for good reason. The higher the marginal tax rate, the longer it takes poor people to become rich and powerful. Meanwhile, when marginal tax rates are high, the already rich and powerful get to stay rich and powerful. Strange, but the communist party in the united states was founded by the father of Billionaire Armand Hammer (himself, an MD, who owned(headed) Occidental petroleum, and could fly his planes/jets into the soviet union without being inspected), if my recollection of Hammer's biography is correct. (Just confirmed my recollection of some of these by reading WP articles...) The Rich are often liberal to communist in their leanings. The poor who agree with "soak the rich" schemes are the unwitting useful idiots of the rich. Heart♥Gold ^tx 23:22, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Heart, you know I love you, and have sympathy for your sometimes tough row to hoe here, but sometimes I do wonder what planet you are from! Anyway, get back to enjoying that vacation! human^{be in}

So much for rational discussion. From my experience, liberals love to exit debates with an ad hominem. I thought my points and examples deserved more than that. Heart♥Gold ^tx 23:30, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Coincidentally, the founder of Communist Party USA was also convicted for performing an abortion that resulted in the death of the mother. Hmn. Never heard that one before today, but it is an interesting link. Heart♥Gold ^tx 00:14, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

You call that ad homimen? You should see how I treat TK! By the way, "rational discussion" gets tiresome when you make several unsupported assertions all at once. Hence, my comment. And, I reiterate, enjoy that vacation most fulsomely. I am jealous. Wait, I am on a permanent vacation, never mind. human^{be in} 03:10, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Hey, I don't know the level of education of RW liberals. You would think you would know the history of your own ideologies. Which "assertions" would you like a reference to support? Heart♥Gold ^tx 07:16, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

"The Rich are often liberal to communist in their leanings. The poor who agree with "soak the rich" schemes are the unwitting useful idiots of the rich" That one. olliegrind 07:25, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

I think the example of Armand Hammer and many RW should suffice to make that case. How about Mark Dayton, Hollywood liberals, Frederick Vanderbilt Field, Willi Münzenberg...this is goofy. How can you people call yourselves liberals and not know that your intellectual leaders and propagandists are wealthy? Heart♥Gold ^tx 07:37, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

First off, you have shown that a handful of rich people are liberal. That does not equate to most rich people being "liberal to communist." With minimal digging I could throw out a handful of rich who are conservative to fascist. Off the top of my head - the Bush family, Dick Cheney, Rupert Murdoch and all the union-busting industrialists of the 20th century. Secondly, you have not shown how the poor who want to "soak the rich" are "unwitting useful idiots of the rich." olliegrind 07:48, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Umn, okay, I'll go take a poll. Heart♥Gold ^tx 07:52, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

From what I know, rich liberals are generally willing to pay taxes to help the less fortunate. MiddleMan 07:42, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Okay, so now we have MiddleMan no longer disputing this. MM, a problem is the rich liberals are not widely known to be rich by their useful idiots, and liberals, who don't usually do math unless it helps support a liberal cause, why it is in the best interest of these wealthy and powerful individuals to have high marginal tax rates (it keeps others from becoming rich and powerful). Heart♥Gold ^tx 07:48, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Oh! I forgot that liberals only do math to support their causes. You have bested me. olliegrind 07:51, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Huh? You have to take a look at how high marginal tax rates slows down the rate of creation of new rich (a loathsome concept to rich liberals). Heart♥Gold ^tx 07:53, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

In the good ol' days when slavery and child labor were permitted it was so much easier to get rich, it's a shame those pesky liberals made it so much harder for us white males to assume are natural dominant position... MiddleMan 08:35, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Communism is slavery. In it, you work for the state. The state takes and allocates the fruits of your labor. MM, you're world view is not balanced. I recommend som Ayn Rand therapy. Heart♥Gold ^tx 18:21, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

All should be equal under the law, rich and poor.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." -- Anatole French

(And what the heck is "Ayn Rand Therapy"? Beating someone in the head with a copy of Atlas Shrugged?) Atlas Shrugged 2: One Hour Later --Gulik 12:19, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Thought I would make a few points. Noone used ad hominem. Ad hom means that human would have had to have based the arguement upon the insult instead of simply making it. For example, I can say "you are mistaken because you are a mindless idiot." That would be ad hominem as I attempted to use labelling you as an idiot, however true it may be, to support the arguement. However, if I were to state that "you are mistaken on taxes because taxes are necessary to provide our nation with everything from a police force to public education, by the way you are an idiot and hypocrite." I would not be employing ad hom as the arguement is not built upon the insult. Devils advocate 14:43, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

Please...

Try not to kill the main page. ɧєɭıסş^{-get sunburn!} 01:26, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Wait, I thought that was a George Michael quote? --Kels 06:44, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Magnificent Promotion

Let it be known to all and sundry who may pass this way that Heart of Gold is now RationalWiki's "Head of Constitutional Studies". Don't forget that just as with great power comes great responsibility, so with extreme glamour comes the burden of extreme fabulousness!

Attested and affirmed this 3rd of July, 2007, in the Common or our Era, by the undersigned duly empowered Bureaucrat-thingie.

human^{be in} 13:36, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

WELCOME BACK

You thought you could make an edit without me noticing. You were WRONG.-αmεσ (!) 23:36, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

Just in time for the excitement! The Team Contest is on! See http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Recentchanges for the best seat in the house. And, welcome back! human^{be in} 23:38, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, very long drive, going to sleep now. Heart♥Gold ^tx 23:46, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

NO. Stay awake & write stuff. Our article on pr0n is currently begging for authorship, but my bet is that that's Human's territory.-αmεσ (!) 23:48, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

Eh, that should be a redirect to pron. My first article, I think. At the one hour mark the scoes are rolling in, and someone needs to let WP know CP violated their copyright by copying a GFDL image to their non-GFDL site. human^{be in} 00:06, 10 July 2007 (CDT)

Who am I?

When do i get to find out who you thought i was?--PalMD^-Goatspeed! 18:18, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

What the ****?

What do you mean by detected? Dagomar 19:09, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

He was joking. --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 19:14, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

Wow. Heart♥Gold ^tx 21:00, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

Sorry it didn't occur to me to blank the profanity in the header the first time I saw it. human^{be in} 21:14, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

No problem, it is not your responsibility, but if you have the inclination and the opportunity arises on my talk page, feel free to perform this maintenance for me. Heart♥Gold ^tx 21:41, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

No, it isn't at all, but I know you don't use that kind of language and would not appreciate it on your talk page, adding nothing. And in this case, I saw it about 12 hours before you fixed it. If I ever did do something like that, I would of course leave a brief note saying I did so. Take care, human^{be in} 15:09, 13 July 2007 (CDT)

See you later. I'll stop back to see how you are doing here again. Bohdan 00:01, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

Okay, gigawabamin ("see you later" in Ojibwe). Heart♥Gold ^tx 00:03, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

Is that triple-lingualism? Kewl ! human^{be in} 00:20, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

I know English, Bad English, and a few phrases in other languages. Heart♥Gold ^tx 00:21, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

And yet, we both know "****"[review history to reveal word] is a bad word? Hmmmmm human^{be in} 00:52, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

Oops, a belated sorry for typing the above deleted word on this page. human^{be in} 01:50, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Moving user page contribution to talk page

The funny thing is, sweetcheeks, that none of those were the equation you attempted to use. yet you will see both mine and human's on there. Funny that. Its quite like you are wrong isn't it.the_anti-drug^{(elk murder)} 03:11, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

What wow?

What's the use of having a token if the only thing one does with him is criticize?

The "we want all kinds of people here" don't fly real good if one starts to nitpick everything posted by the people we don't like.

This is your place too, while it may not feel like "home": I, (for one), do not wish this to turn into simply another place to bash "the usual suspects".

CЯacke® 09:55, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

If Heart stops pretending there's a Unified Conspiracy Theory of Evil Liberal Masterminds, I'll stop making fun of him for it. Would you ask me to stop making fun of Conservative if he was posting YEC essays all over the place here? How cruel...

(I, for one, would prefer to have "all sorts of SANE people here"--but that might get me disqualified. :) --Gulik 13:04, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

You might want to wait for the finished product. I suspect it is a very tongue-in-cheek criticism of those who decry every advance humanity makes to its own benefit (that would be the "communist consensus"), since it looks like by the time it's done, everything it criticizes was actually a "good thing". A Swiftian attempt, let us say, and it's not easy to write such deep parody. Anyway, it's in Essay, clearly marked as an opinion piece. human^{be in} 13:10, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

I apparently can be a bit dense--it wasn't until the last round of updates that my leg finally came off from all of Heart's pulling. (Walter Mondale? Mao's Little Red Book as the Liberal Bible?) I'd apologize for being so gullible, but Heart's going to need to work extra-hard to out-crazy some of the authentic wingnuts on the internet. --Gulik 18:15, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

You might be gullible, but I don't think I am the one duping you. A little artistic license, perhaps, but no more than what the swarm does when disparaging the Bible and all that made Western Civilization great. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 20:42, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Return

I don't know what happened with your retirement/block, and I don't know all the circumstances, but please consider returning to CP. Bohdan 20:15, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Why, I mean, what prompted you to ask this? Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 20:30, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

I've seen your recent edits here. Bohdan 20:31, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

If you do go, be advised, there's talk in the air of having a non-sysop contest...So the invite might be a way to get you "on the team". CЯacke® 20:32, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Non sysop contest? Thats news to me. Tell more. Bohdan 20:33, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

Re: edits. Cool. Do you find reading them as entertaining as I do writing them? Cracker, what's a non-sysop contest? Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 20:43, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

I heard a rumor that there is (in the offing) a non-sysop contest...basically a writing/editing contest like this aone but no points fer blocks that cannnot be done since the parcipitants aren't sysops. Just because (I guess) they're having such fun with the current one. So Bo, does Karajou get 130,000 odd point for each range block? CЯacke® 20:48, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

I am not interested in contests, cracker. I thought you were intimating that CP was trying to desysop me here at RW. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 21:16, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

How on earth could they get us to do that? Must... De... Sys... Op... Heart... of... Gold... Oh my, by His Noodly Appendage, where did that come from?! Bohdan! Did you pwn my user page with your special mind control powerz??? human^{be in} 01:49, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Bzzz..... --Gulik 02:41, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

rumbling - this goes out to everyone, not just HG

i haven't been paying huge attention recently but what's going on with you fighting with others (or others fighting with you, whichever you'd prefer)? Just wanted to ask cos the "discussions" on talk pages involving you are - in my opinion - wasting everyone's time. I am in no way implying this is your fault but if we could figure out a way to make it a little more friendly then the place would run better and everyone's view would be heard more clearly. Anyway, wanted to see if i could help. If you need/want. Д^ιЯɖі$ɧ _ɥοםЄʟ^{βЯƏакĐΩωΝ} 08:52, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

In time...

I'll get there... trust me... ŠтΈṜȳŁЁ^and...? 16:19, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

You lost me. Could you please explain? Thanks. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 16:20, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

I'll e-mail in time... ŠтΈṜȳŁЁ^and...? 16:22, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Oh, okay. Thanks for the heads up. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 16:23, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Feedback

Okay, I have been thinking it over. First the toilets. It does illustrate hypocrisy, and it is funny, but maybe I should fork it off into another essay. I mean, hypocrisy is sometimes notable, but not when dealing with a serious subject like how swarm policy kills millions.

Second, I am thinking about changing the title of the essay to something like "the swarm model of liberalism" or "the hive model of liberalism". Problem is, the swarm doesn't always act like bees. Sometimes they act like birds, or fish. In any event, the model should be scientific, able to make predictions, etc. The Jim Jones, Chairman Mao, and Sanger links are outstanding in my opinion, and quit damning. I have to work something in about the drones (e.g., those who knock on doors for NARAL, claiming to be against abortion personally, completely ignorant about the history of abortion and its major propagandists). Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 23:36, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

"Jim Jones, Chairman Mao, and Sanger links are outstanding in my opinion, and quit damning" OK, so who do the links to these dead people "damn"? Them? Liberals? The "useful idiots" you are educating (whoever they are)? Essay suggestion: move the sane parts to an article on hive or swarm or flock (or whatever) behaviour in political movements, and try to write it in a way that occasionally shows (horrors) something other than partisan namecalling. Oh, wait, here's a better idea. Write the "essay", or "model", or "theory", or whatever you think it is on your computer, and see if you can get someone to publish it. Heck, these days you can self-publish through an on-demand printer and sell it on teh internets for 15 bucks a pop. As it is, you're giving away your brilliant analysis here for free on GFDL... human^{be in} 01:25, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

It is a collaborative essay. I appreciate the help I get from some of the others here. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 09:13, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

problem

No. It is very strange. Your message is not appearing. I am serious. I see it in the changes, but I cant read it. --Bohdan 23:41, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

I wrote it in secret invisible ink that I stole from RobS. You'll need to hit the "edit" tab on the page to see it. But don't tell anybody. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 23:43, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

Sent. Bohdan 23:49, 18 July 2007 (CDT)

You get it?

I got it, but I didn't understand it?

Thanks . . .

. . . for changing the tone of things. I was getting a bit worried. I respect that you made that change. I hope that you keep editing here. (And I hope I can get un-busy enough to edit here more, too!) ŠтΈṜȳŁЁ^and...? 08:50, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Not really a change, just a different view. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 15:36, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Innocent personal question

Are you a Messianic Jew (yes, the capitalization is correct, in case anyone is wondering) yourself, or do you simply support Messianic Judaism? --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 16:24, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

As far as I know, I just support it. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 16:25, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

I had the vague notion that you were one… not that that's a problem, I'm one myself. Well, if you can call a half-Jewish Christian person a Messianic Jew… --Linus^{(plot evil tech)} 16:54, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Who knows, I may be, but it would be a case of my family loosing track of the Jewish heritage. None of my grandparents were Jewish, and, as far as I know, none of my great grandparents. Beyond that, I do not know. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 21:46, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Which indicates you're not LDS either as they know who's who in the family.~~ CЯacke® 22:09, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Thanks Norm. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 22:10, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

problem

Read this, it has been in the article for over 2 weeks. [1] It appears to be nothing more than a disgusting attack on you. I removed it. Resident vandal

Thank you for the wonderful recognition. I am so proud that my efforts have been noticed by a seasoned proffesional. Have you given any more thought to you know what Resident vandal

sysop

Dude, you're a sysop. Feel free, upon good evidence, to block vandals. Explain on their page with diff links if necessary.

I hammered (I am so TK!!!) the IP vandal for one day (the contribs are obvious cause) so we can discuss it later. Without being interrupted. human^{be in} 01:11, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

question

At the Talk:Disproving Intelligent Design page, you said "RW is more ridiculous than blogs4brownback." So, um, why are you here, and how does that jive with being a sysop? Shouldn't sysops basically "approve" of a site they administrate? Even if they don't approve of all content? And, of course, if that was just a throwaway statement, I won't go quoting you on it all over the place. It might make a good slogan, though. human^{be in} 13:33, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

It was broader than necessary. Being rational is good. But insisting that essays not be moved into the essay space is a bit much. My criticism has more to do with some contributors than RW itself. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 15:35, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

RojerB retirement

Apparantly, RoberB probably retired. See this, this, and this. If I am mistaken, my apologies. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 16:13, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

Strike that. My information is she'll be back when she gets broadband, and will lurk in the meantime. Heart♥Gold^{Call me a name} 16:47, 21 July 2007 (CDT)